Once again, there is no religion of Darwinism. As far as I can tell, the term is used to try to discredit a theory of science that *some* people feel somehow threatens Christianity. I do have faith that, eventually, people will get over this perceived threat to Christianity, just like they got over the supposed antitheistic theory of heliocentrism. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Catholic church un-excommunicated Galileo, within the last few decades.
Science concerns itself purely with what can be observed and measured in a systematic fashion. It does not, and cannot, concern itself with the metaphysical. We do not, and never will, have the ability to definitively prove or disprove the existence of God. Anyone who tries to claim that science proves that God doesn't exist (whether they're using the ToE or some other theory as their justification) is a liar.
Furthermore, the use of science as a rationale for committing atrocities is not a condemnation of science. Someone who is set on committing atrocities and who has the power is going to do so, no matter what. It isn't because of some pseudoreligion called "Darwinism" that Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Pol-Pot, etc., committed their atrocities. They did that because they were fundamentally evil people, drunk with their own power.
If studying or using the theory of evolution has some strange power to turn people into monsters, then I must ask: why aren't thousands of scientists like myself busy committing atrocities right this minute? Could it be because our sense of morality does not come from the scientific theories that guide our research in the lab, but comes from our families and society?
One last point. Those of us who make science our careers do not worship science, any more than musicians worship music or accountants worship ledgers. It's just a profession.
One last point. Those of us who make science our careers do not worship science, any more than musicians worship music or accountants worship ledgers. It's just a profession.You may speak for yourself. In my opinion, all too often scientists do, in fact, treat science as dogmatic belief. Try and get a medical doctor - a scientist by training, to consider alternative medical care, even as basic as aspirin instead of acetaminophen or St. Johns Wort instead of prozac. Another example, the current "Global Warming" hysteria has been fed by scientists who have converted belief into falsification of evidence.
As I said already, a religion is a system of beliefs. Regardless of what anyone claims, the belief system which governs a persons life IS their religion.
As far as I can tell, the term is used to try to discredit a theory of science that *some* people feel somehow threatens Christianity.
Darwinist eugenicists have murdered well over a billion people in the last century, if that's not a threat I don't know what is.
I do have faith that, eventually, people will get over this perceived threat to Christianity, just like they got over the supposed antitheistic theory of heliocentrism.
Eugenicists kill over a million people each week, that's hardly a "perceived threat."
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Catholic church un-excommunicated Galileo, within the last few decades.
Yet again, the core beliefs of people like Galileo and Newton didn't involve a twisted philosophy that resulted in their followers committing mass murder, the same cannot be said for the Darwinists.
Science concerns itself purely with what can be observed and measured in a systematic fashion. It does not, and cannot, concern itself with the metaphysical.
Your point?
We do not, and never will, have the ability to definitively prove or disprove the existence of God. Anyone who tries to claim that science proves that God doesn't exist (whether they're using the ToE or some other theory as their justification) is a liar.
Yes, but mankind DOES have the ability to play god and that's what Darwinists do.
Perhaps you should go back and read some of my other posts on this thread. The theory of evolution is a red herring, it has NEVER been at the core of Darwinism, it is a device they use and nothing more. The people who want to focus on evolution almost invariably do so in order to avoid talking about eugenics.
Furthermore, the use of science as a rationale for committing atrocities is not a condemnation of science. Someone who is set on committing atrocities and who has the power is going to do so, no matter what. It isn't because of some pseudoreligion called "Darwinism" that Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Pol-Pot, etc., committed their atrocities. They did that because they were fundamentally evil people, drunk with their own power.
You really need to look at the eugenics movement of the early 20th century, much of this evil occurred BECAUSE many people advocated eugenics. Prominent people were avowed eugenicists and their rhetoric is even found in one of America's more infamous Supreme Court rulings.
If studying or using the theory of evolution has some strange power to turn people into monsters, then I must ask: why aren't thousands of scientists like myself busy committing atrocities right this minute?
Again, why are you confining Darwinism to evolution. Darwinism IS NOT evolution, evolution is merely a small component of Darwinism.
One last point. Those of us who make science our careers do not worship science, any more than musicians worship music or accountants worship ledgers.
As I said earlier, EVERYONE worships SOMETHING. That thing may be God or science or Satan or the intellect or whatever. Though YOU may not worship science, there are plenty who do.
This cuts both ways: some opposed to Christianity like to use evolution and (shall we re-coin a phrase?) "scientism" as a cudgel to attack faith and Faith.
See also Dawkins, Pharyngula, etc.
There are a number of conflicting undercurrents, of which not all the disputants are explicitly conscious -- empiricism vs. scholasticism, intellectual pride, Pharaseeic impulses, etc.
But why concentrate on the real issues when slinging mud is *so* much more fun, is what many people feel.
Cheers!