Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Theo; Ichneumon
However, it should be emphasized that this overwhelming commitment to evolutionism is not because of the scientific evidence, but rather because of antipathy to Biblical Christianity

Do these people have anything to back this up? How does it jibe with the fact that practically all Christian biologists accept evolution?

Even Charles Darwin became an evolutionist and agnostic because of his rejection of the Biblical doctrine of divine punishment.

Anything to support this claim, which flies in the face of everything I know about Darwin's life?

From Was Darwin a Christian?

by Michael Roberts,
Vicar of Chirk, Wales UK :

"In 1851, after the death of his ten-year old daughter Annie, he lost his belief in God's love as Darwin could not square suffering with God's love. Ten years later he wrote to the American botanist Asa Gray, a Christian, "I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent God would have created the Ichneumonidae (whose larvae feed on living caterpillars and gave inspiration to The Alien) or that a cat should play with mice."

Kepler, Newton, Boyle, Pascal, Faraday, Pasteur, Maxwell, Kelvin

The only surprise on the list is Pasteur. He evidently got confused by his experimental results in spontaneous generation. None of the other people on the list made any contributions to biology. (Except Kepler, in phyllotaxis); in fact 5 of the 8 lived before Darwin.

Of even greater significance than the fact that there are thousands of scientists who have become creationists in modern times

Biologists? or frustrated publicity hounds like Fred Hoyle?

What I find interesting is that I said the overwhelming percentage of biologists accept evolution - you came back with dubious statistics about atheism among scientists.

596 posted on 02/21/2004 9:27:02 PM PST by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 595 | View Replies ]


To: Virginia-American
... dubious statistics ...

Not sure what you mean by "dubious." The statistics are accurate (within whatever deviation allowed by the various studies/polls). The paragraphs I quickly copy-pasted do note different statistics for "scientists" vs. "biologists" -- even pointing out that biologists believe in evolution more than other "scientists."

I wasn't trying to mislead -- I guess since "biologists" are a subset of "scientists," it was fine to include the various stats, including those that specified "biologists."

Again, if you look at what I copy-pasted, you'll see that I'm not refuting your assertion that "the overwhelming percentage of biologists accept evolution" -- I'm going beyond that to point out that there have been and are respectable scientists, including biologists, who believe that all this stuff was created by a Person, rather than by gkvoiuwlsjh;alwhv;alw.

How wonderful to be able to marvel at a particular aspect of biology, and have Someone to thank, Someone to admire.

597 posted on 02/22/2004 5:48:00 AM PST by Theo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 596 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson