Posted on 09/18/2006 1:51:27 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
According to a 2005 Pew Research Center poll, 70 percent of evangelical Christians believe that living beings have always existed in their present form, compared with 32 percent of Protestants and 31 percent of Catholics. Politically, 60 percent of Republicans are creationists, whereas only 11 percent accept evolution, compared with 29 percent of Democrats who are creationists and 44 percent who accept evolution. A 2005 Harris Poll found that 63 percent of liberals but only 37 percent of conservatives believe that humans and apes have a common ancestry. What these figures confirm for us is that there are religious and political reasons for rejecting evolution. Can one be a conservative Christian and a Darwinian? Yes. Here's how.
1. Evolution fits well with good theology. Christians believe in an omniscient and omnipotent God. What difference does it make when God created the universe--10,000 years ago or 10,000,000,000 years ago? The glory of the creation commands reverence regardless of how many zeroes in the date. And what difference does it make how God created life--spoken word or natural forces? The grandeur of life's complexity elicits awe regardless of what creative processes were employed. Christians (indeed, all faiths) should embrace modern science for what it has done to reveal the magnificence of the divine in a depth and detail unmatched by ancient texts.
2. Creationism is bad theology. The watchmaker God of intelligent-design creationism is delimited to being a garage tinkerer piecing together life out of available parts. This God is just a genetic engineer slightly more advanced than we are. An omniscient and omnipotent God must be above such humanlike constraints. As Protestant theologian Langdon Gilkey wrote, "The Christian idea, far from merely representing a primitive anthropomorphic projection of human art upon the cosmos, systematically repudiates all direct analogy from human art." Calling God a watchmaker is belittling.
3. Evolution explains original sin and the Christian model of human nature. As a social primate, we evolved within-group amity and between-group enmity. By nature, then, we are cooperative and competitive, altruistic and selfish, greedy and generous, peaceful and bellicose; in short, good and evil. Moral codes and a society based on the rule of law are necessary to accentuate the positive and attenuate the negative sides of our evolved nature.
4. Evolution explains family values. The following characteristics are the foundation of families and societies and are shared by humans and other social mammals: attachment and bonding, cooperation and reciprocity, sympathy and empathy, conflict resolution, community concern and reputation anxiety, and response to group social norms. As a social primate species, we evolved morality to enhance the survival of both family and community. Subsequently, religions designed moral codes based on our evolved moral natures.
5. Evolution accounts for specific Christian moral precepts. Much of Christian morality has to do with human relationships, most notably truth telling and marital fidelity, because the violation of these principles causes a severe breakdown in trust, which is the foundation of family and community. Evolution describes how we developed into pair-bonded primates and how adultery violates trust. Likewise, truth telling is vital for trust in our society, so lying is a sin.
6. Evolution explains conservative free-market economics. Charles Darwin's "natural selection" is precisely parallel to Adam Smith's "invisible hand." Darwin showed how complex design and ecological balance were unintended consequences of competition among individual organisms. Smith showed how national wealth and social harmony were unintended consequences of competition among individual people. Nature's economy mirrors society's economy. Both are designed from the bottom up, not the top down.
Because the theory of evolution provides a scientific foundation for the core values shared by most Christians and conservatives, it should be embraced. The senseless conflict between science and religion must end now, or else, as the Book of Proverbs (11:29) warned: "He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind."
you added your own words, without notice that you had done so...
you combined definition 1c1 and 6, without notice that you had done so...
you completely ignored the one definition set (#5) which had anything to do with evolution as applied to living organisms, without notice that you had done so...
each of the above observations is factual, demonstrable and repeatable by independent observers.
Taken together, the observed actions render your post other than word-for-word transcription of what you claimed to be quoting (which makes your claim of quotation a misrepresentation in itself), and sufficiently alter the meaning of the "definition" to render it false.
and now you claim your post was "word for word" and that you "didn't misrepresent or lie"
Well, I have been directed to avoid calling a FReeper a liar.
I am fairly sure I am allowed to point out that your own words and actions save me that trouble.
*nods*
please do so.
I've been trying to find when Washington wrote or said, "It is IMPOSSIBLE to RIGHTLY govern the world apart from the Bible." After what may have been several dozen sites, I found one that credited to Washington's Farewell Address. I then found Washington's Farewell Address. That quotation was not there.
He did say in that speech, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports," which seems to touch on the same theme, but in softer and more general terms.
I'm always willing to learn. Show me the one through mary. I can find references to your claim, but not any supporting text from the Bible.
I have looked at both sides quite in depth. It has nothing to do with willful ignorance...an objective look at the facts simply speaks for itself regardless of religious persuasion or lack thereof. It would be good if you could be a bit more objective instead of so immersed in your thoughts because the truth in science is alot more fascinating than bad science.
It is not difficult to understand the guideline of "don't make it personal."
Any further non-compliance on this thread will result in suspensions.
Warrior of Justice: you are a newcomer. Be advised that intentional misrepresentations on the Religion Forum usually result in banishment. You get this one and only pass because you are a newbie. The next time you present selective excerpts on the Religion Forum, use on-line sources, provide links to your sources and make your editorial comments clear so they cannot be confused with content at the source.
First off, Adams was not an ordained minister. His father had encouraged him to be and his father-in-law was a minster, but Adams was not.
Adams was a minister in that was the title of an ambassador, when he served as a diplomat in France and England. But that was a political title, not a religious one.
As for the quote, "The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity," please note he was not denying Jesus. He was saying Jesus was used as an excuse for absurd ideas. The full quote is:
"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole carloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity."
In fairness, using the same standard I did on the Washington quote, I cannot find a source for it. Everything I found, starting with his entry in Wikiquote merely attribute it to him.
ok...I will post some info on the fallacy of transitional fossils. Too tired tonight though.
no transitionals placemarker
placemarker placemarker
Since you have said that you are not the Mod who moved this thread into the Religion forum, is there any possibility that you could take the matter up with the Mod who did? This started out as a News thread, science based, and was posted in News/Activism. That is where it was, and where it should have remained.
Whoever foisted this on you richly deserves to have it back, and in its current form. Send it back. Whoever did this to you has it coming. In spades. JMHO.
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.