I responded to the letter, as appears below, as an appendix to this post. (NB: Blogger has a new "feature"/bug that truncates comments at a rather short length. So, to be sure this comment gets through, I have "promoted" it.)
Now, a follow-up anonymous comment has been submitted [evidently from a supporter of Mr Buckland], which appears just below:
__________________
Anonymous comment submitted Sun, 20 December, 2009 17:08:33
>>Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "A comment in response to remarks at Barbados Under...":
Much is to be said for the systematic manner in which you took apart Buckland's latter, though the spirit of it, I can definitely embrace.
Perhaps after all's been written here about the evils of secular humanism, you need to take a look at some of the most secular countries in the world and see where they fall regarding quality and standard of living as well as the levels oc crime. Sweden for example, is 85% atheist. Take a look at the kind of society the citizens are forced to endure. Conversely, the most religious nations on the planet are usually the most corrupt with criminal activity going off the charts.
Superstition and religion go hand in hand, two sides of the same coin. And with Jamaica's reputation of one of the most churched nations in the world, one has to wonder what good it has done for the citizens, many of whom believe their troubles are caused by demons. And at the beginning of each year, one of the major daily papers prints the year ahead at a glance as seen by several self-styled prophets and apostles. The Gleaner publishes these prognostications as though they were news items, and makes no attempt at the end of each year to publish its success or failure rate.
The prognosticators have, since last year, posted a disclaimer on God's behalf, to cover their righteous behinds when their prophecies fall flat. Shame on the Gleaner. >>
___________________
I will respond on points:
++++++++++++
Much is to be said for the systematic manner in which you took apart Buckland's latter, though the spirit of it, I can definitely embrace.
a --> In short, we are here evidently dealing with a supporter of or a spokesman for Mr Buckland's group or its ideas and agendas.
Perhaps after all's been written here about the evils of secular humanism, you need to take a look at some of the most secular countries in the world and see where they fall regarding quality and standard of living as well as the levels o[f] crime. Sweden for example, is 85% atheist. Take a look at the kind of society the citizens are forced to endure.
b --> Neatly omitted: Sweden is an historic Christian country, which still benefits from the deep benefits of the Judaeo-Christian tradition; fading though they be. And, fading precisely because of the inherent amorality of evolutionary materialist secular humanism and its horrendous long-term implications for the moral order of our civilisation [e.g. cf. the 50 millions dead in the ongoing abortion holocaust in the USA, a holocaust that is directly attributable to the dominance of such secularism among the intellectual elites of that nation]. So, it is worth the while to excerpt the just linked analysis and warning by Hawthorne:
Assume (per impossibile) that atheistic naturalism [= evolutionary materialism] is true. Assume, furthermore, that one can't infer an 'ought' from an 'is' [the 'is' being in this context physicalist: matter-energy, space- time, chance and mechanical forces]. (Richard Dawkins and many other atheists should grant both of these assumptions.) Given our second assumption, there is no description of anything in the natural world from which we can infer an 'ought'. And given our first assumption, there is nothing that exists over and above the natural world; the natural world is all that there is. It follows logically that, for any action you care to pick, there's no description of anything in the natural world from which we can infer that one ought to refrain from performing that action. Add a further uncontroversial assumption: an action is permissible if and only if it's not the case that one ought to refrain from performing that action. (This is just the standard inferential scheme for formal deontic logic.) We've conformed to standard principles and inference rules of logic and we've started out with assumptions that atheists have conceded in print. And yet we reach the absurd conclusion: therefore, for any action you care to pick, it's permissible to perform that action. If you'd like, you can take this as the meat behind the slogan 'if atheism is true, all things are permitted'. For example if atheism is true, every action Hitler performed was permissible. Many atheists don't like this consequence of their worldview. But they cannot escape it and insist that they are being logical at the same time.c --> Such benefits include that Sweden was able to participate in the rise of modern liberty and democracy [as was mentioned in my response to Mr Buckland], which grew in reformation soil; thus also from the massive cultural ethical renewal that was one of he long-term consequences of the Reformation of 500 years ago.
Now, we all know that at least some actions are really not permissible (for example, racist actions). Since the conclusion of the argument denies this, there must be a problem somewhere in the argument. Could the argument be invalid? No. The argument has not violated a single rule of logic and all inferences were made explicit. Thus we are forced to deny the truth of one of the assumptions we started out with. That means we either deny atheistic naturalism or (the more intuitively appealing) principle that one can't infer 'ought' from 'is' [except in the case where the IS is the Creator-God who grounds the moral order of the cosmos in his character.] . [Emphases and bracketed comments added.]
d --> If we were to contrast the past century's history of Sweden's neighbour [and actually historic daughter country, as Russia was founded by the Rus, the eastern vikings] and its current consequences from more radical de-Christianisation efforts that particularly sought to root out Judaeo-Christian ethics, we see the result: chaos, crime and corruption.
Conversely, the most religious nations on the planet . . .
e --> Anonymous here falls into the exact error that Mr Buckland did by using the blanket label "religion", so I excerpt my earlier remarks under point 1:
Strictly, the generic term "religion" is far too broad to make any such confident broad-brush assertions; i.e. -- ironically -- this immediately reveals a deep hostility and prejudice driven by a lack of critical awareness and precision of thought. However, since Jamaica's history was as a matter of fact deeply shaped by especially Protestant, dissenter, Bible-citing Christians, this seems the primary target for Mr Buckland's ire.f --> Further to this, within the Judaeo-Christian tradition, the well known anecdotal evidence, strongly backed up by serious social science studies, is that there is a sharp difference between religious identification and the results of religious commitment, manifested in serious, consistent, long-term involvement in discipleship related activities.
Secondly, since the author in question is presumably not "religious" the fallacies in his opening paragraph as just pointed out immediately entail that "religion" cannot be THE "source of the lack of critical thinking and the inability to analyse situations and formulate viable solutions to the nation's problems."
(Lack of critical thinking capacity IS a problem, but it is a general one; and, it appears even on the part of evolutionary materialistic secular humanists. So, perhaps, it traces not to "religion" but to the enormous capacity of humans for self-deception and blindness, once our prejudices and sentiments are in play on a matter. Indeed, that seems to be why Aristotle in his The Rhetoric warned us that our judgements when we are pleased and friendly are very different from those we make when we are pained and hostile. And "pained and hostile" precisely describes the tone of the letter in question.)
In fact, Jamaica's problems -- which are legion -- have very little to do with the Christian beliefs and general moral sentiments of most of that nation's population. Indeed, most of the major criminal and moral challenges in the nation arise from the minority who by their actions reject and flout the key principle of neighbour love that drives Judaeo-Christian morality.
Further, as Mr Buckland has just demonstrated, lack of critical thinking ability has more to do with a lack of balanced education and habituation in fair-minded critical thinking skills -- a widespread problem in our region and well beyond it -- rather than specifically being "religious."
g --> As classic story by Jesse Jackson more or less puts it, if you were in a rough part of town and suddenly saw four stropping young men headed your way, you would be greatly relieved to learn that they were coming out of a Bible Study rather than a gang meeting or a bar.
. . . the most religious nations on the planet are usually the most corrupt with criminal activity going off the charts.
h --> religious of course is being used far too generically, and in the defiance of the obvious evidence as just pointed out on the difference between nominal religious identity and actual discipleship.
i --> So, the essence of the assertion is that Jamaica in particular is in urgent need of repentance, renewal, revival and reformation; which is not news.
Superstition and religion go hand in hand, two sides of the same coin.
j --> A patent falsehood and a bigoted, irresponsible blanket rhetorical declaration of the assumption that religiously based worldviews are all ill-founded prejudices.
k --> As I pointed out in replying to Mr Buckland [as appended], the commenter has no epistemic right to such an assertion without taking time to examine the live option worldview alternatives and especially their key warranting arguments on comparative difficulties across factual adequacy, coherence and explanatory power.
l --> I suggest that on the Christian worldview, s/ he should take time to consult the implications of the AD 55 eyewitness lifetime primary source record here (and the associated life-transforming experience of the millions across 2,000 years who have encountered God in the face of the crucified and risen Christ through the gospel; including many thousands of his/her neighbours all across the Caribbean), as well as discussions by men like professor Yamauchi here and professor Evans here. The 2006 Craig - Ehrman debate (transcript here) between two men at the top of their game, should give a balanced view. This debate (mp3) between professors Craig and Ludemann is also illuminating. [The DVD of the follow-up debate is here.]
And with Jamaica's reputation of one of the most churched nations in the world, one has to wonder what good it has done for the citizens,
m --> Plainly, the commenter has simply not bothered to listen to the stories of many, many thousands of our fellow citizens who will testify in abundant details on just what good their Christian faith has done for them
many of whom believe their troubles are caused by demons.
n --> Maybe, because they have had a bit more experience of dimensions of reality that a skeptical commenter who has not had to explicitly grapple with the reality of demonisation [cf. the remarks of THE expert on the subject in the Gospels!] simply dismisses without serious examination.
And at the beginning of each year, one of the major daily papers prints the year ahead at a glance as seen by several self-styled prophets and apostles.
o --> Which is of course something that is wrong and foolish.
The Gleaner publishes these prognostications as though they were news items, and makes no attempt at the end of each year to publish its success or failure rate.
p --> That is, the Gleaner plainly publishes them as entertainment.
The prognosticators have, since last year, posted a disclaimer on God's behalf, to cover their righteous behinds when their prophecies fall flat. Shame on the Gleaner.
q --> It is worth the while to cite the advice of the apostle Paul on the specific subject:
1 Thess 5 19Do not put out the Spirit's fire; 20do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21Test everything. Hold on to the good. 22Avoid every kind of evil.r --> And, that of Moshe:
s --> By sharp contrast, the commenter and onlookers are invited to reflect on the following key case of a Biblical prophecy, from Isaiah 52 - 53, made c. 700+ BC, and fulfilled in the life, death and resurrection of our Lord; and which is ever so relevant at Christmas time, hitherto the season of goodwill and celebration:Deut 18:9 When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. 10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in [a] the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. 12 Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you. 13 You must be blameless before the LORD your God.The Prophet
14 The nations you will dispossess listen to those who practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the LORD your God has not permitted you to do so. 15 The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him. 16 For this is what you asked of the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, "Let us not hear the voice of the LORD our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die."
17 The LORD said to me: "What they say is good. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. 20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."
21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.
Isaiah 52:13-53:12 (New International Version)
The Suffering and Glory of the Servant
13 See, my servant will act wisely a]">[a] ;
he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.
14 Just as there were many who were appalled at him b]">[b]—
his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man
and his form marred beyond human likeness—
15 so will he sprinkle many nations, c]">[c]
and kings will shut their mouths because of him.
For what they were not told, they will see,
and what they have not heard, they will understand.
Isaiah 53
1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.
8 By oppression d]">[d] and judgment he was taken away.
And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken. e]">[e]
9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes f]">[f] his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.
11 After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life g]">[g] and be satisfied h]">[h] ;
by his knowledge i]">[i] my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, j]">[j]
and he will divide the spoils with the strong, k]">[k]
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.
t --> Have we not instead noticed how in recent years, it has now become routine that at Christmas time [and other major Christian festivals], we see a strident attack on the Christian faith in our region as well as in the wider civilisation?
u --> Does this not speak volumes on a deep-rooted hostility, and how deeply those who adhere to it are embedded in our media culture?
v --> And, does that not then suggest that he complaints on how Christianity is being promoted in the media are actually meant to push for the exclusion of the Christian perspective from the public eye and education system; as we now see with the routine lawsuits to prevent the public in the United States -- where Mr Buckland is based -- from seeing signs, monuments and reminders that reflect their Christian heritage?
w --> Is that what we want in our region? [I rather doubt it.]
+++++++++++
In short, we again see a very familiar skeptic's rhetorical pattern, the trifecta combination fallacy that brings together distraction, distortion and polarising demonisation.
But, red herrings dragged across the track of responsible and civil addressing of issues and led away to caricatured strawmern soaked in ad hominem demonisaitons and ignited to cloud, confuse, poison and polarise the atmosphere do very little to promote either truth or a positive community.
Surely, Mr Buckland and friends can do better than this! END
_____________
APPENDIX:
Rebuttal of the Alfred Buckand letter (emphases added):
++++++++++++
The Anonymous commenter above has given us access to a letter by a Mr Buckland in the Jamaica Gleaner. Thus s/he has provided us an important service.
That letter from Atlanta, which was published in Jamaica's leading newspaper, the Gleaner, is deeply troubling and revealing on how the new atheism and radical evolutionary materialist secular humanism that pervade western culture are now invading our region.
I must therefore comment on the above, snipping out some pivotal excerpts:
1] Buckland: We are all aware that religion has established a firm footing in the Jamaican public space, is embedded in the Jamaican psyche, and is the source of the lack of critical thinking and the inability to analyse situations and formulate viable solutions to the nation's problems.
Strictly, the generic term "religion" is far too broad to make any such confident broad-brush assertions; i.e. -- ironically -- this immediately reveals a deep hostility and prejudice driven by a lack of critical awareness and precision of thought. However, since Jamaica's history was as a matter of fact deeply shaped by especially Protestant, dissenter, Bible-citing Christians, this seems the primary target for Mr Buckland's ire.
Secondly, since the author in question is presumably not "religious" the fallacies in his opening paragraph as just pointed out immediately entail that "religion" cannot be THE "source of the lack of critical thinking and the inability to analyse situations and formulate viable solutions to the nation's problems."
(Lack of critical thinking capacity IS a problem, but it is a general one; and, it appears even on the part of evolutionary materialistic secular humanists. So, perhaps, it traces not to "religion" but to the enormous capacity of humans for self-deception and blindness, once our prejudices and sentiments are in play on a matter. Indeed, that seems to be why Aristotle in his The Rhetoric warned us that our judgements when we are pleased and friendly are very different from those we make when we are pained and hostile. And "pained and hostile" precisely describes the tone of the letter in question.)
In fact, Jamaica's problems -- which are legion -- have very little to do with the Christian beliefs and general moral sentiments of most of that nation's population. Indeed, most of the major criminal and moral challenges in the nation arise from the minority who by their actions reject and flout the key principle of neighbour love that drives Judaeo-Christian morality.
Further, as Mr Buckland has just demonstrated, lack of critical thinking ability has more to do with a lack of balanced education and habituation in fair-minded critical thinking skills -- a widespread problem in our region and well beyond it -- rather than specifically being "religious."
So, the confident assertion "We are all aware that . . . " is simply a bold but fallacious declaration
2] for too long the media, unopposed, have aided and abetted the cause of religion by shoving primitive ideas and concepts as if they are incontrovertible facts down the throats of the ignorant, the illiterate and the gullible, controlling the populace and keeping them cowering in a state of fear of the wrath from an angry God.
Here Mr Buckland tries to tell the truth by the clock, revealing the underlying baneful influence of the modernist-secularist myth of progress. In fact, as Aristotle pointed out long ago in Metaphysics 1011b, the truth says of what is, that it is; and of what is not, that it is not.
Truth, proper, is therefore not progressive -- it is what it is, just as the reality that that which is true accurately describes is what it is. But we may at times approach closer, or at other times drift further away from that safe harbour.
Mr Buckland further labours under the mis-impression that "religion" is necessarily a matter of ignorance; revealing his prejudices.
Laying the point that Christian morality and ethics premised on the virtue of love under God is at least as good and as relevant a basis for practical affairs as any other moral principle, one wonders if he has say paused to analyse the force of the written testimony c. 55 AD in 1 Cor 15:1 - 11, on the foundational facts of the Christian Gospel as attested mid-30's AD by 500+ witnesses [none of whom is on record as recanting; not even in the face of lion, fire and sword], and whether he has for instance taken under notice summaries such as this one by Professor Edwin Yamauchi on the typical skeptical attempts to overturn that testimony and the underlying foundational fact of Jesus' resurrection from the dead as attested by 500+ witnesses; and as has led to 2,000 years of supernatural, blessing-working transforming power in millions of lives, and thousands of families and communities.
But, so far, that only addresses his claimed premises. Mr Buckland's main point here is to assert that the media of Jamaica [etc] are working to create a false sense of credibility for the "religion" he so despises, and to manipulate the public through fear of the -- one presumes, "mythical" -- God.
But, that God and the day of judgement in righteousness by the man God revealed by the resurrection from the dead are not matters to be so easily brushed aside by mere assertion or implication or pain-wracked angry rhetoric. And, it is far from true that the media in Jamaica or in most other places force-feed the public on a diet of blind adherence to religious myths. Instead, the evidence plainly supports a reasonable access to a free media environment, and the bookshops, magazine stands and Internet provide just a s free access to other views. In Jamaica, it so happens that the balance of that free play favours the predominantly Christian sentiments and views of the population, but that should not be surprising if the media are truly free in a community!
If there is any ideological force-feeding in our time and civlisation, on Mr Lewontin's notorious confession it traces to the increasing secular humanist, evolutionary materialist domination of institutional science and science education.
For, in our time, a time where science is often seen as the fountain-head of truth, a priori materialism is too often imposed on scientific work and conclusions; distorting the ability of science to find the truth about our world. (In short, Mr Buckland has here indulged in a turnabout false accusation.)
3] The dogmas of local church denominations need to be challenged, as the Church should hold no position as a moral authority in the land.
It is interesting to immediately contrast such sentiments with say the teaching of Anglican theologian Richard Hooker, in his Ecclesiastical Polity [1594 - ], as cited by John Locke in Ch 2 Sec 5 of his epochal Second Treatise on Civil Government, when he set out to ground the principles of natural liberty:
rooted in and expressing prejudice and hostility, not a sound insight.
u --> Does this not speak volumes on a deep-rooted hostility, and how deeply those who adhere to it are embedded in our media culture?
v --> And, does that not then suggest that he complaints on how Christianity is being promoted in the media are actually meant to push for the exclusion of the Christian perspective from the public eye and education system; as we now see with the routine lawsuits to prevent the public in the United States -- where Mr Buckland is based -- from seeing signs, monuments and reminders that reflect their Christian heritage?
w --> Is that what we want in our region? [I rather doubt it.]
+++++++++++
In short, we again see a very familiar skeptic's rhetorical pattern, the trifecta combination fallacy that brings together distraction, distortion and polarising demonisation.
But, red herrings dragged across the track of responsible and civil addressing of issues and led away to caricatured strawmern soaked in ad hominem demonisaitons and ignited to cloud, confuse, poison and polarise the atmosphere do very little to promote either truth or a positive community.
Surely, Mr Buckland and friends can do better than this! END
_____________
APPENDIX:
Rebuttal of the Alfred Buckand letter (emphases added):
++++++++++++
The Anonymous commenter above has given us access to a letter by a Mr Buckland in the Jamaica Gleaner. Thus s/he has provided us an important service.
That letter from Atlanta, which was published in Jamaica's leading newspaper, the Gleaner, is deeply troubling and revealing on how the new atheism and radical evolutionary materialist secular humanism that pervade western culture are now invading our region.
I must therefore comment on the above, snipping out some pivotal excerpts:
1] Buckland: We are all aware that religion has established a firm footing in the Jamaican public space, is embedded in the Jamaican psyche, and is the source of the lack of critical thinking and the inability to analyse situations and formulate viable solutions to the nation's problems.
Strictly, the generic term "religion" is far too broad to make any such confident broad-brush assertions; i.e. -- ironically -- this immediately reveals a deep hostility and prejudice driven by a lack of critical awareness and precision of thought. However, since Jamaica's history was as a matter of fact deeply shaped by especially Protestant, dissenter, Bible-citing Christians, this seems the primary target for Mr Buckland's ire.
Secondly, since the author in question is presumably not "religious" the fallacies in his opening paragraph as just pointed out immediately entail that "religion" cannot be THE "source of the lack of critical thinking and the inability to analyse situations and formulate viable solutions to the nation's problems."
(Lack of critical thinking capacity IS a problem, but it is a general one; and, it appears even on the part of evolutionary materialistic secular humanists. So, perhaps, it traces not to "religion" but to the enormous capacity of humans for self-deception and blindness, once our prejudices and sentiments are in play on a matter. Indeed, that seems to be why Aristotle in his The Rhetoric warned us that our judgements when we are pleased and friendly are very different from those we make when we are pained and hostile. And "pained and hostile" precisely describes the tone of the letter in question.)
In fact, Jamaica's problems -- which are legion -- have very little to do with the Christian beliefs and general moral sentiments of most of that nation's population. Indeed, most of the major criminal and moral challenges in the nation arise from the minority who by their actions reject and flout the key principle of neighbour love that drives Judaeo-Christian morality.
Further, as Mr Buckland has just demonstrated, lack of critical thinking ability has more to do with a lack of balanced education and habituation in fair-minded critical thinking skills -- a widespread problem in our region and well beyond it -- rather than specifically being "religious."
So, the confident assertion "We are all aware that . . . " is simply a bold but fallacious declaration
2] for too long the media, unopposed, have aided and abetted the cause of religion by shoving primitive ideas and concepts as if they are incontrovertible facts down the throats of the ignorant, the illiterate and the gullible, controlling the populace and keeping them cowering in a state of fear of the wrath from an angry God.
Here Mr Buckland tries to tell the truth by the clock, revealing the underlying baneful influence of the modernist-secularist myth of progress. In fact, as Aristotle pointed out long ago in Metaphysics 1011b, the truth says of what is, that it is; and of what is not, that it is not.
Truth, proper, is therefore not progressive -- it is what it is, just as the reality that that which is true accurately describes is what it is. But we may at times approach closer, or at other times drift further away from that safe harbour.
Mr Buckland further labours under the mis-impression that "religion" is necessarily a matter of ignorance; revealing his prejudices.
Laying the point that Christian morality and ethics premised on the virtue of love under God is at least as good and as relevant a basis for practical affairs as any other moral principle, one wonders if he has say paused to analyse the force of the written testimony c. 55 AD in 1 Cor 15:1 - 11, on the foundational facts of the Christian Gospel as attested mid-30's AD by 500+ witnesses [none of whom is on record as recanting; not even in the face of lion, fire and sword], and whether he has for instance taken under notice summaries such as this one by Professor Edwin Yamauchi on the typical skeptical attempts to overturn that testimony and the underlying foundational fact of Jesus' resurrection from the dead as attested by 500+ witnesses; and as has led to 2,000 years of supernatural, blessing-working transforming power in millions of lives, and thousands of families and communities.
But, so far, that only addresses his claimed premises. Mr Buckland's main point here is to assert that the media of Jamaica [etc] are working to create a false sense of credibility for the "religion" he so despises, and to manipulate the public through fear of the -- one presumes, "mythical" -- God.
But, that God and the day of judgement in righteousness by the man God revealed by the resurrection from the dead are not matters to be so easily brushed aside by mere assertion or implication or pain-wracked angry rhetoric. And, it is far from true that the media in Jamaica or in most other places force-feed the public on a diet of blind adherence to religious myths. Instead, the evidence plainly supports a reasonable access to a free media environment, and the bookshops, magazine stands and Internet provide just a s free access to other views. In Jamaica, it so happens that the balance of that free play favours the predominantly Christian sentiments and views of the population, but that should not be surprising if the media are truly free in a community!
If there is any ideological force-feeding in our time and civlisation, on Mr Lewontin's notorious confession it traces to the increasing secular humanist, evolutionary materialist domination of institutional science and science education.
For, in our time, a time where science is often seen as the fountain-head of truth, a priori materialism is too often imposed on scientific work and conclusions; distorting the ability of science to find the truth about our world. (In short, Mr Buckland has here indulged in a turnabout false accusation.)
3] The dogmas of local church denominations need to be challenged, as the Church should hold no position as a moral authority in the land.
It is interesting to immediately contrast such sentiments with say the teaching of Anglican theologian Richard Hooker, in his Ecclesiastical Polity [1594 - ], as cited by John Locke in Ch 2 Sec 5 of his epochal Second Treatise on Civil Government, when he set out to ground the principles of natural liberty:
rooted in and expressing prejudice and hostility, not a sound insight.
. . . if I cannot but wish to receive good, even as much at every man's hands, as any man can wish unto his own soul, how should I look to have any part of my desire herein satisfied, unless myself be careful to satisfy the like desire which is undoubtedly in other men . . . my desire, therefore, to be loved of my equals in Nature, as much as possible may be, imposeth upon me a natural duty of bearing to themward fully the like affection. From which relation of equality between ourselves and them that are as ourselves, what several rules and canons natural reason hath drawn for direction of life no man is ignorant.In short, here is direct evidence on how the teachings of the Bible and the church on our equality of nature as being made in God's image and our resulting mutual duty of neighbour love grounds equal rights, justice and the civil peace that sets a context fro the rise of modern Democratic self-government by a free people.
By sharpest contrast, the major secular humanist evolutionary materialist alternative being championed by Mr Buckland is inherently amoral cannot ground either a credible mind or provide a solid foundation for binding moral principle. For, as the author of this blog has long had occasion to teach:
. . . [evolutionary] materialism [a worldview that often likes to wear the mantle of "science"] . . . argues that the cosmos is the product of chance interactions of matter and energy, within the constraint of the laws of nature. Therefore, all phenomena in the universe, without residue, are determined by the working of purposeless laws acting on material objects, under the direct or indirect control of chance.
But human thought, clearly a phenomenon in the universe, must now fit into this picture. Thus, what we subjectively experience as "thoughts" and "conclusions" can only be understood materialistically as unintended by-products of the natural forces which cause and control the electro-chemical events going on in neural networks in our brains. (These forces are viewed as ultimately physical, but are taken to be partly mediated through a complex pattern of genetic inheritance ["nature"] and psycho-social conditioning ["nurture"], within the framework of human culture [i.e. socio-cultural conditioning and resulting/associated relativism].)
Therefore, if materialism is true, the "thoughts" we have and the "conclusions" we reach, without residue, are produced and controlled by forces that are irrelevant to purpose, truth, or validity. Of course, the conclusions of such arguments may still happen to be true, by lucky coincidence — but we have no rational grounds for relying on the “reasoning” that has led us to feel that we have “proved” them. And, if our materialist friends then say: “But, we can always apply scientific tests, through observation, experiment and measurement,” then we must note that to demonstrate that such tests provide empirical support to their theories requires the use of the very process of reasoning which they have discredited!
Thus, evolutionary materialism reduces reason itself to the status of illusion. But, immediately, that includes “Materialism.” For instance, Marxists commonly deride opponents for their “bourgeois class conditioning” — but what of the effect of their own class origins? Freudians frequently dismiss qualms about their loosening of moral restraints by alluding to the impact of strict potty training on their “up-tight” critics — but doesn’t this cut both ways? And, should we not simply ask a Behaviourist whether s/he is simply another operantly conditioned rat trapped in the cosmic maze?
In the end, materialism is based on self-defeating logic . . . .
In Law, Government, and Public Policy, the same bitter seed has shot up the idea that "Right" and "Wrong" are simply arbitrary social conventions. This has often led to the adoption of hypocritical, inconsistent, futile and self-destructive public policies.
"Truth is dead," so Education has become a power struggle; the victors have the right to propagandise the next generation as they please. Media power games simply extend this cynical manipulation from the school and the campus to the street, the office, the factory, the church and the home.
Further, since family structures and rules of sexual morality are "simply accidents of history," one is free to force society to redefine family values and principles of sexual morality to suit one's preferences.
Finally, life itself is meaningless and valueless, so the weak, sick, defenceless and undesirable — for whatever reason — can simply be slaughtered, whether in the womb, in the hospital, or in the death camp.
In short, ideas sprout roots, shoot up into all aspects of life, and have consequences in the real world . . .
4] An organised effort could provide formidable resistance to the continued efforts by the Church to enslave the minds of the majority of the populace . . . . Our group, The Emancipation From Mental Slavery (EFMS), intends to initiate a massive pushback to debunk the myths of religion in our midst. We will oppose any intention of the Church or other religious organisations to hijack the seat of authority in the land and impose any further their destructive judgements and pronouncements upon an ignorant and unsuspecting public.
In short, this is the announced launch of an evolutionary materialist secular humanist campaign to radically secularise the worldview and moral sentiments of the Jamaican public.
Given the headlines of recent years, this is in all likelihood probably connected to the current push to stigmatise Jamaica for the steadfastness of the national sentiments against homosexualism and homosexualist agendas to create a perversion-friendly, Biblical Christianity-hostile civil space in our civilisation.
In this case, it is probably best to let the Apostle Paul, c. 57 AD, writing in the face of the moral chaos that was increasingly spreading chaos across Roman society, speak for himself:
Rom 1:18 . . . the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people who suppress the truth by their unrighteousness, 1:19 because what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 1:20 For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, because they are understood through what has been made. So people are without excuse. 1:21 For although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God or give him thanks, but they became futile in their thoughts and their senseless hearts44 were darkened. 1:22 Although they claimed45 to be wise, they became fools 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an image resembling mortal human beings46 or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles. [In the old days in temples, nowadays on TV or computer screens, in museums and in textbooks and magazines, announced as "science" = "knowledge of our world."]Game, set, match to the Apostle to the nations.
1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the desires of their hearts to impurity, to dishonor their bodies among themselves. 1:25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
1:26 For this reason God gave them over to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged the natural sexual relations for unnatural ones, 1:27 and likewise the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed in their passions for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
1:28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what should not be done. 1:29 They are filled with every kind of unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, malice. They are rife with envy, murder, strife, deceit, hostility. They are gossips, 1:30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, contrivers of all sorts of evil, disobedient to parents, 1:31 senseless, covenant-breakers, heartless, ruthless. 1:32 Although they fully know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but also approve of those who practice them.
GEM of TKI
No comments:
Post a Comment