I haven't checked my e-mail in a while, so I missed an anonymous comment posted to an entry that had already slipped into the archive. I'm posting the response here because a) it will likely be too long as a comment, b) no one is likely to read it because the entry itself is no longer on the main page (Yes, in fact I am vain and I want people to read what I write; otherwise, why have a blog?) , and c) this is a very good example of the sort of "logic" that True Believers (tm) think is devastating to science.

Eric:

While you are giving history lessons, allow me to throw out a few historical facts of my own.

Charles Darwin was studying to be a minister when he began the field research that led to his most famous work Origin of Species. He was hardly an "unbeliever." He became estranged from his church largely because the church leaders didn't like his work.

The Bible says many things that have in the past been taken literally which are then reinterpreted to match science, usually after a bit of struggle between scientists and clergy. Google "Sir Isaac Newton" for details of one such incident. [I will leave this as a perfect example of what happens when I write a post in a hurry. Of course, I actually meant to type "Galileo Galilei."] I haven't heard many preachers in my lifetime arguing that the earth is set on a foundation and doesn't move. (Bonus points for knowing who said that). Of course we still have the Flat Earth Society.

You claim that believers have a rock to stand on that never moves, then suggest I read church history. I have. It is one long litany from day one (some say, "I follow Paul", some say, "I follow Apollos") of divisions and factions all proclaiming themselves to be the keepers of Absolute Truth (tm). Evangelicals are the new-born babes in this process with a history that only goes back a couple centuries. They are also the new Flat Earth Society denying what is obvious to everyone else, including fellow-believers. Oh. Sorry. I forget that Evangelicals are the only ones going to heaven. Too bad about all those poor souls burning in hell for eternity because Evangelicalism didn't exist prior to the 1700's. It seems God's perfect plan has some flaws.

You claim kinship with Luther, a Catholic priest who was merely attempting to reform the priesthood and had no intention of starting a break-away church. Speaking of which, have you been to a Lutheran church? Have you ever read a Lutheran doctrinal statement? Are you aware that the Lutheran church, like the Roman Catholic Church, and nearly every mainstream Protestant denomination, accepts evolution? Are you aware of the vast chasms of disagreement between Lutherans and Evangelicals on such basic doctrines as salvation and baptism?

You claim that fundamentalism has been undermined by bad Bible translations. I agree. The King James Version is an abomination to the original text. The person for whom the KJV is named had some pretty ...um... radical doctrines that he had no intention of seeing undermined by the Bible translation that was to bear his name. Here is an exercise for the reader: what tense is the Hebrew word that is translated "created" in Genesis 1:1? I'll give you a hint: it ain't the simple past tense used in the KJV and every other English translation I've seen used in an Evangelical church.

You claim "Darwinists are moving". This reflects a basic ignorance of science. Science (including biology) is constantly "moving" and it's a good thing that it is, otherwise, I would be chisling this on a rock rather than typing it on a keyboard and publishing it for every literate person on the planet to read. I thank God that science is "moving" every time I start my truck and drive the 70-mile round trip to work instead of walking it like my great-grandfather did during the depression. I thank God that science is "moving" everytime I open my refrigerator door and see a literal cornucopia of food, some of it produced thousands of miles away. And I thank God that science "moves" every night around 10PM when I fill a needle with Lantus, without which I would likely be dead in a very short time, and inject it into myself.

One more time: science is tentative, not dogmatic like, say, religion. There is no revealed Absolute Truth (tm) in science. There are theories that fit the currently known data. One of these theories says an inherent property of all matter is mutual attraction. It has grown from observations made repeatedly, in a wide variety of situations both in the lab and in nature, over a period of centuries. Another says that time is not absolute, but rather varies with a person's frame of reference. It, too, has grown from observations made repeatedly, in a wide variety of situations both in the lab and in nature, over a period of decades. Another says that all species are descendents of a common ancestor. It, too, has grown from observations made repeatedly, in a wide variety of situations both in the lab and in nature (both before Darwin and since), over a period of decades. All of these have been attacked by Biblical literalists, who have (mostly) given up on the first two, and are rapidly losing ground on the third. Good thing Christianity is such an immovable rock.

And I will never give up beating Creation "Scientists" and Intelligent Design "Scientists" over the head until they stop propagating outright lies to gullible Christians and school children who would never suspect a fellow-believer or authority figure capable of intentional deceit. It is disgusting. It is embarrassing. It is sin. It must stop and it must be stopped by believers. There is no moral difference between a deacon using his position of trust to steal from the church, a youth pastor using his position of trust for sex with teens, and Kent Hovind peddling lies that he knows are lies so he can live a lavish lifestyle while claiming zero income on his federal taxes. The first two would never be tolerated for one second in any church I've been in, yet Hovind is treated like some sort of rock star by Evangelicals all over North America.

I simply will no longer stand idly by while this goes on, no more than I would turn a blind eye to a youth worker having sex with a 14-year-old. I have become the enemy of the Kent Hovind's of the world.

Enough. I have to run.