Do You Need A Husband To Make You Complete?

This is gorgeous. My wife is not as big a fan of Feist as I am but she is convinced that although the albums are practically unknown in our day, our kids will love the Feist. Like the Pixies. Mark her words for the future. This song appeals to everyone in a way that “better” songs won’t. Or at least that is what she thinks and in this case, as in so many others, she is right.

Will Ferrell movies are things that I certainly approve of. But there is a certain sameness creeping in which is why it is useful to have the Will Ferrell movie generator at hand to predict the next time Ben Stiller is making a cameo appearance as a zany historian or plastics engineer with ninja skill.

I am thinking a lot about the issues of Creation, Evolution and Creationism this week, understandably, in the run up to the conference. I would love to end the dominance of the term Creationist by Creation Scientists. All Christians, all theists, even all deists are Creationists in that they believe God created the universe. What we call Creationism ought really to be called something else, maybe Frabricationism, since they really believe God made the universe in one instant go with no process like evolution at work. This is a way of course of calling them something other than insane (just kidding!) (maybe!).

This book looks like it might be an interesting contribution to the issue, Creation As Science. At least until I make the final contribution with the supreme book on the topic called “Listen To Me You Fools!”

Calvin College is a seminary that runs a fascinating festival every two years (I think) called Faith and Music. Two weeks ago, Sufjan Stevens did a gig as part of the conference on campus but back in 2005 he was a workshop leader talking about the creative process and writing thematically. This is a cool piece of Sufjanalia and you can access the talk here.

Seeing as I am co-hosting a conference which deals with the views popularised by the King of New Atheism, Richard Dawkins, this debate between his Prince, Sam Harris and Rick Warren (who is a pastor of a megachurch who wrote the 20 million + selling “Purpose Driven Life”) caught my attention. Warren, like one of the Zoomtard Heroes, Bill Hybels, doesn’t get much love in Christian circles, in part because he talks in a way that everyone can understand him and not in a way that shows off how clever he is (I’m not looking at anyone in particular, like say E. Peterson or F. Buechner or NTW or…). In this debate though, I think he fairly kicks Harris’ ass around the court.

Your Correspondent, Merely interested in pretty frocks and dollys.

2 Responses to “Do You Need A Husband To Make You Complete?”

  1. Disapproving Neighbour says:

    I think your characterisation of Warren & Harris’ debate is unfair. :o) It is an encouraging read though: to see people at opposite ends of the spectrum talking through their differences is a hopeful thing. Oh, and I think it demonstrates the utility of a good moderator – compare the moderator’s behaviour on the Dawkins/McGrath debate.

    Cian

  2. zoomtard says:

    I thought the moderator in the Harris Warren debate would get 60% from me. He passed but he didn’t a job fantastique, as the French wouldn’t say.

    I thought Harris’ lines were the tired old modernism hidden behind a handsome new face. There must be some mirror image of the God-of-the-gaps argument called the Atheism-of-the-emerging-horizon argument. Harris is Bertrand Russell repackaged with neuroscience as an emerging field he can fill with hypotheses.

    The most startling thing about the debate for me was how often Warren caught Harris out being dogmatic. There wasn’t a hint of that off Warren (which is why the ultra-Reformed Christians despise him- yay for stupidity!).

    Take for example, “As Mr Harris likes to point out, people who demand evidence for everything else in their lives are somehow all too happy to accept the word of long-dead Biblical authors in a corner of a long dead empire.”

    In the first place, I don’t think God-botherers demand evidence or proof of everything in their lives. No one does. We don’t even try to gather evidence on everything, let alone have the training or intelligence to understand it. Who knows everything? I don’t really understand what the yellow fan I can see peeking out of the right hand side of my car engine does. I don’t really know how Calatrava gets his bridges to stay suspended. I have no real grasp of what weak gravitational force is and how it relates to the existence and sustenance of the universe. Damnit neighbour, I barely understand how toast becomes toast, nevermind how weak gravitational force affects my toaster.

    I read someone point out that Harris however, takes so much for granted – “on faith. Things he no more understands than God. Things that are above his intelligence, beyond his learning, bigger than his imagination, then he trusts that others know enough so that he can safely rely on their knowledge, and he can only too happy to accept this ignorance and go about his life.”

    His caricature of believers is just that. It is appalling really that is passes for educated discourse. But if the world is so filled with junk and crap he can’t understand (can he help me clean the grime off the crack in my sideboard beside my oven, can he eh?) then why does he demand that the ultimate source of all this would be so straightforward as well. What he and all the New Atheists are doing is basically deeming the posited God of Christianity as not probable enough, meaning in effect (since that is mathematically unverifiable) that it isn’t straightforward enough for them.