Class Warfare Blog

February 20, 2017

Why, Oh, Why?

I read way too often, that there is an anti-science attitude coming from Christians and other highly religious fellows (Islamists, etc.) because <fill in the blank here>. Most of the reasons sound reasonable but they all miss the mark.

The anti-science attitude stems from this itsy-bitsy problem. If science contradicts the Bible or other religious scripture in the least little bit, then those scriptures become untrustworthy. Each religious pronouncement would then have to be evaluated and interpreted and, well, there goes the baby out with the bathwater.

This is obvious in the statements of Christian fundamental literalists; they are against the teaching of “god-less” evolution; they are against science that shows that the Earth is way older (actually 766 thousand times older) than can be deduced from the Bible; they are against the Big Bang Theory because it isn’t mentioned in the Book of Genesis. For those religionists who are not fundamentalists, the threat is the same but more subtle. They think that morals, for example, come from their god (all evidence to the contrary), and so when science contradicts religion, it is a slippery slope leading directly to science refutes religion. And then there goes morality and all human beings become ravening beasts, just like we see in the movies (a well-known scriptural source for the White House apparently).

The fascinating thing is that the religionists insist their religion is based upon faith, yet they spend time and massive amounts of money trying to prove their view of the world is true. Biblical archeologists prowled the Near East looking to prove the events of the Old Testament happened, only to prove the exact opposite. Adventurers have gone looking, even to the point of scouring satellite images looking for the remains of Noah’s ark, even though the same story was told many centuries before the Noah story was told (and “borrowed” several times prior also) and is probably just a convenient vehicle used to take over another religion’s turf. (Rome did this by equating conquered people’s gods to their own, thus bringing the “new believers” into their fold.) Jerusalem is the most excavated city on the planet, with many people looking for confirmation of David’s and Solomon’s kingdoms, only to end up with vague bits that mighta coulda come from then.

So, faith apparently is not good enough, conformation is desired, but when confirmation doesn’t come, when contradiction comes instead, the science then must be wrong.

This, of course, is wrapped in a culture in which “having faith” is considered a “good thing” but being gullible is not. Poker players will do very strange things and actually lose money rather than to allow themselves to be “bluffed” by another player. No one wants to know they could have gotten an article they just bought at a better price. So, what better example of being gulled is believing in a false religion? Denying that falsity is far easier than admitting one was taken in by fancy words. It is even easier to deny science than to admit being taken for a ride.



  1. That pretty much wraps it up. 🙂

    Too much time and energy devoted to protecting that which repeatedly fails to hold water, leads you to the only other option, denial.

    Unless of course one can be honest with ones self. But we don’t see much of that…


    Comment by shelldigger — February 20, 2017 @ 12:21 pm | Reply

    • If dey was lookin’ for de Nile I coulda showed ’em where it was, but them archeologists, dey wanted sumpin’ else.

      On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Class Warfare Blog wrote:



      Comment by Steve Ruis — February 20, 2017 @ 12:24 pm | Reply

  2. Rap on brother, rap and on!


    Comment by Holding The Line In Florida — February 20, 2017 @ 12:40 pm | Reply

  3. A month or two ago I was in a climate change debate with a rabid Christian. A denier, of course. It got me thinking, and I delved into someresearch to answer the question, Why do evangelicals compose the majority of thye denier population?

    And there is an answer.

    There’s even an organised treatise, of sorts.

    Essentially, it all boils down to Yhwh giving man dominion over the earth, to use it as he sees fit. There’s a second wind at play here, too, which has to do with energy economics.


    Comment by john zande — February 20, 2017 @ 5:22 pm | Reply

    • I think there is also a subtext to that argument. We were told to be good stewards, too. Most of the deniers simply do not want science to be right time after time. So, it comes down to why churches don’t have wifi: they do not want there to be an unseen power that actually works.

      On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Class Warfare Blog wrote:



      Comment by Steve Ruis — February 20, 2017 @ 9:04 pm | Reply

      • Seems that their feeling is, if they accept the science then they also have to accept that there is no god, God. If man can destroy the planet then the liklihood of a creator vanishes.


        Comment by john zande — February 21, 2017 @ 3:36 am | Reply

        • Yep! Supporting the science is supporting the “other side” and in a black and white universe, the sides are of god and Satan.

          As an aside, why can’t Yahweh kick Satan’s ass? This sounds like a variant of “can God create a rock so big even he can’t lift it?” Can god create an opponent so strong that even he can’t take him down? So, why aren’t Christians asking god to do away with Satan? Isn’t our own inherent sinfulness enough that we need to be tempted, too? Such a disgustingly negative view of reality.


          Comment by Steve Ruis — February 21, 2017 @ 8:54 am | Reply

  4. A person can not see the Kingdom of God except he be born again. The bible is incomprehensible to those without the Spirit of God.
    So what’s the solution?
    “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” Acts 16.31


    Comment by Lee Poskey — February 26, 2017 @ 1:17 pm | Reply

    • So, the solution is to believe in Jesus, who is only known through the Bible, and then the Bible will make sense? Do you realize how this sounds to a nonbeliever?


      Comment by Steve Ruis — February 27, 2017 @ 2:29 pm | Reply

      • Hello Steve.
        Good news is, John 12.32 “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.”
        His call is to all of humanity. The Holy Spirit was given so that anyone can know Him; He convicts the world of their sin, and points to Christ as their solution. The reason we’re told in John chapter 3, why men won’t come to Him, is because they loved darkness rather than light.
        The core of the problem with man is pride. Man hates the idea that he needs a Saviour.
        But religion has often distorted God’s message.
        Receiving His new life isn’t a matter of cleaning oneself up. It’s a matter of believing on the Son.
        His offer is there for ya buddy, all you have to do is
        “That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” John 3.15


        Comment by Lee Poskey — February 27, 2017 @ 2:51 pm | Reply

        • Do you (and Lee) truly believe all your scripture quoting is going to influence someone who has clearly indicated he is a non-believer and has placed his “faith” in science?


          Comment by Nan — February 27, 2017 @ 3:03 pm | Reply

          • It’s not up to me who receives the Lord Jesus Christ.
            It’s just my privilege to share the same great news that set me free from my own guilt and shame. 😃


            Comment by Lee Poskey — February 27, 2017 @ 3:10 pm | Reply

        • John 3:15 is a tad misleading. According to Christians, everyone has a soul that is immortal, everlasting. So, everyone “lives forever” and has “everlasting life.” What “belief in Jesus” provides is everlasting life in Heaven rather than everlasting life in Hell. Interestingly, Hell is not mentioned in the Old Testament. In their afterlife, there is Sheol, a quiet dark place not a lake of fire. So, the lake of fire Hell was invented by those selling Jesus as the escape mechanism from it. What kind of loving god would invent everlasting torment in a lake of fire. I cannot even conceive of a crime for which that would be an appropriate punishment.

          On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Class Warfare Blog wrote:



          Comment by Steve Ruis — February 28, 2017 @ 9:21 am | Reply

  5. Actually Muslims welcome Science. Take a look at our blog, we demonstrate how much of psychology today is reflected in Islamic teachings from 1400 years ago, check our our articles on anger, and sleep


    Comment by PsychIslam — March 15, 2017 @ 12:37 am | Reply

    • There was a time in which Muslim science was the pinnacle of human achievement. When western science fell into neglect, much of it was saved by Muslim writers. But history does not shape modern thought so much. When social issues arise now, leaders look to religion and not science. Science is confined to areas where there is no conflict with scripture.

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by Steve Ruis — March 15, 2017 @ 8:07 am | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: