As usual, @Jordan with the thoughtful response. 
1 Like
Right, I actually do think that this type of thing is an example of âsloppyâ communication and maybe some Christianâese thrown in. I honestly donât think Christians (even ID folks) would say that the Godâs sole purpose for autumn leaf color changes is evangelistic or for human enjoyment.
I think they are trying to say, along with theologians like C.S. Lewis and N.T. Wright, that the beauty that we all see in nature has special meaning for the Christian that is beyond what an atheist will see. In other words, the beauty of nature evokes or stimulates a spiritual sense of connectedness with the Creator.
I think people just get a bit overly enthusiastic in making everything an apologetic. I think the apologetic is rather more likely to be pointing out the common ground of a shared experience of the beauty of nature rather than the constant pointing out of the differences in interpretation of that beauty.
5 Likes
So how would you invite @NLENTS to make this connection with his Creator?
Perhaps the less condescending approach would be to wait until @NLENTS expresses an interest. How do you react to cold calls selling whatever they are selling?
1 Like
Iâve never been converted so I have no such experience.
No conversion, so no story.
It doesnât. My skepticism started early and Iâve never been tempted by any flavour of Christianity. Possibly the right people didnât get hold of me when I was a child of seven.
That approach is as effective as trying to sell me double glazing. If I were to feel the call of spirituality, perhaps I would look at actions rather than words. I have a fair bit of regard for the Dalai Lama.
1 Like
As an atheist, I clearly donât believe these things, so Iâm not the person to ask these questions. They nevertheless do follow from a lot of prototypical Christian apologetics.
It is for example frequently implied in the kinds of answer you get from Christians in response to various forms of the problem of evil. Oh so something bad happened to someone and why would God let that happen? Well we just gotta trust that God has some plan with that, that will make that bad thing happening result in some greater good either late in history, or when you get to the afterlife.
Of course, there are Christians on this very forum who have expressed sentiments exactly like I described. That weâre all just sort of playing along on paths God put us on. I believe such ideas can be seen in for example Calvinist views on predestination and âthe electâ. Some of us have apparently been sort of created to go to hell. Made to be unable to believe, and to go to hell for it.
Itâs even found it way into common speech, for example in Islam. They like to throw around this term âinshallahâ a lot, which literally means âGod willingâ. This is invoked constantly in response to, well, everything and anything. I hope my cousin delivers my milk on time, God willing. That of course implies his cousinâs decision to deliver the Milk on time is part of what God intends to happen.
I, too, want to know how these people know that anything that happens is some divine beingâs plan. If you find out, let me know.
1 Like
@Rumraket, sorry that was a Discourse quote misattribution, I fixed it. Thanks for replying anyway!
Yep, I get it. I think if Christians are really honest and think through things, itâs hard to see a clear answer to this question. It seems like a paradox or âmysteryâ as some traditions put it. For me personally, I get the sense that God does have goals and plans, but that heâs not so much into micromanagement. I donât think strict predestination/determinism make a lot of sense logically. I have serious ethical concerns thinking about God âplanningâ torture or rape, etc. and I donât think the totality of scripture says that. On the other hand, I think scripture, tradition, and personal experience suggest that God does care about what happens to people, all people, and his Creation.
3 Likes
Ahh no worries, it was my words in the quote anyway so.
Thatâs a good question, I suppose. Hereâs what comes to mind:
- I would get to know him as a person, show him kindness, empathy, and understanding. I would try to put myself in his place, as much is that is really possible.
- If I came to NYC to visit my friend @NLENTS, and we happened to be out in Central Park discussing the wonders of photosynthesis because we share a passion for science and science education, I might ask him something about the biology of light harvesting reactions because Iâm curious to know more about them, and heâs a biologist.
- As we we stroll along, and heâs giving me insight into the different biology of the forest, and maybe telling me about how they have affected to human history, Iâd say to him âI just love these fall colors, donât you? So vibrant and warm? When I see them sometimes I canât help but think that a God who created all this beauty, must really love us.â
- In my imagination @NLENTS might reply something like âyep, it sure is beautifulâ and we would continue on our stroll. I would ask about his family, he would ask about mine. We would part friends and go about our lives.
5 Likes
I hope we can do this walk through Central Park one day! It really is magical during the autumn. (and the spring, too!)
7 Likes
Well we know that all things were created by God for his pleasure (Book of Revelation I believe), that indicates that the Autumn colors would at least be there for the pleasure of God. Then it follows that since God created us to witness his creation visually, with eyes, and that believers in him are his spiritual offspring, and that a parent always want his offspring to share in his joy, that we too should share in the pleasure of his creation. Meaning that in an indirect sense, yes, the Autumn colors were prepared for us!
2 Likes
@nlents, I hope you and he can too. And to that end, I would like to offer my public apology to you as a overzealous Christian who ruined your day and your article. This is real. I am apologizing.
(And when you take that walk with @Jordan, you are welcome to reference that stupid, out of bounds r-speir all you want if it helps to clear the cobwebs of doubt from your mind.)
6 Likes
Sideways, as I predicted. 
Well this was very kind. And unexpected. You didnât ruin my yesterday, but this message brightened my today, so thank you for that. And I hope you have a nice day today. Enjoy the autumn foliage if you can.
4 Likes
The birding is great too. But my advice is that if you go birding there, donât be black.
9 Likes
I agree with you. I think if this post had been your first post the conversation would maybe have gone quite differently. I think your best posts are when you can slow it down and unpack a little about what you believe and why, rather than starting with telling other people about what you think they believe and what you think about their beliefs. I know itâs hard when you disagree with someone to not start from an adversarial posture, but in my experience conversations that start that way rarely end well (for anyone).
6 Likes
This is insightful advice for all of us!
4 Likes
Not just human enjoyment. Surely the autumn foliage was designed with dogsâ enjoyment in mind. See this video compilation of Stellaâs Best Leaf Jumps of All Time:
I donât have the fortunate opportunity of strolling through Central Park in the autumnâbut it certainly does cheer my day whenever I watch Stella the dog enjoying a hearty leaf-pile plunge.
7 Likes
Here is my feeling on this issue. God creates the world with the idea that a conscient being able to enter in communion with him could blossom in his creation. Therefore he designed his creation to welcome this conscient being in the manner of a couple preparing their house for the arrival of a child. In that sense, I disagree with you when you say that creation wasnât made for us. Indeed, what sense could God make of a world devoid of a conscient being able to enter in communion with him?
1 Like
So let me articulate my real issue with this kind of thinking, hashed out with some text messages with @swamidass and the authorâs response to my Twitter thread (which I admit was needlessly mocking). This Critique of 'What Passes for Serious Thought' Comes Up Short on Serious Thought | Tom Gilson
When we discuss the beauty and wonder of nature, or of âcreationâ if you prefer, and of the emotional response that said beauty evokes, thatâs all fine and good as poetry. (And I donât mean that to dismiss. I enjoy poetry and beauty and nature!) And it may also be very good as theology. But where I find it problematic is when it tries to enter the realm of science. And this article, published on âEvolution News and Science Today,â definitely does that.
If weâre going to approach the lovely colors of autumn from the perspective of beauty and calling us toward awe of Godâs work in the world and all of that⌠thatâs just gravy. And I love gravy. But if we approach the topic of leaf senescence from the perspective of plant biology or evolutionary biology, there are some real traps we would fall into in claiming that it is has anything to do with human enjoyment.
Leaf senescence is a physiological and genetically programmed process that performs specific functions. Those functions were in response to selective pressures experienced by a population of early plants. This particular adaptation gave the plant an important advantage in the grand and natural struggle for survival and success. Thatâs why it evolved, and thatâs why it persists today, because it benefits the plants.
At the time this evolutionary process first played out, it is more likely than not that NO animal could even perceive let alone appreciate the rainbow of colors that result from senescence. (The vertebrate eye was in its evolutionary infancy.) The process evolved to benefit the plants, not to dazzle the animals. And it has evolved and developed extensively since then, always (or almost always) for the direct benefit of the plants and only the plants.
The notion that this process could have evolved for the purpose of delighting creatures that would only appear hundreds of millions of years later is, to be blunt, absurd, from the biological perspective. Traits and adaptations emerge because they benefit the organisms who harbor those traits, not because they make other organisms happy. (Even attracting and feeding pollinators and seed dispersers is ultimately for plantsâ self-interest.) Thatâs how evolution works. And presenting evolution accurately is important to me, and should be important to all scientists.
To claim that an ancient adaptation was designed to please modern humans is simply not tenable because it violates what we we know about how organisms evolve. If this essay had appeared on Christianity Today, Id have no problem with it because it would be obvious that it is theology. Or poetry even. But this is poetry masquerading as science and thatâs why I spoke up. Does the DI wants EN to be taken seriously as a science website or not?
1 Like