Posted on 01/25/2005 6:15:41 PM PST by gobucks
Ken Miller is an interesting guy. He is co-author of the nation's best-selling biology textbook. It was on his book, "Biology," that schools in Cobb County, Ga., slapped a sticker casting doubt on its discussion of evolution theory. And it was this sticker that a federal judge recently ordered removed because it endorsed religion. Miller, who testified against the label, gets a lot of hate mail these days.
But Miller is also a practicing Roman Catholic. "I attend Mass every Sunday morning," he said, "and I'm tired of being called an atheist."
A professor of biology at Brown University, Miller does not believe that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution contradicts the creation passages in the Bible. And he will argue the point till dawn.
"None of the six creative verses (in Genesis) describe an out-of-nothing, puff-of-smoke creation," he says. "All of them amount to a command by the creator for the earth, the soil and the water of this planet to bring forth life. And that's exactly what natural history tells us happened." (Miller has written a book on the subject: "Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution.")
Still, today's emotional conflicts over teaching this science in public schools leave the impression that Christianity and evolution cannot be reconciled. This is not so.
In 1996, Pope John II wrote a strong letter to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences supporting the scientific understanding of evolution. That's one reason why students in Catholic parochial schools get a more clearheaded education in evolution science than do children at many public schools racked by the evolution debate.
American parents who want Darwin's name erased from the textbooks might be surprised at the father of evolution's burial spot. Darwin was laid to rest in Westminster Abbey, an Anglican church and England's national shrine.
Not every illustrious Englishman gains admission to an abbey burial site. Darwin died in 1882. Two years before, friends of George Eliot wanted the famous (female) writer laid to rest at the abbey. Eliot had lived immorally, according to the church fathers, and was denied a place. (She is buried at London's Highgate Cemetery, not far from Karl Marx.)
But Darwin had been an upright man. The clergy were proud both of Darwin's accomplishments and of their own comfort with modern science.
In 1882, during the memorial service for the great evolutionist, one church leader after the other rose to praise Charles Darwin. Canon Alfred Barry, for one, had recently delivered a sermon declaring that Darwin's theory was "by no means alien to the Christian religion."
Nowadays, Catholics and old-line Protestants have largely made peace with evolution theory. Most objections come from evangelicals — and not all of them.
Francis S. Collins is head of the National Genome Project and a born-again Christian. He belongs to the American Scientific Affiliation — a self-described fellowship of scientists "who share a common fidelity to the word of God and a commitment to integrity in the practice of science." Its Web address is www.asa3.org.
But back in Cobb County, the debate rages. The sticker taken off Miller's textbook read: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
Why should Miller care that the Cobb County School Board — having bought his book in great quantity — pastes those words on the cover?
First off, he says, "It implies that facts are things we are certain of and theories are things that are shaky." In science, theory is a higher level of understanding than facts, he notes. "Theories don't grow up to become facts. Rather, theories explain facts."
Then, he questions why, of all the material in his book, only evolution is singled out for special consideration. Miller says that if he could write the sticker, it would say, "Everything in this book should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
Clearly, many religious people regard evolution theory with sincere and heartfelt concern. But theirs is not a mainstream view — even among practicing Christians. Most theologians these days will argue that the biology book and the Good Book are reading from the same page.
Providence Journal columnist Froma Harrop's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. Her e-mail address is fharrop@projo.com
In fact both man and animal ate only plants at this time.In other words, carnivorous animals like lions and sharks got their teeth changed because of the fall, so that they could eat meat? I don't know - reading those verses I cannot infer that animals didn't eat meat, only that they too could eat vegetables.
And if death didn't exist, what method was used for population control? Did flies abstain from mating and did bacteria stop dividing when there were "enough" of them?
Are you referring to me or to your pastor whom you also said that Genesis was not to be taken literally.
At first I thought you were, but since then, you've said some really irrational things on this thread that made me believe you may well be a science is my religion fantatic.
And if you are offended that I called you a 'young man' (for the sake of designation, since you may well be a wizened old woman for all I know, or a 13 year old girl), then you may be a tad too sensitive for your own good.
Before Eve there was NO mating. Don't you remember? God punished Eve by making her bear children. Babies are the curse of God due to Eve's sin.
Somehow this leads to God's killing every living thing except for the millions of species that Noah put in his ark.
I am just saying that rational people are turned off by the Christian superiority complex. What makes your religion better than mine. Why do you think you have a "lock" on God. How many millions have been killed and tortured in the name of your God?
It was clearly another of your attempts to portray yourself as "older and wiser" than me. A trait which you started out with in your posts and I warned you about early on. I bet I have been around the block a lot more than you have!
I will overlook the first three questions as yet more condescendion on your part, but I will address that last one, because it goes beyond the personal to the profane.
Not one person has been killed or tortured in the name of the one true God, whom I worship. There have been others who have blasphemed the Name of God and said their own sin was being done for God, but they were liars and murderers.
It is no more accurate to say that those of true faith in the true God condone, or are in any way parallel to those who torture and mame in the name of religion, than it would be accurate for me to associate your disdain for Christians with the Roman treatment of them in throwing them to the lions to be devoured.
You continue to draw a parallel and make an analogy that is specious and without merit.
To show how twisted your interpretations of the Bible are. I mean, how twisted is it to believe some kook's writings and disavow your pastor's teachings ...
Probably so. Having been a Christian for the past 48 years, I've lived a pretty innocent life.........though my heart is as black as any one else's.........it is only through God's mercy that I have been spared.
(btw, there are plenty of teenagers who have been 'around the block' more than I. Not something I aspire to).
Haha. What?? God punished her by giving her PAIN during child birth.
Uh, let's read the Bible. Remember, there was no "birth" before. He "punished Eve by making her bear children." Nothing in the Bible about pain. That is your non-literal interpretation.
16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Hmmm. I was a Christian before you were a Christian and you call me a "young man" ...
My pastor doesn't "teach" that Genesis 1 is an allegory, so I have not 'disavowed' it.
He has presented it as a possiblity, along with presenting the literal interpretation as a possibility. (My statement had to do with what I 'think' he believes. Don't misquote it again, please). He does, however, believe that the Scripture is without error.........and if he didn't, we wouldn't be members of this church.
As hard as it is for you to believe, most of us Christians actually do think for ourselves.
Your Christian faith is most interesting, though, since you don't seem to believe anything the Bible says.
Wrong. Most of "US" Christians think for ourselves. A lot of fanatical Christians do not and think that every word of the Bible has to be read literally and all science not consistent with that literal wording is false.
But what gets me the most, is when contradictions are pointed out, the "wrong" words are interpreted non-literally by you. Go figure.
Interesting that you can mischaracterize what I say but think you can perfectly interpret what the Bible says.
Thank you.
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.