The testimony that broke the camel's back

The recent trip to the Creation Museum by PZ Myers and about 300 atheists from the Secular Student Alliance, brought back the memory of the occasion that destroyed my personal belief that Christians were honest and trustworthy in their testimony. Growing up in a Pentecostal church meant that I used to trust Christian testimony. When a Christian brother or sister testified to something the Lord had done for them, I believed it no matter how strange it seemed. After all, who would lie when they were talking about God? When my skeptical side started budding I did start to find it harder and harder to remain that credulous, especially with the weirder stories. I remember this one time when a lady told of how she walked in on her sleeping grandson being serenaded by The Devil on TV. Not someone dressed as the devil, not a devil, THE Devil! Apparently as soon as he saw her coming into the room he (THE DEVIL!!) got all flustered and said “OK bye!” and left. This was a strange and defining moment for me because I couldn’t help but notice that while I was thinking “Yeah right!!” my mom (an otherwise skeptical and very intelligent lady) was totally willing to give this woman the benefit of the doubt. However it took the Creationism vs Evolution debate to deliver the killing blow to my credulity.


Long story short I was at first totally convinced by the Creation Science Evangelism seminars of Kent Hovind so when I then found out how much disinformation and lies they contained I was reeling. While trying to make sense of it all I checked out several groups Facebook dedicated to this debate. My favourite was the now defunct “Free Kent Hovind” group. So in my search for answers I decided to post a question in the discussion forum. By then I had read much about how Creation Science was not science at all so I decided to go a different route – I asked whether Creation Science Evangelism was really evangelism. It just seemed to me like no-one on the evolution side ever seemed to be won over and that the only people who enjoyed the seminars were people who were already Creationists looking for confirmation of their beliefs. So I asked the several hundred Hovind fans in the group if they (or anyone they knew) actually became believers because of Creation Science. For a while there was little response and what I got was the literary equivalent of a mumbled “No not exactly” until someone called in the big guns – a testimony from the CSE site itself:

[The original has since been removed but thanks to the wayback machine you can see it in its original glory here ]

"The Power of Polite Questioning" Submited By: Joshua Joscelyn Armed with my textbook, my Bible and my CSE Seminar Notebook, I walked into my earth science classroom, where I knew tonight we would once again discuss evolutionary ideas as if they were facts. I was a freshman at Okaloosa-Walton College, and my professor, Dr. Steven Vaos, a friendly older gentleman from Greece, had been teaching us how plate tectonics, Pangaea, the fossil record, and radiometric dating, etc. proved the earth to be millions and millions of years old. I had been a diligent student who always did my homework well and contributed respectfully to class discussion and projects, and now, though I didn’t even know it, God was going to use my in-class questions to change the entire course of the semester. As the professor started in with his usual mantra, I respectfully raised my hand and asked a question. He couldn’t answer it. So he moved on with his lecture demonstrating in his thick Greek accent how similarities in species and things of that sort obviously pointed to a common ancestor. I once again raised my hand asking if perhaps it could also point to a common designer. He chuckled and patronizingly said it could. But he continued with his explanations of various things, always tying it back into evolution. But at every turn, I raised my hand and showed how it could also be evidence for creation and a worldwide flood. He saw where I was heading and tried to avoid it, but eventually, through a series of questions and statements, we as a class arrived there nevertheless. At every turn, the questions I asked revealed the startling weakness of his theory. The class came alive upon seeing the gross uncertainty of his position after he had been so dogmatic. Hands started flying into the air as secret believers and non-Christians alike began voicing fallacies and contradictions they had observed in the theory he had been presenting. Students not only proclaimed their faith in God’s creation but also showed how evolution comes into direct conflict with creation. After leaving evolution with no legs to stand upon, even the non-Christians began discussing creation as the logical alternative. I sat back in my chair silently praising the Lord for the enlightening power of His truth as the class systematically whittled away at the accepted theory of evolution. The professor simply could not answer the questions they were posing. After about twenty minutes of this, he began to think out loud. Hands raised in question were invisible to him now as he paced back and forth rambling on about his doubts of the theory and some discrepancies, he had quietly harbored for many years. Soon his monologue turned straight to religion as he proclaimed to the class with a tear in his eye that he was a good person, that he should have nothing to answer for should there be a judgment, and how he really would like to believe that he would see his deceased family some day. It was sad in a way to see this pleasant old man visibly confused and wondering. One student pointed out in almost frustration, “Isn’t this an earth science class? Why are we discussing religion?” But we weren’t discussing anything. He was hung up on voicing an internal dialogue in which he went back and forth, weighing his good against his bad, wondering which religion was right, debating whether or not the Bible was literally true, and if it was church membership or just goodness that God demanded of him. I raised my hand and asked him if he would like for me to show him after class how he could have his questions answered. He hesitated. After having rambled on almost entirely uninterrupted for nearly twenty minutes about religion and morality, he was apparently feeling somewhat foolish and wanting to get back to the lesson. But he had already filled up the entire class period. With a few closing comments, he dismissed the class and made his way over to me. He began asking me questions about evolution vs. creation. But I was no expert. I was merely a young college student who took God at His Word: “In the beginning God created.” So I told him I could introduce him to the One Who created the universe, Who could answer all his questions. Right there in the classroom, I opened my Bible and showed him how to be saved. He had too many questions at that moment and clearly wasn’t ready to make such a big decision just yet, but he told me of a Bible he had—a gift his Christian mother had given him before she died. He told me that he was going to read it—that he wanted to find the truth. Then I told him about the CSE Creation Seminar Series videos and offered to loan him one. The next week after viewing it, he thanked me for it and told me he had many questions answered and now he was asking even more. He was on a mission to find the truth. With only a few weeks left in the semester, I didn’t get to see where his search ended. But I know that for the rest of the semester, whenever he came across something he previously had see as evidence for evolution, he told us that while this might seem to indicate a common ancestor, perhaps it was evidence of a worldwide flood or of an Intelligent Designer.

In fact someone had actually alerted Mr Joscelyn and he posted his testimony in the group personally. Now I was intrigued and just had to know how he managed to convince a Professor of Earth Science when I had seen most Creation Science claims being demolished by undergrads. Needless to say that when he proceeded to mention the very arguments and “facts” I had seen defeated so many times I started seriously doubting his story. Then I decided to do something I had never done before – I started fact checking a fellow Christian’s testimony.

First I checked out Okaloosa-Walton College. While looking at the faculty I couldn’t find a Dr Vaos though (thanks to Google) I did find someone who matched his description at Broward Community College. I contacted the Science department and I received the following email from Dr. Bryan, the Chair of Physical Sciences at Okaloosa-Walton College:

"Eugene, This is a curious discovery that you have made. Stephen Vaos no longer teaches for us, only because he had to relocate due to some personal issues (his former wife recenly passed) that he had to tend to in south Florida. He did a fine job for many years as an adjunct professor of Earth science. Steph also had a distinguished career as an industry geologist. If Steve is at Broward CC, you might just try to reach him there. As for this classroom story, I can neither confirm or deny it. Steve never told me of such an incident, nor did any student or any other individual associated with the college or otherwise. So I don't know what to tell you, at all. This is all news to us in the science department. Kent Hovind is presently in prison because of some type of tax evasion problem with a program he had in Pensacola. I only say this as a matter of fact. Hovind visited our college years ago at the request of a student, gave a presentation, and we had a discussion/mini-dabate afterward. As a firmly committed Christian myself (of a conservative Anglican variety), and as a geologist and educator, I naturally have a great interest and concern about these issues generally. And I enjoy engaging students on the various issues. But it sure is difficult to get people on the same level to have an honest discussion over almost anything. To me this indicates the great importance to us of origins issues. And that, at least, is how it should be. Now the hard work of dialogue.... Jon Bryan"

OK so he couldn’t “confirm or deny” anything but by now the story sure seemed even more unlikely to be true. He did manage to confirm that the Dr Vaos who taught there and the Dr Vaos at Broward was the same person. Reaching Dr Vaos was a little harder so I called in some help. Someone else on the Free Kent Hovind group – Whitney Gray, these days better known as popular Youtuber DonExodus – had just done a great piece of detective work showing the Discovery Institute’s list of “Dissenters from Darwinism” to be a total sham. Since he was an academic I asked him to see if he could get an answer out of Dr Vaos. He got the following reply:

"When I teach Earth Science and explain to the students about evolution, I always state to the students that whatever I am going to teach you is not what I believe but what is written in your book and what science accepts. My personal believes are not part of the lecture. I never tried to imposes my personal ideas to anybody, in the class and outside the class. Sir you are insulting me presenting me like an stubborn person who forces students to accept my ideas. Your whole letter is inaccurate and completely imaginary. I do not know why you are doing that. I have taught in an college in North Florida in a class with many Baptists students and they were glad that I had never had any argument with any of them. They had mentioned that they do not go along with evolution and I respected it. I have NEVER discuss religion with any student and they are many students that can confirm that. I only discuss whatever is mentioned in the texbook and whatever geology is based on without mentioning EVER my personal views. If you did not understand science or if you do not accept any view of science it is your busness. Be careful though because you are accusing me using lies, and I if you do continue I will get legal action against you. Dr. Stephen P. Vaos"

As you can see Dr Vaos mistakenly assumed that Whitney was the source of the testimony and he was very upset by the allegations! So then after correcting the misunderstanding, he sent the following email:

"Mr W.Gray I am sorry if I turned against you. It was not clear if you were in support or not of the whole libel. I was upset because I am always professional in my teaching. Geology is based on evolution which is depicted very well in the succession of the sedimentary rocks from the old to the younger ones. So when I have to present this to the students I always make the statement:" Whatever I am going to explain you is what science accepts, or whatever we can find in your book in your textbook, and this presentation has nothing to do with my personal views on the subject", I am very careful in explaining this because I do not want to insult anybodie's belief. Now if any student twists the truth and insists that I am trying to push evolution that is a inaccurate insult. Students that get an "D" of "F" try very hard to incriminate the teacher instead of theit lazy attitude. Sincerely, Dr.S.P.Vaos"

That settled it without a doubt. The testimony was a complete and utter fabrication. Now it would be unfair to say that this case alone destroyed my faith in my fellow Christians because by then guys like Hovind and Jack Chick had already done a great job of undermining the trust I had in the things my fellow Christians told me. This case just provided the final push that sent me over the edge.


I don’t know why people think they need to lie for Jesus, I really don’t. Maybe they think the end justifies the means but really all it does is destroy the credibility of Christianity. I for one will never take any testimony at face value again.

The perils of giving Christians power proven yet again

I would like to start this blog by saying that I really hate to say "I told you so" but that would be a lie. I love saying it. But I do realise that this is a rather annoying character flaw and I'm working on it. Still, once in a while something so vindicating happens that its hard for me to contain myself. Little over a year ago I wrote a blog post on how badly Christians handle power. Now I think the examples I listed there as well as the history of Christianity since Constantine (and perhaps earlier) proved my point just fine. So really when Jeff Sharlet released a book called "The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power" it was really just icing on the cake. On the other hand its the kind of icing that makes you sick to your stomach and thats the reason I'm not currently doing the I-told-you-so-dance. Like most people I found out about this group of Christian politicians when a series of sex scandals involving these good Christian Conservatives hit the news. That alone should have been a sign that there is something wrong on a much deeper level. After all if a group of people all living in the same house all got cancer we would suspect that there may be something carcinogenic in that house. Similarly the fact that about 5 men living in the same house and belonging to the same organization all suffered serious moral failings should have been a clue that there was something seriously wrong with the atmosphere in that house! So then I really shouldn't have been this surprised by this interview with the author and yet I never imagined things would be this dark:



When studying Judaism I came accross something facinating regarding the Name of God - the concepts of chillul Ha-Shem and kiddush Ha-Shem. Any deed that increases the respect accorded to God or Judaism is referred to as kiddush Ha-Shem, "sanctification of The Name", on the other hand, any act that causes God or Judaism to come into disrespect or a commandment to be disobeyed is often referred to as chillul Ha-Shem, "profanation of The Name". I think here we are dealing with a clear case of chillul Ha-Shem. I am a Christian and stories like this leave a bad taste in my mouth. I can't even imagine how this goes over among non-Christians.

You know as much as I like to say "I told you so" there are times where I would have much preferred to be proven wrong instead...




For more information on The Family, check out the Wikipedia entry

This one time, at the homeopathy ER...

I'm a really big fan of British sketch comedy and one of my all time favorites has to be the duo Mitchell & Webb. I recently saw a sketch by them that was not only really funny but also made a brilliant point about "alternative" medicine.



I can't help but be in awe at the power of satire. Arguing with someone who believes in homeopathy (I'm not even counting all the people who think that homeopathy is the same as herbalism here) can feel pretty futile. You can try explaining the why's the wherefore's the facts and the science of why homeopathic "medicine" is really nothing but water until you turn blue and still make very little impression on a believer. But here with a little bit of humour Mitchell & Webb manage to cut right through all that to a very important truth - if you are seriously injured, what kind of treatment do you want? Would you want real ER doctors treating you or would you want a homeopath or someone with some crystals "treating" you? If you trust science based medicine when your life is in immanent danger, why would you trust "alternative" treatments instead at other times. If you want a real doctor when it counts, shouldn't you go to a real doctor for other ailments too?

The last bit of that sketch was just as brilliant. The idea of homeopathic alcohol was also used by another brilliant Brit - Terry Pratchett:

A recent but short-lived line, which never caught on despite the best scientific recommendation, was Bearhugger's Homeopathic Sipping Whiskey. It is a founding fact of homeopathy that the effectiveness of a remedy increases with dilution. Jimkin decided, therefore, that this idea could profitably be applied to his own product.

Strangely enough, the slogan 'Every drop diluted 1 million times!' failed to attract custom even though, in theory, merely being in the same room as an uncorked bottle of the stuff should make the purchaser riotously drunk.

Terry Pratchett, The Discworld Companion

Again, satire manages to get to the point a whole lot faster than any other type of argument. If you laugh at the idea of homeopathic liquor, why would you take homeopathic medicine seriously? If you don't think ridiculously diluted alchol will have any effect on you, why then would you think ridiculously diluted medicine would?

Fearing God

I doubt I would get along very well with the folks over at Rapture Ready but I have to concede that recently during a discussion regarding Babies and the Rapture one of them made a very good point:

“I believe that only the babies of believers will be raptured based on the examples of the families of Noah and Lot being removed before judgment came, while the children of the nonbelievers perished. I do not believe babies born to non-believers will be raptured. I agree rapture-me that the Bible is loaded with the precedence that the children of non-believers suffer right along with their parents.”

It may not be a very pleasant point or a moral one but it’s hard to fault it for Biblical correctness. Despite what the PR stunt by LaHey and Jenkins suggested, there is nothing in the Bible about an age of accountability and therefore there is no reason to suspect that in case of Rapture, all the children of the world would be included. According to the Bible it seems that God is a lot less Pro-Life than we would like Him to be…

To me this is the biggest struggle of my faith. It’s not evolution, its not questions about the historical accuracy of the Bible, it’s the fact that the God I call loving oftentimes seems to be everything but. I like to think it’s not just me though. This is an issue that pretty much divides Christianity, it forces most to go in one of two directions. On the one hand you get people (like those at Rapture Ready) who embrace the wrath and punishment of God to such a scary degree that their fantasies about God torturing the sinners seems almost pornographic. They don't try to excuse or explain away the tough Scriptures, they base their lives on it! They seem to worship a God as cruel and petty as they are and yet fail to see why people aren’t lining up to be like them. On the other hand you get most of Western Christianity, who decided to pretend that all the uncomfortable Scriptures either don’t apply or don’t exist. Instead they worship a much more fluffy, almost teddy bear-like version of God based on only the parts of the Bible they like. I once saw an atheist video claiming that Christians suffer from battered wife syndrome because no matter what God does, no matter how reprehensible we would find it in anyone else, we keep insisting that our case is different, that He really is good and that He loves us. That certainly gave me pause. Turning God into a hippie Santa requires constant (and exhausting) mental gymnastics to account for the massive chunks of the Bible that contradicts this view. Even worse, this fluffy and sanitized version of God just doesn’t work. All it does is turn God into the ultimate spineless parent who just loves to dote on and spoil His kids and can never see anything wrong with whatever they do. It pretty much assumes that God's only job is to make us happy and tell us how awesome we are. Mrs Betty Bowers (America’s best Christian™) put it very eloquently:

“You see, through the resourcefulness of American marketing (and our singular ingenuity for making everything all about us), God has suddenly become helplessly obsessed with His love for us, as if He spent the past decades having His power and morality bludgeoned out of Him by incessant sensitivity training and anger management. So, if you do something evil, instead of calling you into account and sending you to Hell, He meekly sits back and cries like a drunken drama queen watching "Terms of Endearment." With a languid, resigned flip of His lustrous dark-ash blond hair, Jesus simply, and timidly, dabs his Nordic blue eyes and watches you drown your children and set fire to your trailer, hoping you will get around to loving Him so He can give you all the neat stuff you want in the Hereafter!”

So here then is my dilemma – since I know both views are wrong I can’t believe in either one but how do I believe in both? Paul said that we should consider both “the kindness and sternness of God” but how do I find this balance? How do I reconcile the compassionate Father that Jesus talked about with the God who tortured Job on a dare? I really wish I knew. I know I disagree with the concept of a weepy impotent weakling god, but what is the right balance point between the compassion and ferocity of God? I agree that a certain amount of awe and respect is right but does the term "fear of God" literally mean that we are supposed to be terrified of God?

A thoughtless lyric

Today I ran across a very interesting juxtaposition while listening to my local Christian radio station. At one point there was a preacher (I didn't catch his name) who was born with a cleft palate but thanks to plastic surgery is a successful international speaker. In complete opposition to that, the same station later played the song "Our God reigns" by the band Delirious?



This song, after attacking abortion and either HIV or greed (or both) then tackles what the band believes is the third great evil threatening this broken world - plastic surgery:

The west has found a gun and it’s loaded with ‘unsure’
Nip and tuck if you have the bucks in a race to find a cure.
Psalm one hundred and thirty nine is the conscience to our selfish crime,
God didn’t screw up when he made you,
He’s a father who loves to parade you.

Now I like a lot of songs by Delirious? but this is arguably one of the dumbest, most thoughtless pieces of lyric writing out there. Sure, it may sound holy and deep if you are one of the fortunate ones who happened to be born healthy and with everything looking and working as it should. But what about all those who aren't? When you get right down to it, this lyric raises several very uncomfortable questions. If God doesn't "screw up" when he makes you then why are there so many babies born with various birth defects? Is it still a "selfish crime" to correct defects that would prevent a child from talking/walking/seeing/hearing? If God wants you to stay the way He made you (flaws and all) are we supposed to leave all defects untreated? If it's OK to use plastic surgery on some defects, why not on others? At what point does it become an insult to God to alter your appearance? Is it OK to get your crooked teeth fixed? Is it a selfish crime to colour your hair? How about shaving? Is it a sin for people who were born fat to diet? Do frail people who exercise insult God? Should we even be wearing glasses and contact lenses? After all if God (according to Delirious? at least) purposefully made you nearsighted, wouldn't it be a "selfish crime" to try and correct that? Is it OK to use moisturiser or would God prefer to parade my wrinkles and blemishes as soon as possible?

Seriously, if you want to tell a beautiful but insecure teenage girl that she doesn't need breast enlargement to be loved then tell her she is beautiful and doesn't need breast enlargement to be loved. Don't make incredibly dumb and thoughtless blanket statements about plastic surgery.

And since when is plastic surgery one of the biggest evils of our time anyway?

Rick Warren should grow a pair

I get now why Pastor Rick Warren feels so at home among politicians and why presidential candidates seemed so at home in his church . They are cut from the same cloth. Dishonest peas in a pod. Like a true politician he will have an opinion for exactly as long as it makes him look good and then do a complete 180 (and lie through his teeth about it) if that opinion starts making him look bad. Unfortunately for the good pastor this is the information age and if you love seeing yourself on TV its going to make it a little harder to pretend you never said the things you did:



At least he didn't go on to act all unfairly persecuted by people calling him on it! Oh wait, he did and ended up with even more egg on his face:



Look, I am all for freedom of speech. I also firmly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Therefore my issue isn't really with what Rick Warren believes it's with him not having the balls to stick to his beliefs. I have an even bigger issue with the fact that he will look you straight in the eye, smile and lie about it later. If you have an opinion then have an opinion. You want to change your mind then by all means please do, but don't then go around pretending that is what you always believed to begin with (How is that for straight out of 1984?). Most of all don't lie about it, especially when you are trying to set yourself up as the smiling overweight face of protestant Christianity - because that way we all get painted with the dishonest hypocrite brush. Like we needed any more of that...

I may dislike Fred Phelps with every fiber of my being but I respect him a lot more than Rick Warren.

My mother the whore

“The Church is a whore but she is my mother”

St Augustine of Hippo (allegedly)*

Have you ever been to a party where you don’t know anyone but everyone seems to know everyone else there? That’s how I feel about church these days. For longer that I would like to admit, I have been struggling to feel any sense of belonging in the church. I have been to a couple, the people are nice, the music is good and so is the preaching and yet I usually end up feeling the way I do when I attend a funeral for someone I didn’t know (an activity I detest by the way), I feel like I am expected to feel something or experience something that I simply don’t.

What makes this worse is the feeling that I am the only one feeling this way. Everyone else seems to enjoy going to church just fine. Politicians seem right at home (during election time anyway) and yet heaven alone knows what they actually believe. Obviously the good Christian people of the world seem to get a lot out of it. In fact, it turns out even a large number of atheists and agnostics enjoy going to church! So if agnostics can think of ten good reasons to go to church, why is it so hard for me to think of even one?

I have every reason to feel at home in church. I grew up in church. From the time I was a baby I attended church every Sunday. I faithfully attended for most of my life. I wasn’t just attending it either, I was involved in it. I have been a deacon, a cell leader, an usher and a caretaker. Really I have dealt with every part of the church from the people to the toilets in my short life. I used to feel that connection, I used to feel like I belong. So why don’t I feel that way anymore? Sometimes I can’t help but wonder if Calvin was right with his gloomy doctrine. Maybe I am excluded due to predestination.

Maybe it’s because I have changed so much. These days I browse the various neighborhood church websites and look at the smiling pastoral faces promising aggressive Kingdom building and a strong commitment to defending Biblical inerrancy in these trying times and I see exactly the Christian I used to be which in turn makes me wonder how much acceptance the person I am now would have found with the person I once was. These days I have more doubts than certainties and more questions than axioms and I just can’t help but wonder if there would be any room for me among these good people.

Perhaps there will be room, but will there be understanding? Will there be acceptance? Could the smiling faithful really connect with someone who questions as much as I do, someone who doesn’t feel the same way they do, someone who may never see eye to eye with them on certain issues? I certainly don’t have the energy to fake it for the sake of belonging.

I guess there is only one way to find out. Time will tell.





* I say allegedly because while I can find hundreds of people attributing this quote to him I can’t actually find it in any of his works. Therefore there is a chance that he never actually said this.