There is no religious bias in the PBS Evolution Project because Ken Miller says there isn’t.

...than the result of an impersonal, random, ...

Herein lies the crux of the problem. Creationists believe that evolution is a random event. It isn't. The mutations to the genome are random, yes, but those mutations are filtered through the environment -- the result is not random at all, but rather adaptations to that environment. Why is this so difficult to understand?

.....God's Word as we now have it in the Bible has been translated, re-translated, rewritten, recopied, and reinterpreted many times. So to really get a good sense of the meaning of God's Word, particularly regarding such problematic and difficult sections as Genesis, one must study it. Since I am not a theologian, my level of study is inadequate to the level of analysis that an accurate study of Genesis (and the Bible overall) requires...

Well, I have studied Genesis for 11 months(just that one book) and still haven't gone to the depths that are revealed there, but I can tell you that Jesus would have revealed any errors to His people had there been any. Jesus said "I would have told you had it not been so" concerning His building of mansions so we could be with Him. He did not come to fool us, decieve us, or keep us in the dark. The Dead Sea Scrolls proved that over thousands of years of re-writing and translations, the Bible was virtually unchanged. If you ever read about the rituals used in copying the Bible, you might have more faith in the product we now have. One letter wrong and the whole page was discarded. I have trouble with some of the newer versions, but we can always go back to the earlier more accurate ones.

The part about theologians is serious, however. Satan has entered out pulpits from seminary schools. You can find in most seminaries, teaching of every liberal stipe imaginable. Ever hear of "Rev. Spong"? Just because you have a PHD behind your name doesn't mean diddly to me.

Believe like you want to believe, but I'll take the teachings of God over theologians. I fear, however that questioning what God plainly said and calling it false is blasphemy and will be delt with harshly.

"The series was funded by Paul Allen not the government."

The facilities to broadcast this tripe are paid for by public funding. Ergo, you have something worse than either the government simply running propaganda on its stations, or a private entrepreneur buying time on private stations to broadcast his point of view: you have an example of fascism:

Public broadcasting has elements in common with fascism. That's one reason I want public broadcasting eliminated. But eliminating public television would not stop Paul Allen from financing and distributing a series on evolution. Provided the series was professionally produced the Discovery Channel would pick it up in a heartbeat.

Believe like you want to believe, but I'll take the teachings of God over theologians. I fear, however that questioning what God plainly said...

In what language did he "plainly" say it? Aramaic? Arabic? Greek? Latin? Old English? Modern English?

Here's a simple demonstration of how words can mean more than their "plain" sense. When we read Adam in Genesis, English readers see it as the name of a man. 'Adam is a name in Hebrew, meaning "first man". 'adam is a word in the Hebrew language. Do you know what it means? Click this link:

'adam

We don't receive the full meaning of the name "Adam" as English readers. Hebrew readers receive both the literal and symbolic nature of the name. So if we are to read for full understanding, to grasp the entire content of God's word, we must rely on accurate scholarship that goes beyond the "plain meaning" that we as English speakers (and thinkers) perceive. If we do it any other way, we risk imposing our own cultural biases on what God was endeavoring to impart to us.

And that's why theology is important to non-theologians like me. I hope this helps to explain my position.

Creationists believe that evolution is a random event. It isn't. The mutations to the genome are random, yes, but those mutations are filtered through the environment -- the result is not random at all, but rather adaptations to that environment. Why is this so difficult to understand?

Please notice in my post that my last sentence ends with two words; first the adverb 'randomly', followed by the verb 'mutating.' I am also using the word 'random' to describe existence of the entire biocosm, in the evolutionary framework, as the result of non-purposed, non-directed, unintelligent, impersonal forces.

Cordially,

"But eliminating public television would not stop Paul Allen from financing and distributing a series on evolution."

I nevr said it would. Having any private broadcaster/distributor air any privately-funded production by any producer is highly prefered over having government owned and operated stations broadcasting privately-funded points of view.

Would anyone here supporting the airing of this series on PBS feel as compelled to support the airing of the 700 Club on PBS stations were CBN to pay for it? You would hear howls of protest of "establishment of religion on public airwaves" from every atheist and ACLU attorney in America, and yet, evolutionism is - as has been shown - the "science" of materialist philosophy and secular humanism. As such, it is as much a religious belief as any other.

Paul Allen is the Pat Robertson of atheism, and has just succeeded in using publically-owned broadcast facilities to push an anti-religious point of view. Those applauding this "camel's nose under the tent" are hypocrites in the extreme, to say the least.

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.