Posted on 05/11/2003 4:38:14 PM PDT by Junior
Despite movements across the nation to teach creationism in public schools, a science historian said Monday that Christians haven't always used a literal interpretation of the Bible to explain the world's origins.
"For them, the Bible is mostly to teach a religious lesson," said Ernan McMullin of the earliest Christian scholars.
McMullin spoke to a crowd of about 60 people at Montana State University on "Evolution as a Christian theme."
McMullin, a professor at the University of Notre Dame and a Catholic priest, is recognized one of the world's leading science historians and philosophers, according to MSU.
He has written about Galileo, Issac Newton, the concept of matter and, of course, evolution.
It's a subject has been hotly debated ever since Charles Darwin first published "On the Origins of Species" in 1859.
Christian fundamentalists have long pushed the nation's public schools to teach creationism as an alternative, which in its strictest form claims that the world was created in six days, as stated in the Bible's Old Testament Book of Genesis.
But McMullin said creationism largely is an American phenomenon. Other countries simply don't have major creationist movements, leading him to ask: "What makes it in the U.S. ... such an issue (over) evolution and Christian belief?"
The answer probably lies in the nation's history, with the settlement by religious groups, he said. Also, public education and religion are more intertwined here than other countries.
McMullin discussed how Christians have tried to explain their origins over the past 2,000 years, using several examples to show that many viewed Genesis as more of a religious lesson than an exact record of what happened.
It wasn't until the Protestant Reformation of the 16th Century that Genesis started to be taken literally. Then theologians started using nature - and its many complexities - as proof of creation.
Charles Darwin spoiled that through his theory of natural selection, and the battle lines have been drawn ever since.
"It replaced an older view that had sounded like a strong argument for the existence of God," McMullin said.
This was addressed to me. I haven't left. I answer the call.
Because you are mistakenly confusing what is merely the bias inherent with your premise with what is evidence.
Call yourself an "idiot" as you will. That is your choice. I think of you more as willfully intellectually lazy, not an "idiot" per se. That said self-delusion is an idiotic basis for a position.
You continue to entertain what you term "Apparent contradictions," because for you they are self-affirming -- they don't have to be correct as observations go, but they are convenient if not essential in your mind to support your unsupportable premise.
The evidence stands: there is no contradiction. Your mistaken premise is -- and for the sake of your personal definintion must be: contradiction, at all costs and against all logic and accomplished study.
Your problem is that you have failed to prove it here, and no one with any scholarly acheivement has either -- the most anti-biblical scholars gave up such vain attempts long ago. You are the hold out not because you have seen something that has eluded even the most learned albeit skeptical critic. No, you merely insist that it be so because your ego insists it must be so and needs it to be so.
You are enamoured of your premise inspite of the evidence. Because you are so wedded to the notion, you'll do everything in your mind to dismiss evidence, because it doesn't doesn't fit your premise. This is the major failing of the evolutionist. Empirically speaking: incorrect premise - non-supportive evidence = bad "science."
You want "apparent contradictions" to be true so badly, you will ignore and must ignore all evidence to the contrary in order to salvage your precious, self-defining premise.
That, however is not science.
Good science concerns itself with evidence and adjusts it's premises accordingly.
As you insist on remaining willfully ignorant of the evidence, sadly you also continue to remain what is commonly known as "wise" in your own conceit.
Oops, I refuse to address a post the actual jerk under any circumstances and I didn't think that would be a problem. I should have added a "placemarker" or "/rhetorical" to the post. Sorry!
How does this threat differ from that of other religions? How does one choose between Transgressive Sacrality and your threats?
How does this threat differ from that of other religions? How does one choose between Transgressive Sacrality and your threats?
Would you consider those who direct you toward the ONLY life boats available to escape a sinking ship to be "threatening" you?
Once again. The Gospel message in the Bible is either the truth or it is a lie.
If it is truth, then the words are merciful....far from being "threats".
And of course anything less than warning people of the dire consequences of unbelief would be unconscionable for a God of mercy.
Right. And your challenge is to figure out who is telling the truth.
Prove to me that you "life boat" has any more validity than Norse Mythology, Mithraism, etc.
Proof begins with whether or not you believe Jesus Christ Who claimed to be the ONLY WAY to God and salvation...was a liar and a maniac...or if He was telling the truth.
I was an atheist for many years..until once day I looked at the words of Jesus and recognized what He said was from God....that He was not deceitful madman.
It's a simple question of one or the other...and making a simple decision.
To those who accept and recognize Who Jesus is...no proof is needed. To those who reject Him, no proof will ever be enough.
Just trying to keep up with LBB, who is now going multi-colored on us. As is his sidekick.
You will note that the sequence of colors in my placemarker matches the rainbow spectrum, more or less, from violet to red. Hey, I needed *some* kind of guide to follow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.