Re: its quite easy to accomodate faith and science (was ID vs. ?)

From: Susan Brassfield Cogan (Susan-Brassfield@ou.edu)
Date: Fri Sep 22 2000 - 17:02:50 EDT

  • Next message: billwald@juno.com: "Re: its quite easy to accomodate faith and science (was ID vs. ?)"

    >FJ>Darwinism and the underlying
    >>foundation of science are not anti-Christian
    >
    >Maybe that is why leading Darwinists like Dawkins (Oxford Professor for
    >the Public Understanding of Science) describes religious faith as a "virus":
    >
    > "I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world's great
    > evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate.
    > (Morris H.M., "What They Say," BTG No. 123a, Institute for
    > Creation Research, El Cajon CA, March 1999.
    > http://www.icr.org/pubs/btg-a/btg-123a.htm)

    Dawkins (who wrote the above quote) is a fool, in my estimation, because he
    makes something of the same error that Johnson, et al. make, that is, he
    believes that evolution proves something about religion and the gods.

    Stephen, I think this may be the first time you actually make it clear that
    you don't sit around reading 35 year old technical journals mining for
    anti-evolution quotes, but actually pick them up from creationist websites
    and quotebooks. I think I may have that particular copy of "The Humanist"
    so perhaps I can find the original context.

    Even just examining the quote we have at hand we see that Morris, not
    widely known for his honesty, inserted the word "religious" in front of the
    word "faith,"--and you quoted Morris blindly--rather changing Dawkins's
    original meaning. Dawkins is almost certainly talking about faith in the
    sense of "belief without evidence." Evidence is acutely important to
    scientists and belief is not possible without it. Which is why ID and
    creation science will never be embraced by even devout Christians who
    happen to be scientists.

    Susan

    ----------

     I am aware that the conclusions arrived at in this work will be denounced
    by some as highly irreligious; but he who denounces them is bound to shew
    why it is more irreligious to explain the origin of man as a distinct
    species by descent from some lower form, through the laws of variation and
    natural selection, than to explain the birth of the individual through the
    laws of ordinary reproduction.

    ---Charles Darwin

    http://www.telepath.com/susanb/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 22 2000 - 17:05:08 EDT