Well, I don't see too many pseudo-scientific atheists here to heap scorn
upon. I have commented several times here how I challenge my secular
colleagues on their "religious beliefs" and how I use the example of
evolution science to teach my students the difference between science and
metaphysics. In an audience I guess I heap scorn on the pseudo-science of
atheism and in a Christian audience I guess I heap scorn on the
pseudo-science of creationists. It doesn't make much sense to me to preach
to the choir.
The
>unabashed scorn of a Richard Dawkins, supported by questionable "facts," is a
>lot more widespread than the views of a certain segment of creationism.
>Students fall into the fog that assumes the primacy of naturalism and the
>quackery of Christianity, and it's hard to blow away that steam.
>
>Further, Sagan and Dawkins and their ilk have the support of the academy,
>implicitly and explicitly. No wonder students are stunned to find out one can
>actually be a scientist and a Christian.
To be sure, those who are taught that Christians are anti-science, less
intelligent, etc. are surprised. I recently had a most unusual dinner. A
complete stranger called me at home and invited me to dinner with her
family. They were cultural Jews and atheists, and she had a bet with her
high school son that she couldn't find an intelligent person who believed in
God. Well, the whole family trotted out the expected Christianity is the
antithesis of science, etc. It was a fun evening and they were quite
surprised to see an intelligent, Christian scientist.
But on the other hand, I have also stunned young Christians who never heard
of a Christian who wouldn't flat out reject evolution. This was because
they had been only educated in Christian schools and only about one view of
evolution. They have been taught that glaciers never existed (nothing could
be that old), that it HAS BEEN PROVEN that the Grand Canyon was formed in
two weeks, etc.
I am more concerned about the stunned Christian than I am about the stunned
atheist. It is appropriate if the faith of the latter is shaken, but I
worry about shaking the faith of the former.
I have a couple of comments regarding the often mentioned argument that the
message spread by Dawkins and Sagan is more widespread than the message
spread by creationists. First, Christians should know better and do better
in matters of truth. We lose the legitimacy of our position as defenders of
truth when we allow excesses among our ranks. In order to appreciate what
is true regarding science and metaphysics, you must know about both. For
metaphysical naturalists to blurr the distinction between the two while
teacing metaphysics as physics is disingenuos and should not be tolerated.
By the same token, by teaching that aspects of science are wrong because of
the metaphysical excesses of secular teachers, is another way to blurr the
distinction between physics and metaphysics and should not be tolerated.
Cheers
Steve
__________________________________________________________________________
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D. Phone: (608) 263-9137
Associate Professor FAX: (608) 263-4226
Dept. of Human Oncology and email: ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
UW Comprehensive Cancer Ctr
University of Wisconsin
Madison, WI 53792
"I had a great deal of respect for that preacher and I was saddened when
he was called to a bigger church. He was a Baptist, but he was still a
loss to the community". Ferrol Sams in EPIPHANY
__________________________________________________________________________