Darwin Goes to Church

Washington Post ^ | 9/18/2005 | Rev. Henry G. Brinton

[curiosity]

Most adult Sunday school classes don't raise eyebrows, but my church is planning to hold one that's sure to. It's called "Evolution for Christians," and it will be taught this winter by David Bush, a member of the church I lead, Fairfax Presbyterian. David is an articulate government retiree who has been interested in this topic for nearly two decades, teaches a class on theories of the origins of life every five years or so, and once again has really done his homework. His view is that science and religion answer two different sets of questions about creation, with science answering the "how" questions, and religion answering the "why" ones. "With a little bit of wisdom and tolerance on each side," he tells me, "I think they can complement rather than contradict each other."

[curiosity]

You've got no argument with me, brother (except about nominalism, maybe).

[RadioAstronomer]

Needs to do a bit of research I think.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"Incorrect. God cannot lie because it is not in his nature to lie."

Whatever. So, God, by his nature, does not lie.

So, what am I to make of the evidence provided by applying His gift of reason to observations of His works?

[keithtoo]

http://www.darwinism-watch.com/

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

So, God took billions of years to create the Heavens and the Earth.

What's to say He didn't take billions of years longer to create man, and that He chose to do so in a way that doesn't leave His fingerprints all over the place?

God works on a timescale that beggars the imagination of us mere mortals.

[VadeRetro]

Harun Yahyah? Wouldn't have guessed you were a Mecca-bower.

[newgeezer]

As I suspected: a "yomist "-- who won't (or can't) comprehend the facts of relativity.

Hmm... fascinating. Now, if you're quite finished with the condescension, perhaps you'd care to enlighten me.

[RadioAstronomer]

Interesting. A Muslim site.

[Mylo]

No, I am correcting someone who knows very very little about evolutionary theory; not avoiding the question.

The fact that you know so little about the subject is not, in and of itself, impressive; but the fact that you are so evidently proud of your ignorance on the subject IS quite impressive.

How many people have to correct you about your mistaken impression of the "Red Queen Hypothesis" (a Lewis Carrol allusion to those of you in Rio Linda) before you actually read something about it that will tell you just how wrong you are?

And Michael Behe would say that we DID evolve from single-celled organisms; but only with the "help" of some intelligence that acted with an unknown force utilizing an unquantifiable mechanism rather than as a result of a process utilizing a known force and a quantifiable mechanism.

Jeez, you don't even know ID theory, let alone the theory of evolution through natural selection.

[curiosity]

You're preaching to the converted.

[VadeRetro]

That site has turned me away from ID because ID does not acknoledge Allah as the creator! Allahu Akhbar!

[RadioAstronomer]

Yup, I am right with ya!

[Gumlegs]

Bah! Pixels on a computer screen! That's not proof!

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

It does not acknowledge "John Frum" as the True Creator! Intelligent Design is a fraud!

(The preceding message was brought to you by the United Cargo Cults of the Solomon Islands.)

[RadioAstronomer]

Enough proof for you "chicken legs"!

[RadioAstronomer]

Hey, half man half chicken, there ya go, proof of evolution! :-)

[VadeRetro]

Having had a very nice Spaghetti Bolognese dinner tonight, I have to hold out for "ID does not acknowledge His Noodliness, the Flying Spaghetti Monster."

[RadioAstronomer]

Mustard and marshmallow sandwiches for me. :-)

[VadeRetro]

Eeeewww!!

[malakhi]

but if Evolution is true, you should be able to see them living and breathing everywhere. As a matter of fact, if evolution is logical, there should be more intermediate forms than fully formed species.

What do you think an 'intermediate' species would look like?