The Foolishness of God is wiser than men

Yes, can you credit that Scripture declares - contextually, in connection with the cross of Jesus Christ - that very thing? But, of course, the (subclausal) statement pertains here to the matter of last night's Sunday feature, in which the following is documented: the activity of Australian expatriate, now U.S. resident Ken Ham, well-known creationist (to those who follow such things) presently living in Kentucky, where he and a slew of willing helpers are in the process, nearing completion stage I believe, of constructing a biblically realistic, made-to-specified-dimensions replica of Noah's Ark, complete with graphic and life-sized if inanimate representations of the retinue of animals they believe were present in that day and age and moreover were gathered into, after being apparently supernaturally impelled towards, the ark. (Phew! Long-winded is undeniably my second name.) These selfsame folk were basically held up to unmitigated, down-and-out, no-holds-barred ridicule and derision, essentially for having the sheer temerity, the ignorance bordering upon superstition, even delirium supposedly, of questioning today's most utterly sacred cow: i.e. the 'doctrine' - so religiously is it held to and any slightest (basic) deviation therefrom duly considered an indication of early dementia, of alzheimers or far, far worse - of evolution. One might even term it the 'pure gospel' (though whether it's really good news is entirely another matter) of modern 'enlightened' humanity; finally rid once and for all, so it hopes, imagines and supposes, of any remaining vestige of superstitious antediluvian thinking. (Naturally they pay especially little regard to Charles Darwin's own essential, especially later, thoughts and reflections upon his much-abused theorem, which might suggest they've taken and used it for something wholly unintended but regretfully foreseen and later lamented by him, but that's for another occasion. Except to add that at the very end of my own seventh-form, final year of NZ high school my much liked and esteemed biology teacher, a 'Mr Reid', responding to my own - then non-Christian, I must hasten to add - deep misgivings and inability to really accept the theory of evolution in the final analysis, or when push came to shove, assured me that "it's just a theory" - though you'd hardly imagine so these days!) The program was laced with smears and barely-veiled innuendoes, impugning both the character as well as the intelligence of Mr Ham, though characteristically never getting back to him to get his side of the story. That apparently wasn't really necessary, for as I stated yesterday, if the straw man you build up is sufficiently and negatively enough characterized, your readership - or rather listenership - will implicitly 'catch your drift' as it were, accepting your bait hook, line and even sinker, and before all that long will join in the antics of the mob, whether that results in throwing the rascals/scoundrels to the lions in the amphitheatre or, as with the Master Himself, baying incessantly for His crucifixion...curiously enough - worth a study in human fickleness and the dynamics of the crowd for some restless psychology lab in one of our numerous universities intent upon exploring every last odd and esoteric topic until the cattle beast quite literally comes home - only days after selfsame crowd were hailing Him as Israel's Hero arriving in Jerusalem for His much-anticipated public coronation. Yes, such was the effective hatchet job upon, sorry, I mean description of Mr Ham et al - and wouldn't you know it, they even wheeled out the 'crazy as' - so she was well depicted as at least, in every way, shape and form - Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk in the news a (half?) year or so ago for refusing to sign the dotted line of assent to a same sex marriage in her county office, for which she was summarily assigned to gaol (I've always preferred the American word, perhaps going back to my childhood love affair with the Beagle Boys - but I hasten to add not their especial antics!) The pics of her - especially those at the very end of the piece - focused in upon her rather difficult and seemingly forced and strained grimace of a smile and then smirk to boot, staying with this image till it became highly uncomfortable not only to Ms Davis and her interviewer but undoubtedly to listeners generally. As if to sink the boot in well and truly, to finish things off, thus leaving folks watching in no lingering doubt - if they still had any - that this lady and that man (i.e. Mr Ham), and basically anyone and everyone at all associated with them were loony tunes, pure and simple, derisable in the extreme and fit only for the funny farm. And if that were all it'd obviously have been bad enough. But no, not only were they given the hatchet work, the implicit character assassination - at least in Ken Ham's case - the loony tune prognosis and the obvious implication that they deserved to be consigned, and probably for life, ipso pronto, but throughout the story and exponentially more as it reached its conclusion, Mr Ham anyhow - and by implication all associated with his financially scandalous project (in view of all the needs in the world, it was basically implied, and yes, perhaps that one aspect's worthy of more exploration - but who are they to judge?) - was presented as a very real threat to the future citizens of America. Though Bill Nye, towards the piece's conclusion, basically said that all (?20/40?) million viewers (in the States) would therefore just outright dismiss his way out ideas as pure lunacy, and hence Ken Ham himself as an utter crackpot, there were a couple of occasions throughout that the very right of Mr Ham to even hold, let alone express for public consumption, such way out views were seriously questioned, leading one inevitably to relate the whole setup to another subject of pressing and immediate concern and alarm and some would even claim hysteria. Though I happen not to hold to the view that humanity does not play a very significant role in the ever-escalating hyper-paranoia over what is termed anthropomorphic climate change, those who do include some indubitably, genuinely intelligent people and moreover some whose environmental credentials could hardly be questioned - the renowned and personally beloved David Bellamy for perfect example, who I would submit has more love for this planet and its seemingly innumerable species and ecosystems in his little finger than the great majority of world scientists have put together (no, I do overstate matters, I'm well aware!) So what am I saying, at the end of the day? Not simply that the much-maligned on the aforementioned issues share much in common, but rather that their opponents and critics and detractors show much more of a kinship with a certain early-mid 20th century dictator than they do to the supposedly enlightened and open-minded scientific community they claim to be worthy representatives of. For those who scapegoat their ideological opponents one moment have been historically shown the 'nekminute' - as New Zealand's beloved Pita Sharples might put it - to often descend to calling for their consignment...and sometimes that isn't even considered enough, and ultimately they find themselves in what ordinarily they would regard as some very unusual company, amidst strange bedfellows indeed. Even eventually baying for their enemies' blood.