Posted on 09/09/2006 8:39:07 PM PDT by curiosity
“In the final analysis (God) used evolution to set us free.”
Brown University biologist Kenneth Miller used this quote from his book “Finding Darwin’s God” as a central point in his speech about simultaneously believing in evolution and religion.
Miller spoke to more than 500 people Thursday evening in the Kansas Union Ballroom.
He testified for the pro-evolution side in the recent lawsuit against the Dover, Pa., school district, where a federal judge ruled against the district’s teaching of intelligent design in biology classrooms. He said it was creationism in disguise.
Conservatives on the Kansas State Board of Education approved science standards last year that criticized evolution, but after the August primary election, it appears moderates will regain control of the board and eventually reinstate the former standards.
Miller gained several laughs from the audience during his speech as he described the Dover trial, including a scene when intelligent design proponent Michael Behe asked the judge if he could “move the evidence to the side.”
Plaintiffs’ attorney Eric Rothschild had stacked 58 scientific papers, nine books and other textbook chapters on evolutionary evidence supporting development of the human immune system in front of Behe on the witness stand.
Miller said religion and evolution are too often played as opposing forces and incorrectly identified as mutually exclusive. At Brown, a student once told him he could not worship at the university chapel and cited a book that places evolution as the fruit in the serpent’s mouth or a “tool of Satan.”
But Miller said the root of the portrayal of religion and evolution as opposites may come from scientists who have an “anti-theistic interpretation of evolution,” a stance he disagrees with.
“People of faith are shooting at the wrong target. They should not be shooting at evolution itself,” he said.
Miller, a Catholic, said evolution has been remarkably robust in answering criticism through fossil records, the fusing of human chromosomes and other examples.
Instead of attacking evolutionary theory, the argument should be against the anti-theistic interpretation of evolution, he said.
He quoted several scientists, philosophers and religious leaders, including Pope Benedict XVI, who has written: “Even the outcome of a truly contingent natural process can nonetheless fall within God’s providential plan for creation.”
“By understanding the mechanics of this world, what one is really doing is praising and glorifying God,” Miller said.
Miller will answer questions from the public at 10 a.m. today at the Hall Center for the Humanities.
The lecture was the first in the “Difficult Dialogues” series on “Knowledge: Faith & Reason,” presented by the Hall Center and the Biodiversity Institute.
Federal Judge John E. Jones III, who ruled in favor of the Dover plaintiffs, will speak Sept. 26.
It doesn't bother me, and I won't press you on it. Thanks for your reply
I've tried to come to an understanding for myself on some of teachings. The two different days of creating man, as you mention, what Hell actually is, what tongues is and what actually happened on Pentecost day.
My take on him
1)He's not out to make a buck like so so many other televangelists are. His audio tapes are 4 bucks last time I checked but he doesn't shill and go on and on and on begging for money, promising to heal people if they send in a "love gift" or trying to sell books.
2) He's not racist. I searched around on the net years ago when I first discovered him and one site ( I forget the name but the same site suggested Charles Stanley wasn't a true Christian because he's been divorced.) claimed he was or at least taught Christian Identity. Actually hearing him talk/teach more I became satisfied he is not. Is 7th day creation true? I don't know. If it is, the CI movement takes a possibly true doctrine and utterly perverts it with hatred. God truly is color blind.
3) He believes the earth is billions of years old and says fossils and dating methods support this claim. Once heard him say that people running around shouting the earth is only 6000 yrs old are an embarrassment to their faith. He keeps a T-Rex tooth in his desk drawer.
4) I agree with him that there is no rapture. I am able to wrap my mind around that one on my own. II Thess. somewhere in there..it's been a very long time since I opened a bible but I did highlight it years ago and also noticed a correlation about being "carried away" ot "taken" in the Gospels is the same word used in Rev. that talks about a flood from the Dragon's mouth carrying people away. I'll post or freepmail, whichever you prefer, the exact bible quotes and my take on it later when I have more time if you're at all interested.
5) The mark of the Beast is no tattoo or bar code, chip, or anything like that. It's whether or not you believe the antiChrist is really Jesus and worship him. It's a state of mind or falling for deception. I'm guessing that those that do not worship him will be shunned and denied food maybe other stuff. See, if you refuse to bow down to the antiChrist but he or followers were to capture and hold a person down, stamp a big 666 on them even though they refuse to worship him...what are they supposed to do? Commit suicide to avoid a "stamping"? What's in a person's head or heart is what counts, not what's on or done to their body
No bearing on the subject at all but on one broadcast, this would be 4 maybe 5 years ago he panned to the pew or audience section when Loretta Lynn visited his church once. I almost forgot, his show is unique in that he reads a bible chapter line by line then breaks it down into modern english or explains it instead of jumping around with his own lesson plan. Also, the way the second half is him answering viewer questions. Those two things are what I found refreshing about him years ago in a tv world filled with Benny Hinns, Peter Popoffs and even Jesse Duplantis'. The latter guy of which is very likable on screen and has a great flair for telling funny stories.
I'm outta here everyone. Goodnight!
You believe that your body is in God's image? Not your soul?
You can't scientifically determine God's guidance. It's a matter of faith.
No...
Yes it is. Read your words again:
"To reject the Theory of Evolution is to reject so much of science that the problems created in the process are insurmountable by any standard of rationality worth the name.
No scientist worth his degree would say that about any other scientific theory.
Its bullshit, plain and simple.
When I observe systems like the human reproductive system or the cardiovascular system, I cannot see them as evolutionary. Not in billions of years. Not in trillions of years. I am open to persuasion but I just don't see systems evolving from non-systems. They take intelligence to design.
How many Gods do you think there really are?
Did plant death happen before the Fall? How about cell death?
Theist != Christian
Speaking of tactics, how, on the one hand can you say that such a scenario is "insurmountable by any standard of rationality," yet on the other, claim that it is a [reasonable] possibility.
This "image" -- do you mean "body", or "soul"?
Do you believe "in God's image" means the physical human body?
Some find evolution not "miraculous" enough, I suppose...
I could answer this question in any number of ways. Be a little more specific please, and what exactly this correlates to.
Do you not agree men wrote the Bible? It's not as if there were golden plates written by some Moroni Angel like Joseph Smith believed...
Do you believe that God has a physical image that resemble's man's physical image?
Why were some creationists ragging me because I said that many of you believe that "made in His image" meant the body, not the soul?
They claimed not only did I know little about Christianity, I knew little about creationism.
I was raised in the church, yet I never heard of the belief that "God's image" was physical until I came to these threads. I don't know anyone in RL that does. Everyone I know accepts that "in His image" means our ETERNAL soul.
To attribute our decaying, changing bodies as "God's image" instead of the only thing we have that is eternal? Blasphemous, to say the least.
God is NOT change.
If He was, He wouldn't be GOD.
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.