IT is the question that has symbolized the two competing cultures in the United States from the last one hundred years: Was man created, or did he evolve? This central question is not just a question of belief, but of one's fundamental world view.
Before I go further, I believe that to be objective one must make clear how they stand. I am agnostic and as a general rule I give less and less credence to the scripture as it moves away from the general middle of the physical text (yes, that means the two most contentious books, genesis and revelations, are pulp fiction in my eyes). To that I have written quite a few agressive papers in defense of evolution. In this blog, I am really seeking to encourage debate because I feel everyone can get more out of evolving (no pun intended) conversation than sniping at either side.
To start this debate, I mostly just want to give a few positives for both sides. From there, I hope people of both persuations will then chime in in a civil and constructive way.
So, first is science.
Science has become an instrumental part of modern society mostly by being able to predict outcomes and be tailored to different situation. The other main strength of science is that it is always seeking to prove and diprove itself to come to better conclusions. That is how science seems to survive every test, because it is usually its own best critic.
Religion is one of the true pillars of human civilization. Every religion, particularly Christianity as well as all others, possesses an unequaled power to bring people together. It is common to every culture and virtually every one seeks to bring out and explain the very best in all of us. Many claim that religion will someday destroy humanity, but so many times, on smaller scales, it has saved humanity. One could even say that without religion, there might be mankind, but not humanity
Well, I've started it, now I want everyone to help me finish it.
As far as I see it, there is no real debate. There are just a lot of militant religious people and antagonistic scientific people who are seeking to create strife where one doesn't necessarily exist.
The way I see it, the best way to understand our lives and universe is to examine them from both scientific and spiritual standpoints.
Does religion and science conflict? I think so.
I wouldn't say they are diametrically opposed in all areas, however there are areas in which there is overlap such as questions of origins as you noted. Science is NOT supporting the religious view.
It is true that that some religious people who are able to rationalize away those differences but they do so at a price. Either words mean what they say or else they mean nothing. If you are going to interpret "day" to mean a period of time of no set length, then there you have wiped out all useful information from the Genesis story.
To my way of thinking, you have also sacrificed your own intellectual integrity. The phraseology of the Genesis account is "evening and morning, the [first/second/third/fourth/fifth/sixth] day". You are denying that the author's obvious intent to portray a 24 hour day.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
I think humanity started before religion, so it can exist after religion.
Obviously, I wrote this becuase I feel there is a real debate and that is central to our future. Somehow this debate has become the center of that decision. On one side, we have a society that honors the past and tradition. THe other is much more forward in its thinking, trying to be better than what came before. I don't mean to say that one is better. I do think that despite the difference, the two sides are compatible if both sides would come together.
The two sides CAN'T come together ... at least not for every one. If one side says the universe as we know it started from a microscopic point of space 13.7 billion years ago, and the other side says that it was poofed into existence pretty much as it is now 6,000 years ago; then one side is wrong.
You may argue that you can get around this by reinterpreting the bible, but I think that is intellectually dishonest. The bible REALLY does say that, and I think it is quite obvious that is what it really meant. So if one is going to take the bible at its word then you either have to believe the universe is indeed 6,000 years old or admit that the bible has errors.
If your religion is based on the bible as being the word of God, then you cannot accept that the later so the conflict is unavoidable.
Cheers,
DB
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
When I lived in Spain i had the honor to hear my public school philosphy teacher say that evolution was the truth. He said it again and again looking at me because i was an american. It seems that baby america is always behind in progressive ideas.
People shouldn't fight the truth. that doesn't mean question it, but don't condemn it.
If it means that one of their ideas about Christianity is false, then they must change it or evolve from it. or they themselves risk falling behind.