Posted on 09/12/2009 9:18:23 AM PDT by BGHater
Karen Armstrong says we need God to grasp the wonder of our existence
Richard Dawkins has been right all along, of course—at least in one important respect. Evolution has indeed dealt a blow to the idea of a benign creator, literally conceived. It tells us that there is no Intelligence controlling the cosmos, and that life itself is the result of a blind process of natural selection, in which innumerable species failed to survive. The fossil record reveals a natural history of pain, death and racial extinction, so if there was a divine plan, it was cruel, callously prodigal and wasteful. Human beings were not the pinnacle of a purposeful creation; like everything else, they evolved by trial and error and God had no direct hand in their making. No wonder so many fundamentalist Christians find their faith shaken to the core
But Darwin may have done religion—and God—a favor by revealing a flaw in modern Western faith. Despite our scientific and technological brilliance, our understanding of God is often remarkably undeveloped—even primitive. In the past, many of the most influential Jewish, Christian and Muslim thinkers understood that what we call "God" is merely a symbol that points beyond itself to an indescribable transcendence, whose existence cannot be proved but is only intuited by means of spiritual exercises and a compassionate lifestyle that enable us to cultivate new capacities of mind and heart.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
>>volution has indeed dealt a blow to the idea of a benign creator, literally conceived. It tells us that there is no Intelligence controlling the cosmos<<
It says no such thing, so there is no point in continuing the read.
Mendacity in the name of the Lord is a particularly heinous sin.
“Man vs. God”.
Shouldn’t that be “Dawkins vs. God”?
Think I know who’s gonna win this one...
I suspect we will have the standard non sequitur of “a person who understands TToE says”=”all people who understand TToE say.”
Not really.
Pretty good article in the end. Its funny, a guy like Dawkins looks at the wonders of the universe and sees nothing, no intelligence, nothing that speaks to him of anything beyond chemistry and physics. Its almost like he sees the world in two dimensions. I look at the very same world, posit his physical descriptions of the mechanics of the universe as "close enough" but I see it in 3D. I see God in every inch of it. He sees the laws of physics as proof no God exists and I see those very laws themselves as his DNA, as a clue into his nature.
He looks at the tragedy that is life and sees no evidence of God. I look at it and I see God on all sides. And I see life itself as a miracle, even mixed with tragedy as it often is, a miracle that demands courage of us and a certain stubborn toughness of spirit but a beautiful miracle nonetheless.
>>He looks at the tragedy that is life and sees no evidence of God. I look at it and I see God on all sides. <<
I agree. It is like describing a Rembrandt to a blind person, only magnitudes greater.
But Dawkins is important in that there are naturalistic explanations for all we encounter. That is the How — the Why is a completely different issue. And, as you pointed out, many (I would hope most) Christians are intelligent enough to see how TToE fits into God’s plan.
Tools in the tool kit.
God made evolution happen.
>>God made evolution happen.<<
Yes He did!
Basic question: where did the laws of chemistry and physics come from?
Duh, from Gov’t! What a silly question.
Your explanation is a wonderful, clear and accurate definition of a faith in God.
This lady does not know any Fundamentalists. She acts like Dawkins is some uber wise guru who makes perfect arguments that can't be shaken.
She sounds like a new ager.
If God intervened in every event and thereby micromanaged history, there would be no room for free will; we would all be automatons, with no ability to love and to choose salvation.
The Bible shows that God works through events in the history of mankind, intervening to preserve those who are "chosen according to his purposes," but that many people are destined for condemnation. How is that different from the extinction of most species according to evolutionary theory?
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.