Is it possible for religion and evolution to coexist?

[Grumpy]

Below is an open letter which has been signed by over 7500 clergy and pastors attesting to the compatibility of scientific discoveries with the tenets of religious thought.

An Open Letter Concerning Religion and Science

Within the community of Christian believers there are areas of dispute and disagreement, including the proper way to interpret Holy Scripture. While virtually all Christians take the Bible seriously and hold it to be authoritative in matters of faith and practice, the overwhelming majority do not read the Bible literally, as they would a science textbook. Many of the beloved stories found in the Bible – the Creation, Adam and Eve, Noah and the ark – convey timeless truths about God, human beings, and the proper relationship between Creator and creation expressed in the only form capable of transmitting these truths from generation to generation. Religious truth is of a different order from scientific truth. Its purpose is not to convey scientific information but to transform hearts.

We the undersigned, Christian clergy from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator. To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to attempt to limit God, an act of hubris. We urge school board members to preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge. We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth.

Wisdom indeed!!!

Your thoughts???

Grumpy 8)

[Grumpy]

hannahjoy

Quote:
A science book is not a religious text, there is no religious information in it. . . . The Bible is not a science book, there is no scientific information in it.

Nonsense. If you've never read a science book that had anything religious in it, you need to expand your reading list.

I have never seen any science text(Outside of creationist CRAP)which claims to answer any religious questions. Part of the reason creationist "science" is not science is because it tries to inject religion where it does not apply.

The Bible is so subject to interpretation that no passage in it can be used in a scientific way. Science requires clear, unambiguous explanations with supporting evidence not required of religious texts.

Quote:
My point was not that you or anyone should get on a bandwagon. My point was the logical reasoning contained in the letter itself, hence my "wisdom indeed" comment after the letter. That wisdom is there even if noone signed the letter.

And that "wisdom" is a logical fallacy.

No, it is not. It is a logical truth accepted by most religious leaders in the world and in Christianity(including the RCC). You are simply wrong.

The Bible contains stories that purport to be historical, and infer scientific claims. The people who have believed in Creation and the Flood for thousands of years didn't have all the scientific evidence we have today, but they weren't stupid - they recognized claims to historical truth when they saw them.

There may be accurate historical references in the Bible, but the people who believed in the Pillars of the Earth and claimed that meant a flat Earth were in error. While God may have created the universe the accounts in the Old Testament were in no way a scientificly accurate description of the process. And a world wide flood did not happen as described in the story of Noah. These stories are allegory meant to teach spiritual lessons and not scientific facts. The Big Bang and evolution are facts, any interpretation in conflict with them is in error and that interpretation should be reexamined in the light of reality. Again, most religious leaders and Christians recognize these facts. To try to insist that the Bible has accurate scientific accounts of these stories can only be done by those ignorant of the scientific facts and harms that religion in the long run because it is so easily shown to be founded on falsehood.

But believe anything you want, it's a free country. And even fundamentalist beliefs are not as strange as some others, just don't show up in a public science class expecting to be allowed to teach those beliefs as a science because it is not.

I haven't studied the fossil record. Whichever position I take would have to rest on another authority. I'm sorry you don't approve of the authority I've chosen.

I have studied the fossil record and I do know of which I speak, you are free to use any authority you wish to make your descisions for yourself, but not for me and not for those who accept the scientific facts, and your religion has no place in the public school science class.

Grumpy 8)

[QED]

I haven't studied the fossil record. Whichever position I take would have to rest on another authority. I'm sorry you don't approve of the authority I've chosen.

I assume from this that your chosen authority is to be found in the bible. Out of interest which biblical character studied the fossil record and reported their conclusions? The fossil record is just as real as the bible. Both have an explanation. One cannot deny the existence of the other so what are those explanations?

[hannahjoy]

Scientific statements often have religious implications and vice versa.
The Bible is so subject to interpretation that no one can figure out what it really means, but the fossil record is so objective that no one studying it can come to any other conclusion than evolution??
Is that why we communicate with words instead of pictures? So that everyone can interpret us however they prefer?
Gimme a break.

[Grumpy]

hannahjoy

You don't have to take my word for it, greater scientists than me also hold this view:

Let me try to make crystal clear what is established beyond reasonable doubt, and what needs further study, about evolution. Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant of the evidence or are resistant to evidence, owing to emotional blocks or to plain bigotry. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification. There are no alternatives to evolution as history that can withstand critical examination. Yet we are constantly learning new and important facts about evolutionary mechanisms.
- Theodosius Dobzhansky "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution", American Biology Teacher vol. 35 (March 1973)



It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue within biology are questions of details of the process and the relative importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a fact that the earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that period and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million years old. It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250 million years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are none now. It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living forms. Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral forms that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and humans from nonhumans. No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural world can deny these facts any more than she or he can deny that the earth is round, rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun.
- R. C. Lewontin "Evolution/Creation Debate: A Time for Truth" Bioscience 31, 559 (1981)

Emphasis mine.

These are the facts about evolutionary science. I do not try to tell you what to believe in your religion nor do I try to tell you what the facts of religion are, but if your interpretation of scripture(which you are entitled to) conflicts with what we know reality to be, it is your interpretation of scripture which is in error. You have the right to be wrong but not the right to impose that error on everybody.

Grumpy

[Rob]

It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue within biology are questions of details of the process and the relative importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a fact that the earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that period and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million years old. It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250 million years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are none now. It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living forms. Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral forms that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and humans from nonhumans. No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural world can deny these facts any more than she or he can deny that the earth is round, rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun.
- R. C. Lewontin "Evolution/Creation Debate: A Time for Truth" Bioscience 31, 559 (1981) Emphasis mine.

That is a great quote Grumpy. I am putting it in my reference database! I really like your arguments Grumpy, and I agree 100% with you.

I have a question. Are you following the evo-devo stuff? I am deep in a study of evo-devo and find it fascinating.

Take care,

Rob (that weird heathen UB guy

[Grumpy]

Rob

The quote you reference by R. C. Lewontin is indeed a cogent and relavent statement of my view of the science of evolution. It makes me extremely jealous that I did not say it first!!!!

The Evo-Devo segment of our studies is very new to me. Today the latest National Geographic came in and it had a small article about it. But before I could so much as scan it my neice came in and is now parked in the living room looking at the big article on marine dinosaurs also in this issue!!! But the momentary frustration and delayed gratification are worth having a junior paleontologist in the family!!! I intend to read it as soon as she goes to bed, it's a school night so it won't be long!!

Thanks for the kind words!

Grumpy 8)

[hannahjoy]

"Evolution is a fact, so there!"
Wow, I just can't refute that powerful reasoning.

When have I ever "imposed" my beliefs on you?

[Grumpy]

hannahjoy

"Evolution is a fact, so there!"
Wow, I just can't refute that powerful reasoning.

You're smarter than that!!! Evolution as a fact is supported by so much evidence of such great quality that to deny it is on the same level as denying that electrons doing their thing in our computers allows us to speak over the internet. I'm sorry if that fact upsets you but I can do no more to change that fact than I can do something about the sun coming up in the morning if you've got a math test.

You personally may not try to impose your views on me, but people who refuse to accept the above truth are certainly trying to do so by pushing the pseudoscience of Creationism or ID(creationism light) on our public science classrooms where I used to teach. Our schools are in enough difficulties without having to teach ID as biology, Alchemy as chemistry,or Astrology as astronomy.

Grumpy 8)

[ShieldAxe]

"Evolution is a fact, so there!"
Wow, I just can't refute that powerful reasoning.

When have I ever "imposed" my beliefs on you?

What other natural phenomena do you disbelieve? Gravity? Magnetism? Subatomic particles?

[hannahjoy]

You're smarter than that!!! Evolution as a fact is supported by so much evidence of such great quality that to deny it is on the same level as denying that electrons doing their thing in our computers allows us to speak over the internet. I'm sorry if that fact upsets you but I can do no more to change that fact than I can do something about the sun coming up in the morning if you've got a math test.

I'm not upset. It's actually rather amusing to see you saying the same thing over and over again. Do you really think if you say "Evolution is a fact" enough you'll convince anyone?