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.

[general_re]

Is Tango a noun or a verb?

Depends on the context. Presenting a word like "tango" that can be either depending on the context does not magically rescue your idiotic proposition that "Hummer" can be a verb - it is not, no matter how much you might wish that it is.

[Last Visible Dog]

Depends on the context. Presenting a word like "tango" that can be either depending on the context

So Tango can be both a noun or a verb - a thing or a process. Just like Hummer.

You just disproved you own point

[general_re]

Okay, it's pretty obvious why you suggested that I was changing the subject - you want to change the subject from your illiterate proposition that "evolution as cosmology" is somehow a meaningful construct, but you want to distract attention from you doing the changing yourself.

Whatever. It won't work, since that sort of thing is generally only adequate for fooling the severely retarded and the very young, but go ahead and do it if you like. I'll just be over here calling attention to the basic emptiness of this "evolution as cosmology" thing.

[general_re]

Ooooo, and all you had to do was distort my post by omitting the last part. As if nobody can cast their eyes upwards by a few posts and see what I actually said - "Presenting a word like "tango" that can be either depending on the context does not magically rescue your idiotic proposition that "Hummer" can be a verb - it is not, no matter how much you might wish that it is."

[Last Visible Dog]

You are trolling, I think - nobody can possibly be this stupid. "Hummer", absent any modifier, is a product. "Building a Hummer" is a specific sort of process.

Therefore the word "Hummer" with a modifier is an process.

You just disproved your own point.

[general_re]

Therefore the word "Hummer" with a modifier is an process.

With a specific sort of modifier - a verb. Was that really so difficult? Was it really so difficult for you to concede the point that "Hummer" on its own is not a process, as you originally claimed?

[Last Visible Dog]

you want to change the subject from your illiterate proposition that "evolution as cosmology" is somehow a meaningful construct,

The Tile of this book is "Cosmology: The origin and evolution of cosmic structure."

Is this context “evolution” is referring to cosmology thus “evolution as cosmology”

Are you now going to call the authors of this book "illiterate"?

checkmate again

Like I said, when I defeat your arguments you just change the subject.

[Aric2000]

Well, actually, a hummer is a process, it feels really good too....;)

[Aric2000]

Sorry General, I just couldn't help myself...

Yes, I am a VERY sick puppy, what can I say?

[general_re]

Is this context “evolution” is referring to cosmology thus “evolution as cosmology”

See, here's the thing - you want to present an analogy without actually bothering to see if the things are analogous. Let's subject that analogy to a little bit of an acid test - how is the process of the "evolution of the cosmic structure" similar to the process of biological evolution? Be as specific as you can.

[Aric2000]

Give it up General, and use your arguments on someone with some brains.

When you speak to a child who thinks their right, no amount of logic, nor correct argument is going to convince them.

They will sit in a corner and whine about how they are right, no matter what.

[general_re]

Down, boy - that's "Hummer" with a capital "H" ;)

[Aric2000]

I know this to be true, I have a 7 year old and a 2 1/2 year old, it's almost impossible.

[general_re]

When you speak to a child who thinks their right, no amount of logic, nor correct argument is going to convince them.

It does have that aura about it, doesn't it?

[Last Visible Dog]

With a specific sort of modifier - a verb.

But without the modifier the verb "build" is meaningless in this context therefore the modifier hummer refers to the process (not the thing)

In actuality “build” is the verb and “hummer” is the modifier or adverb (that is one way a noun can denote an action) You can’t wiggle your way out of this one.

BTW: Tango is a noun (I have found no dictionary that claims Tango is a verb – Tangoing is verb just as Hummering would be a verb if the term catches on. Tango is a noun and Hummer is a noun but depending on context they can both can refer to a process.

[Aric2000]

LOL, oh yeah, you got that right, CAPITAL "H"...;)

[Last Visible Dog]

Give it up General, and use your arguments on someone with some brains.

When your logic and intellect fail you – you can always turn to this crap

BTW: That is considered forum abuse.

[Aric2000]

Picked up Hummer as a process pretty quick there didn't he? He even capitalized it....:)

[general_re]

Nope, no more changing the subject to your silly semantic games. How is the process of the "evolution of the cosmic structure" similar to the process of biological evolution? Should be easy enough to answer, if they're really "two applications of the same principle", as you claim.

C'mon, here's your chance to finally blow me out of the water - show everyone that "evolution as cosmology" is really a meaningful construct. Take all the time you need - I'll wait.

[Aric2000]

I don't believe I was talking to you, LVD skipping placemarker