Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Darwin on the Right: Why Christians and conservatives should accept evolution
Scientific American ^ | October 2006 issue | Michael Shermer

Posted on 09/18/2006 1:51:27 PM PDT by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 2,001-2,015 next last
To: US Navy guy

Bwaaaaaahaaahaaaa


41 posted on 09/18/2006 2:08:40 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ThinkDifferent

You may think He is a practical joker based on your assumptions of what happened in time past. Assumptions that, by the way, cannot be scientifically substantiated or repeated in an experiment under controlled conditions.


42 posted on 09/18/2006 2:09:58 PM PDT by srweaver (Never Forget the Judicial Homicide of Terri Schiavo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: scottdeus12; The Blitherer

Why do you care about the answer to that question?

It is as fruitful as pondering whether or not Adam had a navel.


43 posted on 09/18/2006 2:09:59 PM PDT by Thatcherite (I'm PatHenry I'm the real PatHenry all the other PatHenrys are just imitators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: gcruse

"Honey, have you seen my razor?"
-- Occam

"They took it to the CSI lab. They want to know who shaves the barber."
--Mrs. Occam

"Item: Friar Guillaume's razor ne'er shaved the barber,
it is much too dull."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
Glory Road


44 posted on 09/18/2006 2:10:50 PM PDT by Kyrie (The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

Evolutionism implies biological determinism.


45 posted on 09/18/2006 2:10:53 PM PDT by wideawake ("The nation which forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten." - Calvin Coolidge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Thatcherite

A little defensive, aren't we?

I am simply making the point that, for evangelical Christians, the Bible is numero uno, and God included Creation, not evolution, in the Bible. What is the reason for this, other than he wanted us to reflect upon it?

If you don't believe the Bible is numero uno, then that's your prerogative.


46 posted on 09/18/2006 2:11:13 PM PDT by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: The Blitherer
Can any Christian who believes in evolution please explain one thing to me...at what point between apes and humans did God decide to give humans a soul?

Well, I'm Jewish, but I'll give it a shot: It was the point where Adam was born.

A little less glibly, the first human soul was the first along the line of human evolution, who realized "I am," thus becoming the image of God -- "I Am That I Am."

47 posted on 09/18/2006 2:11:26 PM PDT by Celtjew Libertarian ("Don't take life so seriously. You'll never get out of it alive." -- Bugs Bunny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
An interesting article, but it should be noted that it's not really an argument as to why evolution should be accepted. It should be accepted because the evidence points toward it, not because of its consequences.

Saying otherwise is really just the flip side of "evolution leads to Naziism, yada yada..."

48 posted on 09/18/2006 2:11:30 PM PDT by Quark2005 ("Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs." -Matthew 7:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ThinkDifferent
If evolution is false then God is at best a practical joker, given all the evidence he had to fake.

How do you know that God is responsible for the evidence?

49 posted on 09/18/2006 2:11:45 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: scottdeus12

Your point being...?


50 posted on 09/18/2006 2:12:23 PM PDT by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Thatcherite

"the scientific evidence being absolutely unambiguous"

Really? First I've heard that.


51 posted on 09/18/2006 2:13:01 PM PDT by srweaver (Never Forget the Judicial Homicide of Terri Schiavo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: LongElegantLegs
"This article is a little one dimensional."

That's Shermer for ya. A one-trick pony if there ever was one.

52 posted on 09/18/2006 2:13:36 PM PDT by Sam's Army (Imagine a world without car commercials.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Gordongekko909
And here is ICR's article blaming Darwin for capitalism.
53 posted on 09/18/2006 2:13:44 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; Dog Gone
"There is a conflict between biblical literalists and evolution. Not much doubt about that."?

I completely disagree with that! Not the doubt part. That is you and many may have no doubts, and I agree or rather appreciate (with) that.

The notion that there is conflict b/n Biblical literalists and evolution probably has more to do with how one defines a "literalist."

I have met few people in this lifetime who actually have read that text, and even fewer who have read the text in the original language.

I have met none with complete understanding. I have met many who claim to have such a command.

The number 3 (Three) is nonsense in the article.

Keep being nice.

54 posted on 09/18/2006 2:14:04 PM PDT by Radix (Tag Line promoting the acknowledgment that the Internet was actually invented by Americans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quark2005
An interesting article, but it should be noted that it's not really an argument as to why evolution should be accepted. It should be accepted because the evidence points toward it, not because of its consequences.

I strongly suspect the author knows that, and he knows that people who care about evidence already accept evolution. He's written this article for the people who don't think along those lines.

55 posted on 09/18/2006 2:14:31 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Science-denial is not conservative. It's reality-denial and it's unhealthy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty

Fair enough. Your remark activated one of my hot buttons, which is curiosity at the cognitive dissonance of those who decry scientific knowledge while participating in an internet debate.

Examining your remarks more closely I was probably being unfair.


56 posted on 09/18/2006 2:14:37 PM PDT by Thatcherite (I'm PatHenry I'm the real PatHenry all the other PatHenrys are just imitators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: srweaver
"the scientific evidence being absolutely unambiguous"

Really? First I've heard that.

Perhaps you haven't studied it much then.

57 posted on 09/18/2006 2:15:46 PM PDT by Thatcherite (I'm PatHenry I'm the real PatHenry all the other PatHenrys are just imitators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
God is just a genetic engineer slightly more advanced than we are.

They're setting themselves up for the fall. When lightning was not understood, it was the work of the Greek and Roman gods. Nowdays we understand how to generate electricity and so as impressive as a bolt of lightning is, there's no great mystery about it.

Similarly, as our abilities to genetically engineer things increases we will eventually be able to produce things more perfectly than anything found in nature.

This religionist view of God as genetic engineer will become silly because human engineers will do a better job. Yet it is not because they consider themselves to be god like in their powers -- but because the creationists of today are so limited in their imaginations of what power a god like being must have. Just as the ancients thought only gods could produce electricity.

58 posted on 09/18/2006 2:16:10 PM PDT by Dracian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thatcherite
We got moved to the religion forum. I don't know the rules that the mods apply here, so I'm out.
59 posted on 09/18/2006 2:16:42 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Science-denial is not conservative. It's reality-denial and it's unhealthy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty
I am simply making the point that, for evangelical Christians, the Bible is numero uno, and God included Creation, not evolution, in the Bible. What is the reason for this, other than he wanted us to reflect upon it?

Actually God did include evolution in the Bible. We've just lost the reference in the translation from Hebrew to English.

Genesis 2:7:
Then God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

The Hebrew translated as "formed" has its root in the term for a potter's work. A potter does not throw down his clay and have in instantly take the form he wants. He molds it through various intermediate forms, shaping it and reshaping it, until it reaches the shape he wants.

Therefore God, did not create man in an instant, but shaped and reshaped "the dust of the ground" until He had created man.

Which is a remarkably on-target analogy for evolution.

60 posted on 09/18/2006 2:17:08 PM PDT by Celtjew Libertarian ("Don't take life so seriously. You'll never get out of it alive." -- Bugs Bunny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 2,001-2,015 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson