Posted on 08/31/2006 7:42:01 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
More adults in the United States believe the theory of evolution is correct, according to a poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 51 per cent of respondents think that humans and other living things evolved over time, while 42 per cent say they existed in their present form since the beginning of time.
Charles Darwin’s "The Origin of Species" was first published in 1859. The book details the British naturalist’s theory that all organisms gradually evolve through the process of natural selection. Darwin’s views were antagonistic to creationism, the belief that a more powerful being or a deity created life.
In the United States, the debate on the topic accelerated after the 1925 Scopes trial, which tested a law that banned the teaching of evolution in Tennessee public schools. In 2004, Georgia’s Cobb County was at the centre of a controversy on whether science textbooks that explain evolutionary theory should include disclaimer stickers.
The theory of intelligent design suggests certain biological mechanisms are too complex to have developed without the involvement of a powerful force or intelligent being.
Last month, Austrian cardinal Christoph Schoenborn said the two views are not necessarily incompatible, declaring, "There is no conflict between science and religion, but a debate between a materialist interpretation of the results of science and a metaphysical philosophical interpretation. (...) The possibility that the Creator used evolution as a tool is completely acceptable for the Catholic faith."
Polling Data
Some people think that humans and other living things evolved over time. Others think that humans and other living things existed in their present form since the beginning of time. Which of these comes closest to your view?
|
|
||
|
Jul. 2006 |
Jul. 2005 |
|
|
Evolved over time |
51% |
48% |
|
Existed in their present form |
42% |
42% |
|
Don’t know / Refused |
7% |
10% |
Source: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press Methodology: Telephone interviews with 2,003 American adults, conducted from Jul. 6 to Jul. 19, 2006. Margin of error is 3 per cent.
His Word is subject to interpretation, else there would be only one branch of Christianity and there would be no Jews.
At the time of Jesus and John, there was no "science" as we know it today. They had to frame their words in terms of the world as they knew it (as do we all).
Before I go on, are you a YEC?
Neils Bohr would have definitely agreed with Newton here. But Newton had his "scientist hat" on when he said this. When he took off his "scientist's hat," he speculated about the sensorium Dei.... Newton certainly wasn't a "one-dimensional thinker." (Neither was Bohr....)
A thing of beauty is a joy forever... (LOL)
I don't think there is any reluctance to discussing various myths and religions in the appropriate class. The problem arises when classes such as science have enormous very specific amounts of information to present to students within a restricted time frame. There just isn't time to teach as much science as necessary in science class and to add subjects which do not fit within the classification of science.
If those other subjects are to be taught they should be presented in philosophy or comparative religions (or some other appropriate) classes rather than in science class.
So which hat should scientists wear when they are practicing or teaching science?
Wow. Cyberstalking. And you're going after both the guys and gals, so I take it you bat for both sides?
"This interest coupled with his/her ability to see our future means that God will know both the time and the content of decisions each of us will make in the future."
I disagree. God knows how it will end, but whether we are there to enjoy it, is up to us. There are many times that God tested man's choice without intervention: 1) Adam and Eve in the garden of eden in having sexual relations thus producing the tree of life and shame for doing something they were told would have great reprocussions. 2) Destroying man through the flood with Noah because we got out of control, and then stating He wouldn't do it again with water, but with fire; 3) Arguing with Moses because Moses felt he couldn't speak to Pharaoah because he was scared so he told Noah to take his brother Aaron to speak for him., etc...
God to not give man freewill to choose to worship is an insincere worship. What joy is that? Might as well be ants in an ant farm. He gets great pleasure of a man that has chosen to live a destructive life and then returns to Him and rectify the ills. This is free will and this is how He made us. Predetermination is of events and outcomes of a greater level. We have to choose to decide if we want to be part of that outcome. A football team can still win games even if a couple of players decide not to give their all. The score, record, and outcome will still stand. And eventually, those players will be forgotten.
Really goes to show that surveys are a poor way of determining the popularity of belief systems (or any other subjective question). The answers are highly dependent on the wording of the questions, so much so that many Psych Faculties require students to take more than one credit class in producing and interpreting surveys.
Perhaps such classes should be taught at the high school level.
They should be wearing their scientist hat -- but it would be helpful if they were to say there are other hats, too. Maybe they could use Newton to illustrate this point.
I wonder if you would explain something to me from your post? You posted, "How does the average Christian deal with the paradox of having free will yet having all decisions predetermined?" When you use the term 'predetermined', do you mean that God knowing what you will choose is the same as God is responsible for your choice? Do you use that term 'predetermined' to imply there is after all no free choice since God knows your choices before you make them? ... May I point out that one of the evil one's favorite ploys is to cause such chaos and suffering that we conclude God should have intervened and thus our suffering is God's fault?
Isn't that cute. It knows how to do a screen capture. But it's otherwise clueless about what happened.
"...is outside of time."
It depends how you define 'time.'
If God is pure energy of conscious state, which I do believe, then the 1st law of thermodynamics (which to me is one of the best examples of understanding the nature of God), comes into play, and molecular degradation is irrelevant to being, and transformable. Time is a man made measurement to understand and categorize our concept of matter, its relevance, and its relationship to space. God is inside and outside of Time. Its that He gets great joy and sorrow of being inside of time and interracting with the creation of His image. Much like, well, a hamster cage. Seeing man accomplish great feats of charity and science skills is a joy. Seeing man destroy each other because of the color of hamster hair, which hamster has more food, and because which hamster has a home next to the water bottle just infuriates Him.
"Festival of the Troll Hoist-by-his-own-Petard" placemarker
I think you might investigate Newton's extracurricular ramblings before recommending them.
LOLOL! Great question.
That picture is crude. Please don't post your crude graphics to FR.
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.