Posted on 12/18/2004 5:56:30 PM PST by PatrickHenry
Professional danger comes in many flavors, and while Richard Colling doesn't jump into forest fires or test experimental jets for a living, he does do the academic's equivalent: He teaches biology and evolution at a fundamentalist Christian college.
At Olivet Nazarene University in Bourbonnais, Ill., he says, "as soon as you mention evolution in anything louder than a whisper, you have people who aren't very happy." And within the larger conservative-Christian community, he adds, "I've been called some interesting names."
But those experiences haven't stopped Prof. Colling -- who received a Ph.D. in microbiology, chairs the biology department at Olivet Nazarene and is himself a devout conservative Christian -- from coming out swinging. In his new book, "Random Designer," he writes: "It pains me to suggest that my religious brothers are telling falsehoods" when they say evolutionary theory is "in crisis" and claim that there is widespread skepticism about it among scientists. "Such statements are blatantly untrue," he argues; "evolution has stood the test of time and considerable scrutiny."
His is hardly the standard scientific defense of Darwin, however. His central claim is that both the origin of life from a primordial goo of nonliving chemicals, and the evolution of species according to the processes of random mutation and natural selection, are "fully compatible with the available scientific evidence and also contemporary religious beliefs." In addition, as he bluntly told me, "denying science makes us [Conservative Christians] look stupid."
Prof. Colling is one of a small number of conservative Christian scholars who are trying to convince biblical literalists that Darwin's theory of evolution is no more the work of the devil than is Newton's theory of gravity. They haven't picked an easy time to enter the fray. Evolution is under assault from Georgia to Pennsylvania and from Kansas to Wisconsin, with schools ordering science teachers to raise questions about its validity and, in some cases, teach "intelligent design," which asserts that only a supernatural tinkerer could have produced such coups as the human eye. According to a Gallup poll released last month, only one-third of Americans regard Darwin's theory of evolution as well supported by empirical evidence; 45% believe God created humans in their present form 10,000 years ago.
Usually, the defense of evolution comes from scientists and those trying to maintain the separation of church and state. But Prof. Colling has another motivation. "People should not feel they have to deny reality in order to experience their faith," he says. He therefore offers a rendering of evolution fully compatible with faith, including his own. The Church of the Nazarene, which runs his university, "believes in the biblical account of creation," explains its manual. "We oppose a godless interpretation of the evolutionary hypothesis."
It's a small opening, but Prof. Colling took it. He finds a place for God in evolution by positing a "random designer" who harnesses the laws of nature he created. "What the designer designed is the random-design process," or Darwinian evolution, Prof. Colling says. "God devised these natural laws, and uses evolution to accomplish his goals." God is not in there with a divine screwdriver and spare parts every time a new species or a wondrous biological structure appears.
Unlike those who see evolution as an assault on faith, Prof. Colling finds it strengthens his own. "A God who can harness the laws of randomness and chaos, and create beauty and wonder and all of these marvelous structures, is a lot more creative than fundamentalists give him credit for," he told me. Creating the laws of physics and chemistry that, over the eons, coaxed life from nonliving molecules is something he finds just as awe inspiring as the idea that God instantly and supernaturally created life from nonlife.
Prof. Colling reserves some of his sharpest barbs for intelligent design, the idea that the intricate structures and processes in the living world -- from exquisitely engineered flagella that propel bacteria to the marvels of the human immune system -- can't be the work of random chance and natural selection. Intelligent-design advocates look at these sophisticated components of living things, can't imagine how evolution could have produced them, and conclude that only God could have.
That makes Prof. Colling see red. "When Christians insert God into the gaps that science cannot explain -- in this case how wondrous structures and forms of life came to be -- they set themselves up for failure and even ridicule," he told me. "Soon -- and it's already happening with the flagellum -- science is going to come along and explain" how a seemingly miraculous bit of biological engineering in fact could have evolved by Darwinian mechanisms. And that will leave intelligent design backed into an ever-shrinking corner.
It won't be easy to persuade conservative Christians of this; at least half of them believe that the six-day creation story of Genesis is the literal truth. But Prof. Colling intends to try.
Try here.
That's my thinking.
If a person has a main artery slashed, they're near death. Doesn't matter how long they have, they're near death. When they loose feeling in the extremities, they are still near death. When the blood pressure shallows, they are still near death. When they begin feeling cold, they are still near death. When vision starts tunneling and sound fades, they are still near death. When it all stops they are dead. The end of time is near because we see the signs of it. It doesn't mean it's ten minutes away, it means we should take the signs for what they are and be prepared for the inevitable. You can at times forestall Death. But the end of time is on God's schedule - you ain't stoppin it. The most you can do is be aware of what is due to happen and know where you stand in relation to it. If you're right with God, how soon is immaterial. The signs are here to tell us it's close - not to give us chance to prevent it. So some perspective is required.
I rest my case.
Note that the progression from false laws to accusing scientists of defending Nazi's to threatening people with burning follows as the night follows the day.
64 FAILED END-OF-THE-WORLD PREDICTIONS. Google turns up a lotta websites like this one.
Situational ethics is predictable in its ends. So, yes, when you promote something that leads to situational ethics, you will get reminded of what it is and what it does. You're not offended that the Nazis came up as an example, you're ticked that people get it pointed out to them to actually think about it. Thinking is a bad thing with religions like yours.
Language is actually much more (don't say "vague", don't say "poetic") USEFUL than even that.
For example, Jesus also used the expression "your father, the devil". By it he meant something like "active control producing moral resemblance".
There is no indication He was referring to a historical copulation.
When? From about a couple of hundred years BC, the learned knew the world was spherical. One of them there pagan dudes worked it out and also figured out the Earth's actual size to within a few decimal places. And, he did this all without benefit of divine revelation. Go figure.
That ain't what science believed on the whole though, was it.
In fact it was so pervasive that even the church accepted it.
And when they took the position against Galileo, everyone got to wear egg - save for Galileo. Truth is unpopular and usually held in a very small minority - sometimes of one or two. It is usually persecuted and rarely is accepted without a big fight. Who you kiddin.
It is falsifiable. Finding modern human skeletons before the Tertiary would be a falsification, for instance. That it hasn't been falsified does not mean that it cannot. And, as for your second sentence above, Evolution does not in any way teach that this would be possible. That you believe it does shows a profound ignorance of that which you rale against.
Codswallop! Read something more than Jack Chick and get back to me.
More codswallop.
ok, we'll try this again - post seems to have been eaten.
Science and the whole world for that matter largely believed the planet to be flat. It was so pervasive a belief that the Catholics accepted it despite evidence to the contrary in scripture (normal). They persecuted Galileo for arguing contrary to prevailing wisdom. At the time, there was one other on his side because Galileo had come to be on his side.
They were a minority opinion. And as with any truth that paints "wise" men as idiots, it was reviled till it was proven beyond a doubt. Now Galileo is no longer a heretic; but, a learned man. Funny how them things work. He was also not imprisoned for his teaching now, he was imprisoned by revisionism for daring to defy a pope. Care to polish your rhetoric some more. Popular opinion of scientists has a long history of error. I note that you took issue with the one that is most controversial of my examples. Guess we're supposed to ignore all the other times by proxy and assume your one failed rebutt is supposed to redeam the community and your case?
</p>
Nazi alert
Your mis-information is virtually complete, sweeping as it does across several different fields of knowledge. Galileo's problem with the church was over the solar system, not the shape of the earth. If you're at all curious, I have some useful Galileo links at my homepage.
The Conservation of Ignorance Law seems to be operating. I predict personal attacks to follow after the usual Nazi and burn-in-hell threats.
I used to have a few of these guys show up in math classes now and then.
Never said I didn't like it. I may argue against your reasoning and point out where it is flawed, however. Now, without using Scripture, give us a repeatable test for the soul. You claimed you had one.
The Crime of Galileo: Indictment and Abjuration of 1633. The heresy confession.
Trial of Galileo Galilei in 1633.
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.