...semi-neutral meaninglessness.
I will just repeat that to be clear "muted faith (faith without scripture, faith without faith affirming words) in 'an Evolution' (a belief in Evolution, in Evolution in general) inevitably mutates into neutrality (indifference, apathy) or semi-neutral meaninglessness (glib repetition of defensive phrases, discarding the gravity of purpose in the name of pleasure or some other such pursuit)" (amplified).
This is the natural progression of a meaningless faith, unpracticed, unfollowed, into something that can cohabit with the works of the nations, that progress towards a unified plateau of mutual recognition, in which the individual beliefs of the individually defined substrata of nations, the people, are irrelevant and inconsequential.
There is no sense in which this neutrality is friendly, either. It is purely aggressive, purely isolationist, on the verge of elitism but not quite there because of its own crucifixion between nonsense and boredom that never ventures into the science lab or back for very long to the classroom. It does not make friends, let me repeat, it does not make friends. It defies religion, as a convenience of the command inimical to its greatest contender - Christianity - that it serve. It's purity is irrelevant and inconsequential and yet simultaneously piously exclusive and intensely effectual, though no one ever knows where the exact mechanism lies, but in the unconscious fear that retreats ever further back in time to justify the next sin, the next mutation that holy men refuse to tolerate, when pushed too far.
There is a crisis there, as it becomes known for its neutrality, as it takes shape in the midst of that neutral protozoan soup, a creation of its own making from beginning to end and destined to die, as every living thing discovers much to its horror that it can and that if it can't its still dead, what that dilemma should be, the precise response it should cultivate is the crisis, there is no telling what it can be without it? Meaningless can only be tolerated for so long, and this crisis is it: what will Evolution do with its neutrality, how will it conduct science in the hope that mere progress looks like an answer for its sheer practicality that without which struggles to survive take over because the distraction that other dilemmas represent remain distractions and in no way transformative distractions... even.... even as though being a distraction in one context rules out the validity of its transformative meaning in all other contexts.
This fundamentally is why Christianity must address it, because the noise of repetition that goes with human belief will drown out sense, of the kind seen at WWII, will destroy all meaning and destabilize the easily prone to doubt among the faithful, as has been said leading to apostasy, which will be known to be a constant peril of the Church, not merely a fleeting question of numbers for certain concerned pastors, and one that phases them not for the faith of the Lord that comes with precisely that answer that the Church will give the world and its Evolution, first for all, then for the few, then for the one - in which is foreclosed all question of Evolution that is not for the glory of God.
Consider this, it is my appraisal of a neutrality that is doomed.
I will just repeat that to be clear "muted faith (faith without scripture, faith without faith affirming words) in 'an Evolution' (a belief in Evolution, in Evolution in general) inevitably mutates into neutrality (indifference, apathy) or semi-neutral meaninglessness (glib repetition of defensive phrases, discarding the gravity of purpose in the name of pleasure or some other such pursuit)" (amplified).
This is the natural progression of a meaningless faith, unpracticed, unfollowed, into something that can cohabit with the works of the nations, that progress towards a unified plateau of mutual recognition, in which the individual beliefs of the individually defined substrata of nations, the people, are irrelevant and inconsequential.
There is no sense in which this neutrality is friendly, either. It is purely aggressive, purely isolationist, on the verge of elitism but not quite there because of its own crucifixion between nonsense and boredom that never ventures into the science lab or back for very long to the classroom. It does not make friends, let me repeat, it does not make friends. It defies religion, as a convenience of the command inimical to its greatest contender - Christianity - that it serve. It's purity is irrelevant and inconsequential and yet simultaneously piously exclusive and intensely effectual, though no one ever knows where the exact mechanism lies, but in the unconscious fear that retreats ever further back in time to justify the next sin, the next mutation that holy men refuse to tolerate, when pushed too far.
There is a crisis there, as it becomes known for its neutrality, as it takes shape in the midst of that neutral protozoan soup, a creation of its own making from beginning to end and destined to die, as every living thing discovers much to its horror that it can and that if it can't its still dead, what that dilemma should be, the precise response it should cultivate is the crisis, there is no telling what it can be without it? Meaningless can only be tolerated for so long, and this crisis is it: what will Evolution do with its neutrality, how will it conduct science in the hope that mere progress looks like an answer for its sheer practicality that without which struggles to survive take over because the distraction that other dilemmas represent remain distractions and in no way transformative distractions... even.... even as though being a distraction in one context rules out the validity of its transformative meaning in all other contexts.
This fundamentally is why Christianity must address it, because the noise of repetition that goes with human belief will drown out sense, of the kind seen at WWII, will destroy all meaning and destabilize the easily prone to doubt among the faithful, as has been said leading to apostasy, which will be known to be a constant peril of the Church, not merely a fleeting question of numbers for certain concerned pastors, and one that phases them not for the faith of the Lord that comes with precisely that answer that the Church will give the world and its Evolution, first for all, then for the few, then for the one - in which is foreclosed all question of Evolution that is not for the glory of God.
Consider this, it is my appraisal of a neutrality that is doomed.
