[/caption] Posted on 05/11/2012 10:56:54 AM PDT by ReligiousLibertyTV
[dc]O[/dc]n May 14, noted philanthropist and neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson is scheduled to give the commencement address at Emory University and receive an honorary degree. But there is a problem. In recent weeks Emory faculty and students have asked the University to disinvite Dr. Carson because he is a critic of evolutionary theory and advocate of creationism. Faculty and staff have written that Dr. Carson’s “great achievements in medicine allow him to be viewed as someone who ‘understands science’” poses a direct threat to science that “rests squarely on the shoulders of evolution.”
The anti-Carson letter describes how there is “overwhelming” evidence of “ape-human transitional fossils” and how this evolution process has advanced an ability to develop animal models for disease and that even “the work of Dr. Carson himself is based on scientific advances fostered by an understanding of evolution.” The letter then argues that “the theory of evolution is as strongly supported as the theory of gravity and the theory that infectious diseases are caused by micro-organisms.”
In 2010, Gallup released a poll that found that 40% of Americans believe in strict creationism, the idea that humans were created by God in their present form within the past 10,000 years. Thirty-eight percent believe that God guided the process of human evolution from lower life forms over millions of years , and only 16% believe that humans evolved without divine intervention. Sixty percent of those who attend church weekly believe that we were created less than 10,000 years ago. Gallup notes that the numbers have remained generally stable for the past 28 years.
That the number of adherents of creationism remains so strong, even though Charles Darwin’s book, “On the Origin of Species” has been around since 1859 and has been taught in most public schools since the 1960s, is a testament to the persistent strength of American religious belief and faith over contradictory concepts.
Earlier this week, Forbes magazine staff writer Alex Knapp wrote an essay entitled, “Why Some Christians Reject Evolution,” arguing that many Christians reject evolutionary theory because it conflicts with the Protestant view of the doctrines of original sin and salvation.
[caption id="" align="alignright" width="347" caption="Photo credit - iStockPhoto.com"][/caption]
Perhaps the only way to explain how evolved human beings would end up with a soul is expressed in the hybrid evolution-creation concept advanced by Pope Pius XII in the encyclical Humani generis (1950). Pius XII writes, "For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.”
In Catholic thought, this has been interpreted to provide room for the concept that human beings were created over millions of years through evolution, and that God ultimately provided pre-existing, pre-created souls to those He designated and that these souls reconnect to God through practicing the sacraments.
In contrast, American evangelicals tend to view Adam and Eve as actual living people, who were literally created by God as clay forms into which God breathed the breath of life. There was no death before the fall of humanity. The time frames are important because they rely on the Biblical chronologies Matthew 1 and Luke 3:23-28 to prove that Jesus was in the prophetically-designated ancestral line of David, and draw the genealogical line all the way back to Adam, the first created human being.
Many evangelicals reject the hybrid view of creation and evolution because it would necessarily require them to regard creation, as discussed in the books of Genesis and of a new earth in Revelation, as allegory and submit the pervasive teachings of the Bible referencing Creation and other supernatural activity to the realm of mythology or cultural contextualism. Acceptance of “scientific” views of evolution would then, by necessity, require a major reconfiguration of matters of faith – and that is something that most adherents to strict creationism are unwilling to do.
Knapp, whose own religious beliefs are not indicated, notes that while some churches have found ways to incorporate the idea of change over time into their belief systems, “for many Christians, evolution isn’t a minor fact of science that can be resolved into the mythos of their faith. It is, rather, a fundamental attack on their faith and many things that they believe.”
There have been a number of heated arguments on the campuses of a diverse array of religious universities regarding how issues of origins should be taught. Some have tried to walk the middle line of teaching “intelligent design” as an alternative to creationism and evolution. Critics of those teaching intelligent design point out that trying to split the issue down the middle does no favors to either side and in the end is nothing but a weakened form of creationism, and an explanation that is of no value to secular science.
Within the larger context of American Protestant Christianity the debate continues without resolution. Among Christians, creationists are often asked to consider various forms of evidence of a long-history of the earth, but those advocating for a long-earth have largely ignored discussion of the genealogies of the New Testament and the concepts of original sin and salvation. Christian evolutionists have failed to provide a verse-by-verse rebuttal to the Biblical Creation narrative or to acknowledge the extent to which acceptance of creation would impact theology.
Instead theistic evolutionists operate on the supposition that Creationists will eventually bifurcate their religious beliefs from scientific understanding, because incompatibilities must be resolved in favor of science. This places faith directly in conflict with science and any resultant battle on these issues will take centuries if true academic freedom is to be granted, but can resolve faster if the voices of religious dissent are silenced and those who have openly criticized evolution are denied a seat at the academic table.
The attempt to “purify” academia by silencing the voices of critics such as Dr. Carson would be the first step toward a secular Dark Ages. So far, it appears that despite the controversy, Emory University’s commencement ceremony will go forward as planned.
###
In response to the controversy at Emory, as of this writing nearly 2,000 people have signed a Petition to reaffirm “Dr. Ben Carson’s Welcome and Defend His Right to Express His Views.” Click here to view the Petition.
The public is generally not aware of how thoroughly the theory of evolution has been debunked over the past century. No normal science theory would survive such a history.
How many here think it’s a clear cut sin not to reject the old earth theories outright?
“there is “overwhelming” evidence of “ape-human transitional fossils”
Then why do we still have apes running around?
Shouldn’t they have “transitioned” by now?
Is thinking or analyzing or measuring things a sin?
I believe that the missing link is still missing.
Maybe unicorns ate it.
:)
It’s worse than that. There’s overwhelming reason to doubt that humans could be descended from hominids or apes.
—How many here think it’s a clear cut sin not to reject the old earth theories outright?—
I don’t. I’ve read the Genesis account in Hebrew and there is room to interpret the six days a multitude of ways. That said, I like to ask people, “If you could go back in time and meet Adam one day after he was created, based on his appearance how old would you guess that he is?
Same with the earth and the heavens.
According to a “convincing” show I saw on one of the science channels a couple years back, you’re *all* ultimately descended from salamanders.
[and ~I~ am your overlord....so kneel!]
;D
A day is 24 hours long and six days is 144 hours long.
That fact is true today as it was at the beginning of time around 5,974 years ago.
DNA analysis shows that we share common genes with only 70% of the chimp genome, and we are more like the gorillas (peaceful vegetarians) in 15% of our genome. That gives you another 15% that's not particularly shared with the Great Apes.
Then there are the differences not so apparent where "They" have a gene and "We" don't, or we have a different number of copies, or the copies are stored in different places.
DNA tells us everything we need to know about 'the missing link' ~ and the first thing it says to us is that things are more complex than anyone ever imagined.
Time to read up on epigenetics ~ kind of Lysenko-ish and less Mendelian. Trick is through the magic of methylation you can end up with short circuits in your DNA that give you a beak instead of teeth (if you are a bird ~ for example), or maybe turn you into a gay instead of straight! We've known about mammalian "conditioning" for a very long time ~ but now they are able to put a chemical description to it.
Funniest thing, though I know hundreds of Evangelicals and not a one of them is a young earther. That is mostly a non-issue in their lives.
This is unacceptable.
The renowned brain surgeon will need to go to a re-education facility.
Intolerance will not be tolerated.
My own ancestors were drawing instruction guides and providing storyboards (Of pictures) a good 8,000 years ago ~ you can find their stuff in the Kola Peninsula.
My own ancestors were drawing instruction guides and providing storyboards (Of pictures) a good 8,000 years ago ~ you can find their stuff in the Kola Peninsula.
They were assembled in factories. Out of the same stuff.
You don’t believe in general relativity?
But time is relative depending on other factors. What lasts 24 hours to someone moving the speed of light may last years for someone moving much slower. Thus, what took 7 days at the time could appear to us to have taken millions of years. General relativity changes everything in this regard.
I don’t care one way or the other. As Christians we are required to believe in the Apostles Creed, which does not contain any affirmations about how old the earth is or whether humans were created instantaneously or over millions of years.
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.