Posted on 11/30/2004 9:14:15 AM PST by cainin04
Over the past days there has been a great discussion about the role of the theory of evolution and whether it alone or the thoughts on Intellegent Design should be taught in schools.
I made the argument that Darwinsism attempts to replace God. "If you have Darwinism there is no need for God the Creator." But many of the Free Republic members disagreed.
Read the text from this recent text book used today in public schools and draw your own conclusions. I found this in Lee Stroble's "Case for a Creator."
Futuyma Douglas author of "Evolutionary Biology"--page 3--"By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superflous."
The book "Sign of Intellegence" cites several of the other popular text books. The writers cite the terms used to describe evolution; "evolution is random and undirected,"without plan or purpose,"Darwin gave biology a sound scientific basis by attributing the diversity of life to natural causes rather than the supernatural creation."
Stroble also cites an article from Time Magazine, "Charles Darwin didn't want to murder God, as he once put it. But he did."
One can read text book after text book, they all come to the same conclusion--Darwin replaced God.
Why then is a theory that has so many holes in it, still being taught as "fact?" Many excuses could be listed, but I would say it is just part of the liberal establishment trying to remove God from our schools and our country as a whole. In history class we can't read the "Declaration of ID" or say the Pledge of Allegiance, because they mention God; in English we can't read a story from the Bible, because that is seperation of church and state--yet we CAN read other religous materials as long as they are not Christian; and of course in science class we can't mention ID because that would include God.
Americans are going to have to stand up. We can not sit back and watch these atheistic liberals have every mention of God removed from our country. If we do stand up, not only will we produce children who have no understanding of our country, our history, or our values, but we will also see our nation fall into a great moral decline.
However, I do not think we are going to allow that to occur. In this last election we had a clear choice between a man of God--a man with values--and a man with little or no values. We chose the man with values. The fight will continue and Patriotic-God loving Americans can never give in. Read what is in your child's text books and if it attempts to remove God, speak out against it. Your voice matters--it matters not just for your child's sake, but for the sake of all America's citizens.
It is possible he is wrong, though given he and his advisors theological background and personal dedication I am far more apt to believe their stand on this issue, than those evangelicals that dismiss without merit a theory that as I have said before at its best simply offers a "HOW" God may have worked... God is the answer to "WHY" not "how".
Human experience can observe the world and theorize and even prove the HOW something works or behaves... however when it comes to the answer of "WHY"... that is the realm of God.
Evolution does not remotely suggest WHY or even attempt to deal with WHY... it is merely an theory on "how".
It explains "how" by saying there is no need for a designer!! If just blind happenstance and mutations and survival of the fittest accomplished it all then what good is this god? What kind of a role did this idiotic deity play? This kind of god is superfulous and a deity without a brain.
I think that many of us are basically disagree about the def. of "Darwinism."
When I speak of Darwinism I am not refering to the book "Origin of Species." I am refering to what his theory has become and how it is used. I realize that Charles Darwin was not "out to murder God." But, the liberal establishment IS. And they use his theory to attempt to get God out of the hearts and minds of school children. They cite "scientists" who use quotes like I mentioned in my article.
I honestly think that is where alot of us have our disagrement. I apologize for not clearly stating what "Darwinism" means to me in my original article.
Did you really research them yourself from texts you knew to be high-school texts, or did you merely take them from other people's web pages? They all seem to be things other people have quoted extensively. I doubt you were deliberately false; I think you merely accepted other people's false attributions without checking. You should be careful about that.
> Electrical engineers usually don't go around trying to impose their dogmatic cosmological views on society under the guise of "Science".
That's because their views are now accepted within society.
As evolution will be, given time. The difference is that evolution touches more directly on people's superstitions, and if history has shown anything, people get in a snit when their superstitions are involved.
No, I did not get them from a website. If you read my article you will see where they came from.
I am careful about my sources--if you read my article about Dan Rather you will see that I have a major problem with false info!
The info I used is in those books! And some of them are used in high-schools. One book is only used in college courses--but even in that case--the thesis is the same...liberals are using Darwinism to Remove God.
Oh, apparently your God is not omnipotent. He couldn't create man in his own image by using evolution?
"People of faith who hold that disbelief in evolutionary theory is a necessary tenet of faith are likewise zealots."
You would, I hope, that the men whose lives are chronicled in Scripture - for example the Book of Acts - are zealots? If so, then I think we are all on the same page. If I could be found worthy to be tossed into that same camp as the men in Scripture and the authors of Scripture, then I would consider that an honor.
If, however, you want to say that Moses, Stephen, Peter, Paul and the like are not "zealots" who drew bright lines, then, we do have a problem. However, I am also confident that your problem is with understanding Scripture, not with me any opinions I have.
Quit telling God how He's supposed to run His universe, OK?
An actual link would've been nice.
I agree with you passionately that God is the answer to Why and that Darwinian evolution isn't. I just don't agree that DE is the answer to how. I think the better answer is to admit we don't know how.
Oh, yes, I have always marvelled at the parallels between Biblical Genesis and the Bigbang in the Void->Celestial Matter->Local Star->Sol System Day/Night->Ocean Muck->Human Beings path. And I hope I didn't paint you as taking the focus off...this was just a response to the whole thread.
Uncommon Dissent:Intellectuals Who Find Darwinism Unconvincing
This book is terrific. It was written by a number of scientists who have top intellectual pedigrees, and so cannot be summarily dismissed by elitist Darwinists. They take you on an expertly guided tour of the gaping holes in Darwinian macroevolutionary theory. (Man, those long words are cool, eh?)
"If they don't believe all the Law and all the Prophets". eh? Too sadly true...Our Founders couldn't imagine that we would ever use the Courts to separate God from our society...how could they think to legislate against it? Even Jefferson was no foe of an abstract God. It's just that in the last 50 years we have realized that our brains are so much smarter than Adams and all his ilk!
[/SARCASM]
It's not evolution, but the Big Bang that makes a greater attempt at replacing God. The Big Bangers would have us believe that the team of random chaos, random energy, random matter and time are the great creators of the universe we explore. Second Law of Thermodynamics be damned.
There are more scientists named "Steve" who accept evolution than the sum total who reject it. Why do creationists attempt to argue from authority when the authority is 99 percent against?
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.