No one was ever attracted to atheism by the love, joy, peace and kindness of an atheist.
There is little wonder why this unique event, the incarnation of God in the form of a helpless child remains the central event of history, celebrated some 2000 years later around the earth by people of every culture, race and class.
It is one of those times where I as a Christian enjoy taking a rest from defending the truth of Christ’s coming, and simply revel in it.
A lovely instumental version of What Child is This? by modern violinist Lindsey Stirling.
There was a revealing article recently on ScienceDaily concerning a novel approach to determining how life originated. Up until now most scientists have been trying to chemically synthesize the organic compounds integral to the structures of life in hopes of determining how life might have originated through natural processes. To say the least this has been an abysmal failure. There is in fact no evidence that living organisms originated through unguided natural processes. One of the reasons it has been a failure is because scientists have attempted to reconstruct the chemical structures of life, while ignoring the fact that life at its core is an information processing system – something I have been pointing out for years. Now it seems that some scientists are finally coming to the same conclusion:
Now, a novel approach to the question of life’s origin, proposed by two Arizona State University scientists, attempts to dramatically redefine the problem. The researchers — Paul Davies, an ASU Regents’ Professor and director of the Beyond Center for Fundamental Concepts in Science, and Sara Walker, a NASA post-doctoral fellow at the Beyond Center — published their theory in the Dec. 12 issue of the Royal Society journal Interface.
In a nutshell, the authors shift attention from the “hardware” — the chemical basis of life — to the “software” — its information content. To use a computer analogy, chemistry explains the material substance of the machine, but it won’t function without a program and data. Davies and Walker suggest that the crucial distinction between non-life and life is the way that living organisms manage the information flowing through the system.
I for one applaud this change of strategy because at least it acknowledges the right problem. That being said, I am certain they will face the same frustrations those focused on the chemical origin of life have because information systems simply can’t originate apart from the intention of a mind.
Perhaps it will take a few more decades of failure for science to realize this obvious fact.
Personally I am rather indifferent to the imagined ‘War on Christmas’ and all that entails, in large part because I don’t believe Christians should focus so much energy on a single Holiday during the year, and partly because Christmas with all its materialism and stress has much bigger problems than atheists.
Nonetheless a recent effort by the American Atheists demonstrates that there is as much silliness coming from the atheists as anyone else on the issue. In an effort to promote atheism, the atheists have again erected a large billboard in Times Square contrasting Santa Claus with Jesus.
In many ways the billboard displays how ignorant they are of the culture they live in; while Santa Claus took his final form as a result of American advertising campaigns, he is firmly rooted in Christian history in the form of St. Nicholas, of which the name ‘Santa Claus’ is a derivative. Some atheists of course might point to pagan influences, but those influences are no less religious.
Attempting to retain the joy of Christmas and excise its religious content is in many ways typical of the nonsensical nature of Western atheism, which enjoys the culture, morality, prosperity and knowledge of the West while attempting to deny its overtly Christian origin. They assume that such things can exist apart from the content of Christianity, though there is no evidence of this whatsoever – culture comes from somewhere, and it’s roots are invariably spiritual.
It’s part of the reason why atheism at its root is ultimately the refuge of the ignorant. To be an atheist requires willfully ignoring history and to some extent the reality of the human condition.
Some may think this a harsh assessment, but they are the ones putting their ignorance on display on a large billboard in the middle of Times Square.
I was thinking about Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy’s request for a moment of silence on Friday to be followed by churches ringing their bells 26 times in honor of the victims of the recent school shooting, and it reminded me of a the poem by Longfellow I heard again recently, I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day written at a despairing time when his own son’s life was nearly ended by gunfire:
And in despair I bowed my head;
“There is no peace on earth,” I said;
“For hate is strong,
And mocks the song
Of peace on earth, good-will to men!”
Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:
“God is not dead, nor doth He sleep;
The Wrong shall fail,
The Right prevail,
With peace on the earth, good-will to men.”
We have no greater hope than this, that God’s goodness will prevail, justice will ultimately be had and there will be hope and healing in the next life if not in this one. If death is the end, then there is no final justice, or comfort or peace – only in the eternal hope of the Gospel is there any real hope that what has gone so tragically wrong can be made right.
I post it every Christmas, but that’s because there really is no Christmas music like that sung by Nat King Cole.