<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Creation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.matgreenfield.com/2009/09/12/creation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.matgreenfield.com/2009/09/12/creation/</link>
	<description>Because I&#039;m a slightly different kind of opinionated geek</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 16:14:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bernard</title>
		<link>http://www.matgreenfield.com/2009/09/12/creation/comment-page-1/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator>Bernard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:39:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://matgreenfield.wordpress.com/?p=187#comment-27</guid>
		<description>I appreciate the way in which you have articulated the above Matt - being a Christian, you&#039;ve tapped in on the numerous things which &#039;bug&#039; me about certain fundamentalists and outright denials of truths which have a scientific track record. Modern Science has &#039;elements&#039; of faith as part of it&#039;s very composition; with the hypotheses we produce, we run them against several trials, until a reasonable degree of certainty can be reached that (often) 95% of the time, x, y and z will occur given...etc. This is the same with Evolution - it&#039;s something that should be embraced. Evolution takes place in society, language and in many other facets, I think it would be ignorant to say that our very development is not down to this very thing. It frustrates me a bit that, as Christians, we are called to love with a servants heart, but some feel it&#039;s appropriate to write a book which glorifies their opinion, sells a few thousand, and funds an apparent &#039;revival&#039; (or a new house); all in the name of God.

Personally, having read The God Delusion, Dawkins is a little polarized by what he sees in Christians and the Church, and so he should be when fundamentalists attack and proceed to self-glorify, but his arguments are sometimes more vindictive than anything philosophically concrete (as if he knows anything more than the rest of us do.)

On an even more personal level, when Christians do this (yes, there is a position to be upheld, I don&#039;t contend this) it makes me feel distinctly uneasy. People should be engaged in love, not hate, and things like this remind me of the worrying path some American Christians and Churches are taking - to deny scientific fact as some sort of attack on their faith and to respond by writing books or holding big conferences to raise money for a ministry that will completely lose sight of what they were trying to do in the first place, to follow God. I feel the UK is on a better path, this movie should be shown (I got to the point eventually), and it should be acknowledged as something integral to the Christian faith, by engaging like this (believers and non) - things can be open and honest. Again, the picture Dawkins has painted is wrong. I am involved in a detached Youth Work Project in Southwater that is completely run by the church in the area, Im not saying WSCC couldn&#039;t do as good a job, but if churches were based on tea-drinking vicars, they would be long dead.

Im only 18, and as Matt has said, my argument may lack the conviction that some sort of Biblically based or biology based argument may deliver. But when Christians turn around, put their fingers in their ears and shout &quot;la la la, im not listening&quot; - they cannot engage with the facts that their faith should have delivered them to long ago.

Good blog post by the way Matt! :P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I appreciate the way in which you have articulated the above Matt &#8211; being a Christian, you&#8217;ve tapped in on the numerous things which &#8216;bug&#8217; me about certain fundamentalists and outright denials of truths which have a scientific track record. Modern Science has &#8216;elements&#8217; of faith as part of it&#8217;s very composition; with the hypotheses we produce, we run them against several trials, until a reasonable degree of certainty can be reached that (often) 95% of the time, x, y and z will occur given&#8230;etc. This is the same with Evolution &#8211; it&#8217;s something that should be embraced. Evolution takes place in society, language and in many other facets, I think it would be ignorant to say that our very development is not down to this very thing. It frustrates me a bit that, as Christians, we are called to love with a servants heart, but some feel it&#8217;s appropriate to write a book which glorifies their opinion, sells a few thousand, and funds an apparent &#8216;revival&#8217; (or a new house); all in the name of God.</p>
<p>Personally, having read The God Delusion, Dawkins is a little polarized by what he sees in Christians and the Church, and so he should be when fundamentalists attack and proceed to self-glorify, but his arguments are sometimes more vindictive than anything philosophically concrete (as if he knows anything more than the rest of us do.)</p>
<p>On an even more personal level, when Christians do this (yes, there is a position to be upheld, I don&#8217;t contend this) it makes me feel distinctly uneasy. People should be engaged in love, not hate, and things like this remind me of the worrying path some American Christians and Churches are taking &#8211; to deny scientific fact as some sort of attack on their faith and to respond by writing books or holding big conferences to raise money for a ministry that will completely lose sight of what they were trying to do in the first place, to follow God. I feel the UK is on a better path, this movie should be shown (I got to the point eventually), and it should be acknowledged as something integral to the Christian faith, by engaging like this (believers and non) &#8211; things can be open and honest. Again, the picture Dawkins has painted is wrong. I am involved in a detached Youth Work Project in Southwater that is completely run by the church in the area, Im not saying WSCC couldn&#8217;t do as good a job, but if churches were based on tea-drinking vicars, they would be long dead.</p>
<p>Im only 18, and as Matt has said, my argument may lack the conviction that some sort of Biblically based or biology based argument may deliver. But when Christians turn around, put their fingers in their ears and shout &#8220;la la la, im not listening&#8221; &#8211; they cannot engage with the facts that their faith should have delivered them to long ago.</p>
<p>Good blog post by the way Matt! <img src='http://www.matgreenfield.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

