Notre Dame priest: Creationism debate unique to U.S.

The Bozeman Daily Chronicle ^ | 2003-05-11 | Walt Williams

[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.

[Dimensio]

I think that I understand to what you are referring, but I'm afraid that it does not fit the definition of "theory", at least not in terms of science. As such, I don't think that schools should be teaching it as such.

[stuartcr]

OK

[f.Christian]

evolution ... definition --- something for fools to crow about !

[Aric2000]

You got BIG cahunas buddy, YOU are the ONLY person that I have ever seen that CLAIMS that evolution is cosmology.

Not one paleontologist that I have ever talked to has ever said this, not one Biologist has ever claimed this, and not one REAL scientist that I have ever talked to has claimed this.

You and creationists and IDr's are the only ones that claim this.

To say that evolution begs to answer the question of the origins of life, is false, whether you claim otherwise or not.

You need to get a grip.

[Dimensio]

Will he (or she, as the case may be) be burning in these thousand hells simultaneously (which implies a very small area for each hell) or will the burning be done in individual hells, one at a time?

[Last Visible Dog]

You've already been told that evolution is not cosmology and that it makes no claims that "something came from nothing". That you repeat it after being told only makes you dishonest, it doesn't make your lies any less invalid.

Repeating a stupid statement does not make it any less stupid. If you think evolution has nothing to do with cosmology - you clearly don't understand what you are trying to talk about. Run along - you are getting on my nerves.

[f.Christian]

The FR atheist hate God cult has an orgy !

[Aric2000]

And he continues on with his ridiculous statement by saying that you are clueless as to what you are talking about and how dare you attempt to correct him.

LVD, you ARE CLUELESS!! HELLO, did you hear that?

You are the one that is CLUELESS!!!

Should I send you a certified mail as well?

Geez, you really need to get a grip.

This false premise that you keep popping up with, is just that, a FALSE premise.

Evolution never asks the question, so how can it claim to answer it?

[The Bard]

Interestingly enough, when I have these face-to-face "discussions" with Creationists, they all reach that same snarling, blood-in-the-eye stage...at which point I remind them that the subject is irrelevant with respect to Salvation. They whimper a bit, then try to restart the argument, but ultimately crumble when I ask why this subject seems so much more important to then than assuring a person's final destination.

n Heaven's name are they so afraid of? I still don't understand them, even after having started out as a Creationist.

Here is the crux of the probem: Most who are creationist believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God. The Bible tells us that it is not in Gods nature to lie. As God can not lie, then the creation story must be correct. Once man decides that any part of the bible is not correct, then they can start picking it apart, accepting the areas they wish (creating their own God?) or decide to disregard the entire thing as a myth.

Thus to the creationist, while the creation story may not be essential to the salvation doctrine, if it is not true, then it leads to one questioning the entire salvation doctrine.

I've heard it stated that if the devil can get us to disbelieve the creation, then he can start tearing down the rest of the foundations as being nothing more than the myth he (the devil) tries to make the creation story into.

Even Jesus referred to the Genesis creation story. If that story is false, then wouldn't it Christ a false prophet?

I myself will stick to the creation story. Evolution is the kind of stuff that makes up a good Star Trek story.

[Right Wing Professor]

If you think evolution has nothing to do with cosmology - you clearly don't understand what you are trying to talk about.

Evolution has nothing to do with cosmology. I am quite sure I know what I'm talking about.

[Aric2000]

And you seem to be getting on his nerves...

Are you frightened? LOL

[f.Christian]

One flat note crescendo --- whacks --- anarcho-loons !

[PatrickHenry]

BTW, My textbook on orbital mechanics states that Gallileo's principle problem wasn't that he was publishing ideas counter to the church, but that he called the pope a fool. Seems that Gallileo had a rather biting wit.

Indeed. In his book on the solar system, written in the form of a dialogue, the scriptural heliocentric model was championed by a fellow named Simplicio, ("Simpleton," I believe is a fair translation). That didn't win him any points with the clergy. Still, his troubles went far beyond a mere slander trial. It was full-blown heresy: The Crime of Galileo: Indictment and Abjuration of 1633.

[Dimensio]

So, you claim evolution has nothing to do with the origin of the universe.

Specifically, when confronted with the claim that evolution has something to do with the origin of the universe, I point out that said claim is false. Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of the universe.

Your claim that evolution has nothing to do with cosmology proves you have no idea what you are talking about

And you've substantiated your claim in what way?

Evolution is both a theory of biology and a cosmology theory (theory of the origin of the universe).

No, evolution is only a theory of biology. It states that alelle frequencies change over time. This does not apply in any way to cosmology. Either you are utterly clueless regarding cosmology or you are thinking of a completely different theory and mistakenly calling it evolution. If you claim that evolution deals with cosmology, then be specific and state exactly what evolution claims. Cite scientific journals or other scientific texts to support your definition.

[Right Wing Professor]

Thus to the creationist, while the creation story may not be essential to the salvation doctrine, if it is not true, then it leads to one questioning the entire salvation doctrine.

I had no idea thae Pope had such doubts.

[stuartcr]

I don't either. I was responding to a reply about where this stuff should be taught in our public schools. What do you tell kids when they ask about how the world started though? Myself, I would just say that I have no idea.

[Dimensio]

Fine. What does evolution state regarding cosmology. Be very specific. It appears that what you think of as evolution is completely different than what any biologist or any person with any scienfitic knowledge thinks of as evolution.

Calling me an idiot doesn't help your argument, especially when you haven't bothered to provide any evidence to support your assertion that evolution has anything at all to do with cosmology.

[f.Christian]

Isn't that a self diagnosis ...

you need a pathologist (( analyst )) ---

to pull (( point )) out the tumor (( denial // delusion ))!

[stuartcr]

Sorry, I didn't realize that I would have to explain that it was sarcasm...there is no hell.

[Aric2000]

The pope does not, only fundamentalist Christians would.

Doubts are NOT allowed, thinking of the bible as wonderful religious and historical text, that has stories that teach morals and ethics would not be OK.

It's either ALL literal, or it's not and therefore it can be tossed.

Pretty wild if you ask me, and totally unnecassary, but I am not a christian, so who am I to say?