Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.

 

What a strong motive for man who knows the truth but won't come to Jesus

To The Daily Sun,

Dave Pollak, in his letter of Aug. 19, pretty much gives the standard line as to why the theory of evolution should be taught in the classroom as science. And that competing faith-based theories should be taught in theology class. It sounds like a reasonable explanation on the surface, but it's really a sham.

If you teach the theory of evolution as the truth in science class and the way it is presented is as though it is as established as Newtonian physics. Science by the way is a mandatory class. Then you teach say, the "creation myth" in theology class, if perhaps some students sign up for it. Which do you think our children are going to grow up believing is true, regardless if it's true or not. They will believe that evolution is true because their teachers and text books say it is.

Nowhere in their training are they made known of the spiritual roots of this so-called science, of Darwin's writing of how he found the Christian doctrine of eternal damnation of sinners repulsive, or his theological discussions with the captain of Beagle on his now famous voyage. Then you can imagine the discomfort that this seminary trained naturalist must have felt studying God's creation and being reminded, by the very object of his study, of the Creator God from whom this situation that all men must come to terms with flows from; this truth that is suppose to lead one to Jesus and salvation.

What a strong motive for a man who knows the truth and will not come to Jesus, for finding some imagined mechanism, that is: that the changes in living creatures that we see from generation to generation continue without bound, to explain nature without this God. This is one of the main sources of the artificial construct in science that remains to this day that says in the study of our human history, and that of our world it is off limits to consider God and that science is the venue which exercises the ultimate authority in this study. These assumptions constitute an artificial construct which at its core is atheism. (I will not consider Charles Lyell and "The Principles of Geology" at this time.)

This is hugely different than not considering God in the study of nature in the present, as was the case with Copernicus, Kepler, Newton and Galileo. This is hugely different than the Copernican revolution that you liken it to. Galileo was in rebellion to the pope, a man, who was wrong about a peripheral issue concerning Christianity, if he indeed held to the Ptolemaic theory as true. But, the theory of evolution is in rebellion to God for it says that God has not acted throughout history, and he has. God's action in history is an essential truth that is at the core of the Christian faith, that God is alive and that he acts in our lives and that He has done so throughout history.

What this means in terms of education is that we are by design raising a generation of young atheists and agnostics. May I remind you that public education is mandatory. Only those students whose parents can afford private schooling can escape it. (Praise God that there are some school choice programs that help alleviate this.) I have yet to meet a supporter of teaching the theory of evolution in our schools who will meet this issue head on.

At this point you will probably come back at me with the idea that the theory of evolution is merely following the evidence. But if you look at its history this is categorically untrue. It begins with Darwin acknowledging the lack of evidence, presenting his best argument (his claim) to be his doubt of the predestination of stones, a theological argument. It was then sold to the public through a series frauds and hoaxes, and peer pressure. The study of biological evolution and anthropology, in addition to this, did not progress by following the evidence, but it was driven in the direction of evolution. This is what the history of evolution tells us. This is quite a different story than that which evolutionist will have you believe. What this endeavor has verifiably brought us is a study in variation in kind. What they try to ram down our throats is the amoeba to man theory, which no matter how impossible it has been for this to happen they must approve because of their rebellion towards God. If God is out of the picture then evolution must have happened. With the Creator there is no need for it.

As to my comment on ring species, that was a hypothetical. I'm sorry if that was not clear. But responding to your comments concerning this, if I am understanding this correctly the monkeys in the study that you present are all still monkeys. It is a leap of faith to go from that study, to dinosaurs to birds.

As to freedom of inquiry within the evolutionary paradigm. In this you seem to be naive. This letter is already fairly long. If you wish to discuss this further, I'd be glad to explore that with you in a later exchange.

John Demakowski
Franklin

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 213

If you've a form DD-214 I thank you for your service but I'd like to see it

To The Daily Sun,

My goodness, reading letters to the editor in Aug. 20's Daily Sun, it seems someone took the blanket off the parrot cage again. The squawking is unbearable, but such a pleasant sound.

I asked Russ Wiles a simple yes-or-no question and got a half-page response. That is to be expected from a right-wing politician wannabe. I'm sure if you kept up with the news, Russ, the five terrorists traded for Bowe Bergdahl are being watched from the ground and from above as well. Berdahl's case will be heard the end of next month. At present he is still on active duty in Texas.

If you served in the army and have a form DD-214, thanks for your service.

However pretending to be a right-winger who has questioned the birthplace of President Obama I will have to see it before I believe it. AWK AWK.

Ramblin' on, I am not surprised to read that Mr. Wiles continues to be the answer parrot to any criticism directed at Mr. Meade. It was my experience with Mr. Meade in past letters that he does not like to respond when put on the spot.

Ramblin' on, it is plain that Steve Earle needs to look into the history books and find the truth on highways federal grants to each state for upgrade in infrastructure. The C.C.C undertook projects during the 1930s to create jobs. Why are you so worried about Social Security and Medicare going broke by 2035, Steve? I am older than you are, so when I become 94 in 2035, let's talk about it again when we don't receive our check. Okay, Steve?

Mr. Earle says Hillary can't be president because she used her own server. Steve, tell me how outraged you were when in 2007 Bush and Cheney were caught deleting 20 million e-mails on a illegal secret private e-mail server hosted by Republican Party? I was glad to see you know now who created the Internet, Steve. You and I have a problem of speaking before we think as noted by me in the Daily Sun of Aug. 22. So much more to say but for now I'm ramblin' on. Awk Awk

Henry Osmer

Hill

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 251