How to Win Plants and influence Animals

How to Win over Plants and influence Animals . 


I think what I would like to question is the idea of projection in Religion. The idea of projection is interesting and I will limit myself to that for now at least..That would seem to indicate that the writer or writers (on the presumption that there is no God) had so many psychological problems that they should have or could have been locked up long ago. For being guilty of the propagation of which is obviously for some people according to the theory of projection  a  delusion held by a group or and an individual.. However since the writers of the Bible for example to mention but one religious book appear to have written it at different times hundreds of years apart that particular conclusion remains problematic. In fact of course the ideas expressed in this projection if that is indeed what it is are so preposterous as to be laughable,bushes not being consumed by fire as in the story of the burning bush in the story of Moses. Everyone knows combustible material will burn away in the presence of fire given no retardants are present.. There surely can be no other possibility. at least naturalistically speaking..Of course the making of the world ex nihilo ie out of nothing when every sensible person knows according to the conclusions of the projection theory that indubitably the world came about by time-plus chance plus nothing and the stellar dust or matter has always been in existence eternally one might say.The Big Bang put the planets almost mathematically in or about given a few light years here or there in their place and the known Universe having come about by time plus chance plus nothing(let's make it nothing nothing as Dr Schaeffer would say:makes it more exciting does'nt it.!))we can  despite that even make calculations on observable data and that science is objective and is not and does not have prior presuppositions attached to it and that scientists never never never have personal pre scientific opinions about their scientific endeavours. (See Michael Polanyi “Personal Knowledge” for a thoughtful examination of that very point.) and that only time plus chance plus nothing is the ONLY way the Earth could have come into being and no other idea by law should be or is allowed to be taught especially in America in especial Creationism or Intelligent design.I myself am not commited to either camp  for I have a view ofScripture and by text and context with good exegesis of passages I somehow navigate my way by the Grace of God. Of a certainty too of course we would certainly think the Founding Fathers statement in the USA would not have been so foolish as to necessarily imply the actual existence of God and any evidence to the contrary in the Bill of Rights is obviously a case of verbal gymnastics as is for example in the statement issued in Vatican Two when liberal theologians and the Conservative Orthodox were evenly balanced and what you read can be read in a different way entirely. Alice in Wonderland lives again, a word means what I want it to mean linguistic practice and verbal gymnastics and verbal inflation being one of the symptoms of the age. Football teams get reported as having been massacred and the whole losing team troops of the pitch nothing worse for wear except in the score.Having a wicked time as these dating ads we are assualted with late at night means having a good time.A good time means of course in that context and with that implied sexual innuendos means for Christians that they would indeed have a wicked time and also that God would not hold them guiltless,that being the case of course that He is there and He is not silent.  Obviously natural selection as Darwin outlined it is an explanation one would say as a projection theorist and not an explanatory theory and as evolutionary biology would atempt to postulate a line or lines of Progress. (Now, there's a word worth contemplating.). Some of course would say that the presence of the possibility of natural selection itself is unverifiable, unknowable and unprovable. Of course it must have happened that way as Darwin said and after all it is not his fault no one thought of it before him except Huxley of course and what will we say of these millions who believed otherwise and were prepared to pay the ultimate price for their beliefs and often did. Most of the gospel writers were crucified. The very idea of the story of the Tower of Babel story accounting for language difference and language structure is of course totally improbable and wildly erratic.It must be a projection because of course a priori there is no God. Of course Noam Chomsky makes some interesting points re language(see the little article byAaron Stark) but after all not all of us are fans. Everyone knows that mankind first appeared in one place and they just decided it would be better if everyone spoke differently with different languages, different dialects,different cultural meanings even attached to the language they use.Of course language aqquisution is problematic too but"light will be shed..) Darwins great Pumpkin will gain the power of speech and all will be revealed in the great nineteenth century tradition of the inevitability of progress.The twentieth Century was a rude awakening for many. The evidence for the last hundred  years or so points to a wildly different conclusion. Of course who needs good evidence when bias and pre scientific presuppositions can guide us to the conclusions we so ardently desire. These things language, etc, the idea that humanity is better,different,more able, than it's cousins as Dawkins claims who preceded it is going to in and of itself  aid peaceful living is worthy of a Karl Jasper.It is so much bigger,brasher and without foundation of all the projection theories put together including  Marxism which is a Christian heresy.It is the last gasp leap of an optimistic evolutionary humanism of man being the measure of all things which the breezy Dawkins holds on to without a quaver in his voice amazingly since the Twentieth century just passed has probably been the worst centurythat mankind has ever known for the concentration of hatew and worlwide slaughter on a scale unimagineable before.Of course if we go to the original scenario as postulated by Darwin (Hitler found the theory handy).for of course they found themselves continually fighting and generally wreaking havoc amongst themselves because of the survival of the fittest which happily for some resulted in the survival of the fittest which of course meant that the fittest survives. Ce la vie..Even though the amoeba down the road was a fellow traveller on this ever optimistic road from Brigadoon to Glockamorra that seems to lead nowhere, that has no guides,in order to lead only to a big cliff that we must all fall off one day except of course Enoch who walked with God,amazing,Lazarus who was raised from the dead,astounding, and the Christ,the son of the living God who after three days was resurrected and appeared to over five hundred people with even his digestive organs intact for He ate some fish. Give me a break for everyone knows that some God figure cannot come back from the dead unless He wants to. Also that about donkeys speaking, like Balaam's ass did , give me a break,everybody knows it could only be a God that could get an ass to speak and that he,we are asked to believe he spoke in a logically coherent manner.. Since we assert there is no God it clearly is quite impossible a priiori .As for the Israelites escaping from Pharaoh and the pursuing Egyptians getting drowned in the Red Sea with their chariots and then sometime this year someone finding Chariots in the Dead Sea well that' is just the long arm of coincidence. Why there would have to be a God who could do that and of course anyway God does not love us as anyone who knows of Jesus Christ,the king of the Jews, as the Romans named him dying on the cross for sinners like ourselves could say.Well what a load of nonsense for everyone knows God is not like that,He is a far off God who does not give one hoot about human life. Of course other people say that we are trying so hard to escape from reason. That there is the God who is there. That He is there and He is not silent,that there is a Genesis in space and time, that it happened in space-time history as Dr Schaeffer and the Bible say. That God walked with Adam in the cool of the day because He simply loved him as another person.After all they say He had plenty of experience.each other- a person to person relationship that Adam and Eve had before the historic space time fall and God loved it, not because he lonely for He was not. He enjoyed human company. We do. Why should God be denied the possibility. God took a day off not because He needed it but because His creation did. That creation  is not all powerful and self sustaining like Him. He sustains it then and now or so the theory goes we say.

It is I must admit evidential, not compelling but worth a Pascal kind of bet I would say if you decide in favour after weighing all the evidence. It is after all an evidentially based religion unlike others which are either infinite but impersonal, personal but finite and ours of course which iws based on a God being there who speaks about who He is,What man is, where the world its order annd conformity to established laws and even given the historic space-time fall still retains a deep down beauty as Gerard Manley Hopkins would say. Optimistic evolutionary humanism may seem faith based at times but of course it is always  chance+time =plus nothing,always the same regardless of its formulation and leading of course via natural selection, survival of the fittest, the selfish gene,regardless of the religious crutch as if we were limping, leading to the conclusion that we as secularizers, and being naturalistic allies rationalistically seek with the idea of inevitable human progress to the bright sunny hills beyond where the Wizard of Oz will supply our every need..

Every other God I notice though does not come down and be born of a virgin be a man and live an innocent life,claim to be God, and make the lame walk, the blind see,the thirsty fill with better wine made from water at Canaan,save a woman from stoning for adultery, forgive her her sins,turn the rich man away because he would rather trust in riches than in God,raise Lazarus his friend from the dead,claim Divinity with His Father,be judged by a kangaroo court,illegally meeting in the night, with not enough present at the meeting,be turned over to the Romans, the occupying powers for sentence and Him being declared innocent and the Judge washing his hands of the case saying "what is truth" and being betrayed by all His followers, betrayed by His own people who bayed for His blood to be shed, who would rather free a criminal than have an innocent man not suffer,to want Him to be scourged illegally,mocked unmercifully,with a crown of thorns forced on His head,to be crucified,a cursed death, to hang in agony for hours and then freely give up the Ghost. If He was God He could not be killed. And then rising again appearing to people, eating some fish and rising to Heaven in the transfiguration .And not to mention coming again about icing on the cake. That is a real stunner. That was a nice touch,very skilful. For a fiction, for a projection, the Bible is remarkably crafted no wonder it is the most popular book in the world. Easy Booker Prize winner, an Oscar winner made into a film. Outright winner of the Cannes Foreign Language film in New Testament Greek and to say that He Jesus wanted all this suffering and so did His Father in order to take the sins of the world on Himself Jesus and make man free. What kind of love is this. Who would or could conceive such a plan,die on the only evidence provided by His life and works and words of being good and performing miracles,so be judged innocent and handed over to a mob to be killed. It's obviously nonsense isn't it. Non- sense. Why the whole population of the Earth all die and are replaced entirely in 130 years or less allowing that they live near that long with good health, no war, or famine ,disease, or die of thirst or bad management of resources. What would be the point of His sacrifice anyway. if that is the case and it is.It's not as if the saved are going to live for ever and the guilty suffer the punishment they so richly deserve. Bring back Hitler, not in my watch, I hear them say. Death is always the end of course there can be no doubt of it, we arrive in pain and the first thing we get is a smack and we are innocent then we die sans teeth,sans eyes,sans everything and no significance can be safely attached to either event so we say. Everyone knows that trees evolved,why you only need to look at them to see that, to produce oxygen and the algae to eat up carbon dioxide. Evolution the great white black, yellow ,red ,pink and points in between made it that way. And man's identity,personality and creativity,coming from God :of course not, for everyone knows that man's identity and longing for significance comes from single celled organisms that somehow appeared on the land and grew wings from legs,oops of course they grew legs first and perhaps then they developed eyes and hollow bones so they could fly. Scientists these Bible believers point out tried to prove aeronautically that what we know here as bumble bees in Britain cannot fly but the trouble is that the silly bumble bee does not listen to scientific opinion and flies anyway. Bumble Bees obviously do not listen to evidence and continue to fly. Of Course everyone knows that all laws too are man made and that the Bible-oops I nearly said inspired came up with some good ones (good-what is that-don't ask me- I might be tempted to tell you.)and of course all laws are man made and do not reflect inalienable rights because of course they can be taken away by statistical averages, the fifty-one percent vote,or by oppressors or ruling intellectual elites. Why even now it is the West's reliance on population control by natural selection that keeps the African continent lagging behind. The so called third world, when if you ever deigned to ask them you find that they want the same things that we want, good earthquake proof housing in affected areas, good housing generally,good food, clean water,good government,peace and tranquillity, good medical services,good law, no military or other coups,protection for the sick and poverty eradicated,an end to unclean water carrying killer diseases like cholera etc.,better protection for women,better flood control, better management of natural resources including good management and protection for animals and plants. and the Brazilian Rain forest in South America to mention somewhere else. Better drug control of research drugs for health and controlled substances like heroin.. All that sounds like us. What if they were like us would our life as we know it be affected? What if one day they compete.?,It is better for us if they are called third world and that then creates a nice buffer Zone that no one ever talks about and we are absolved of responsibility for them .Let's scrap the second commandment, we should never have written that down. People might take it seriously. All the above being missing is effectively keeping them under control. Every five seconds it succeeds. All hail natural selection we know inevitably as the rationalist humanist that he is will march on in a bright sunlit path to the unknown future. Dawkins believes it,Dawkins believes he is the cousin of an ape, so my question is to him, why does he not  insist that he wants to be treated like one. Of course he could be,in another presuppositional apologetic as a human being ,made in the image of God cogently, responsible, able to use and understand language effectively,able to create far more ,to a greater extent than anything else on the planet, even to aggree like for some of us to want a relationship which is what our religion is.. Can Dawkins be true to his presuppositions and live out in the real world without demanding things like freedom and responsibility?.Why should we let him wander free. Things like him belong in Zoos where we can admire his nineteenth century optimistic evolutionary stance. We should have him of course if he does not confess, in a cage with Darwin's motto inscribed and I quote”Light will be shed..He is obviously a danger to society being what he claims he is..However I have to admit I am a born again believer so I would hope his heart could be changed and do the honourable thing and invite him in  to my house to discuss with meand offer him a banana.  Francis A Schaeffer did not believe it was all a projection and put forth cogent reasons as to why not.,Doug Groothuis does the same and he is no slouch, and he like Francis Schaeffer is no slouch. Hans Rookmaaker did not believe it,J P Moreland does not either,Nancy Pearcey (and see her book(Total Truthfor Nancy's viewpoint) ,Alvin Plantigna does not believe it either,(do a Google search on these names if your thick hairy appendages will let you Mr Dawkins. And of course my readers too to whom I would extend the same advice. Of course these are only names to readers and what does anyone know of anything anyway since knowledge is debatable. Epistemological basis for belief is impossible some say and anyway what does it matter,the rat is in the trap until it dies, sans teeth,sans eyes sans everything. Man as Sartre says is a useless passion. I hope you make the right choice for there is a choice to be made..There is a story of a man who jumped from a fifty story window and tragically the story of jumping from great heights is fraught with difficulties. However this particular man as he was falling down was heard to mutter"so far,so good". As I say with John Three and Sixteen in mind I hope you the reader make the right choice.make the right choice .

He either fears his fate too much or his deserts are small
Who will not put it to the touch,to win or lose it all.
See Pascals Pensees for further details.