Home > Religion, Science > The Beam in Thine Own Eye

The Beam in Thine Own Eye

December 4th, 2006

Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye. –Luke 6:42

You’d think that in Kenya, a country now world-famous as being the cradle of mankind due to the fossils found by Dr. Richard Leakey there, would be proud of that distinction and would overcome quite some obstacles to claim international pride in the fact. Apparently, however, a bunch of fundamentalists have cowed the nation’s museums enough to seriously consider hiding the fossils so as not to upset the people who believe that the Earth is 6000 years old and that evolution is “just one theory.”

Leaders of Kenya’s 6-million-strong Pentecostal church want the fossils “de-emphasized”:

“The Christian community here is very uncomfortable that Leakey and his group want their theories presented as fact,” said Bishop Bonifes Adoyo, head of the largest Pentecostal church in Kenya, the Christ is the Answer Ministries.

“Our doctrine is not that we evolved from apes, and we have grave concerns that the museum wants to enhance the prominence of something presented as fact which is just one theory,” the bishop said.

The criticism that it is a “theory,” of course, is a common creationist fallacy; Evolution is a “theory” just like gravity is a “theory.” The theory is not about whether it exists, the theory is about how it works. Evolution clearly exists, and in that respect, it is not “just one theory,” it is fact. The only thing that can overcome that is a faith in a belief that says you should ignore facts before your eyes in favor of the unsupported belief–which is exactly what these people are asking be done.

Now, even if one is to bend way over backwards and allow them their “theory” argument, consider what they have said: Evolution is “just one theory.” Well, another “theory” is creationism. And that “theory” has vastly less evidence to back it up than Evolution has. So it should be “de-emphasized” more, yes? Even they themselves admit that Evolution goes against their doctrine–not their research, not their evidence, not their proofs, but their doctrines, which are lesser than research, evidence, or proof (unless you have the all-important fact-defying faith).

But then consider the irony: the fossils they are seeking to suppress are evidence to back up Evolution (hence their eagerness to suppress them). First, they dismiss Evolution is “theory,” and say that because of this, evidence to back up that theory should be “de-emphasized.” Imagine you come up to someone in the early morning and say, “Look, the ground as far as we can see is wet, therefore it must have rained last night.” To which the other person says, “That’s just a theory, so we should ignore your evidence for it and only look up at the sky. See, it is clear and sunny now, therefore there was no rain last night. Ha, what a jolly fool you are!”

If the religious folks were to have their own “theories” held up to the same rigorous tests that they castigate science for not passing (even when it does), their “doctrines” would shatter into tiny little pieces. Ergo, my quote about the mote and the beam from Luke. That’s one thing religion is sometimes good for: maxims about principles and common sense. So why is it that the most holier-than-thou bible-thumpers violate these principles more than anyone else?

Thank goodness that the people running the museums have good sense and–

“We have a responsibility to present all our artifacts in the best way that we can so that everyone who sees them can gain a full understanding of their significance,” said Ali Chege, public relations manager for the National Museums of Kenya. “But things can get tricky when you have religious beliefs on one side, and intellectuals, scientists, or researchers on the other, saying the opposite.”

[sound of me smacking my palm against my forehead]

Yes, it is tricky when one side wants to present evidence and the other side wants to suppress it. Whatever are we to do? After all, we are just simple museum folk.


Categories: Religion, Science Tags: by
  1. Intensitee
    December 5th, 2006 at 00:16 | #1

    hmmmmmmmmm!I like that!

  2. Tim Kane
    December 5th, 2006 at 08:14 | #2

    The thing about all of this is, biblical literacy started out as a way for protestants to be “christian” without having to serve allegiance to the pope.

    In other words, bibilical literacy movement is politically based.

    In an era where canon law was a major tennent of international law, protestants had to find an arguement for not having allegance to the pope. They had to get around the passage that Peter was the rock upon which the church would be built. My guess is that passage might have been inserted in the bible at a much later date, but prior to the councils of Nicea.

    To get around the pope, the protestants decided that humanity did not need the pope as go between the divinity and humanity. That humanity could go directly to god, and authority could come from the bible.

    The stepping stones after this become very short. Authority in the bible, leads to literal interpretation of the bible. The next thing you know, you’ve got people saying that the world was created in 6 days, literally, as perhaps not even Moses, who is reported to have first written those words, intended.

    As far as christianity was and is concerned, the catholics were right to not want to base faith soley on biblical interpretation. That doesn’t mean the pope should get authority. He has to earn his moral authority everyday, as do most bishops, and in my book, because they backed Bush, because they back authoritarianism, they have no moral authority, and therefore no authority (isn’t that ironic).

    In the end, while I am still a theist, and I like the liturgy of the Catholic mass, thats more emotional and familier to me. In the end I think maybe John Lennon probably got it right. Just imagine. Or, as the enlightened Buddha might say, paradise is only just a thought away.

  3. March 8th, 2009 at 21:14 | #3


    To complete some information, i suggest you check out this article on fossils:


    It questions wether fossils are really millions year old as scientific data says so… Evolution theory being a fact, is a very gross mistakes. For example Gravity as a theory, can be proved through scientific method, and repeated experimentation, compared to Evolution theory, which is a concept which cannot be proven because no experimentation is possible. Plus, Carbon dating, can only go back to 60 000 years as a big maximum (pls see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating#Measurements_and_scales and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating#Radiocarbon_half-life). Another issue with evolution theory, is the “swiss cheese aspect of it”, for example from one phase of development to the other for humans, scientific claim millions of years have passed, nonetheless, there is no evidence linking one stage of evolution to the next. They (the scientists) say 500 000 years or 1 Million years has passed, but they cannot find 1 piece of evidence out of the Millions of “human beings” that lived within that timespan. Crazy isn’t it?

    As for the previous comment, the fight for protestant in order not to have allegance to the pope, costed them a whole inquisition…. All those years of wars in the last 500 years, have been brought only by the Vatican and their strong arm, the Jesuits.

    You can read more here:

    God Bless all…

Comments are closed.