Can a Darwinian Be a Christian?

Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...

Mo Rocca Feed

Can a Darwinian Be a Christian?

Posted Jun 12th 2008 4:35AM by Dinesh D'Souza
Filed under: Science, Christianity, Atheism

When Richard Dawkins published The God Delusion, philosopher Michael Ruse was quoted as saying that the book "makes me embarrassed to be an atheist." What especially galls Ruse is Dawkins' pig-headed insistence that anyone who embraces the Darwinian account of evolution cannot remain a Christian.

Ruse is a noted philosopher at Florida State University, an atheist champion of evolution and Darwinism, and author of several critically acclaimed books including Can a Darwinian Be a Christian?

I've been reading Ruse's book, and in it he counters Dawkins' simple-minded argument that God has been proven irrelevant since chance and natural selection now constitute "the blind watchmaker." Ruse writes, "It still leaves open the option of God's designing at a distance. Perhaps God put His design into action through the medium of unbroken law. Perhaps a God who works in this way is superior to a God who has to intervene personally and miraculously."

But doesn't evolution contradict a literal reading of the first chapter of Genesis? Yes, but Ruse points out that there are only two groups of people who insist on reading Genesis in a close-mindedly literal way. The first group is ignorant fundamentalists. And the second group is ignorant atheists like Dawkins.

By contrast, Ruse shows that from earliest times thoughtful Christians like the church father Augustine read the creation account figuratively. And for nearly two thousand years the Catholic Church has followed in this tradition. Ruse adds that while Calvin was a bit more literal-minded than Luther, both leading reformers also allowed for non-literal understandings of creation. Indeed Calvin introduced his doctrine of "accommodation" in which he argued that the Bible is sometimes written in a form as to make itself intelligible to people who are not well educated and don't have a sophisticated understanding of science.

Ruse 's conclusion introduces subtleties that seem entirely beyond the capacity of Dawkins. "Is the Christian obligated to be a Darwinian?" Ruse answers no, but urges Christians to take evolutionary biology seriously because they don't want a Christianity practiced in the dark. "Is the Darwinian obligated to be a Christian?" Again, the answer is no but Ruse adds this advice: "Try to be understanding of those who are." Finally Ruse gets to the big one. "Can a Darwinian be a Christian?" To which he offers the resounding answer: "Absolutely!"

Permalink
Email this
Linking Blogs
Comments [1715]
Share this
- Add this post to...
- Netscape
- Digg
- Del.icio.us

Reader Comments ( Page 30 of 115)

Previous 15 Comments | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

436. 69. LOL

Robert at 11:35AM on Jun 14th 2008

437.
Atheists do NOT have a monopoly on bitterness.

I see hatred masked as religion all the time...look into yourselves - ourselves. We find we're not that different, good and bad.

mac at 11:45AM on Jun 14th 2008

438. That last was a wish for DD on Father's Day- NOT a countdown.

Happy Father's Day Y'all!

Aloha!

Robert at 11:38AM on Jun 14th 2008

439. OOPS! I'll Skew the numbers to win. LOLLOLLOL

Robert at 11:40AM on Jun 14th 2008

440. "His use of 'darwinian' and yours occurs here many times and is used as an attempt to draw a discussion on evolution out of the twenty first century and the science of molecular genetics into the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, which is the last time any of the preacher silliness you take as fact was updated.
You do the same thing with the 'big bang', acting as though the bulk of the scientific community had never heard of it and Hoyle's Steady State theory was still prevalent. Most of you never heard of inflation, the higgs field, the standard model, m-theory, nothing that's come along since the seventies. Some genius even disputes Einstein.
It's a typical ploy of desperation since you aren't' well educated enough in science basics to improve your understanding, or you have one humongous psychological block against understanding."

Kindly back this up and cite a single line from any of my posts in which I attempt to do what you claim above.

I have no quarrel whatsoever with evolution, so long as we're restricting ourselves to the serious scientific work that's being done in the life sciences. My position is in line with professor Ken Miller's (a Catholic and an ardent defender of evolution who teaches molecular biology at Brown), viz. it's ridiculous to suppose that Christianity and evolution are incompatible. I do, however, have a problem with those who attempt to take the scientific legitimacy of evolution and transfer it to a philosophic view of evolution (and PLENTY of highly respected people do this, so don't act as if it's a straw man; to take the most obvious example, Dan Dennett calls evolution a 'universal acid,' which is to say that biology cannot contain it, and people like Richard Dawkins agree with him; Miller, on the other hand, argues that once you attempt to remove evolution from its proper biological category, you're no longer doing science, but attempting to use the good name of science to support your pet philosophical conceptions).

Your silly and groundless assertions about my view and understanding of the Big Bang are equally without justification.

All I did was demonstrate that both you and Hays don't know what you're talking about -- or, worse, are simply lying -- when you claim that no scientists use the term "Darwinian" today, and that the use of this term is symptomatic of an ignorance of modern developments in evolutionary theory. Why not just admit that you were wrong?

Renzo at 11:48AM on Jun 14th 2008

441. Peter says he's a scientist.

I wonder if he's the one in the scientist family no one ever talks about. hee-haw hee-haw.

For some reason he reminds of that dumb lion on the wizard of OZ were he's singing, "If I only had a brain" [Now that is funny] I crack myself up...

Observant at 11:42AM on Jun 14th 2008

442. Yup, many Christians are evolutionists. Most often the arguments pro and con evolution are semantic.

I am a creationist, but know many evolutionist Christians.

Using the distinctions as tests for 'Chrstianiness' is a false dichotomy, and is unrelated to any kind of Biblical Christianity.

rbray7 at 11:44AM on Jun 14th 2008

443. "Christianity" has been the "state religion" in Rome and England; for example. Treating obligatory pronouncements as truth ignores the idea they should be considered meaningless prefaces, because one must consider the social acceptability of "free speech".
Interestingly, Darwin considered himself a Christian. The tiff between those proposing evolution and those trying to suppress the idea because it seemed to challenge institutionalized B.S. ( We should sympathize today. Global Warming, anyone ? ) preceded him by a good century.

opit at 7:13PM on Jun 14th 2008

444.
I think the scarecrow needed a brain. Maybe the lion needed courage.

BUT I do see your point Observant.

mac at 12:02PM on Jun 14th 2008

445. ATHEIST

How Stupidity works in modern America:

Reply to: By contrast, Ruse shows that from earliest times thoughtful Christians like the church father Augustine read the creation account figuratively. And for nearly two thousand years the Catholic Church has followed in this tradition.(end)

Pretending that the words say something OTHER than what they say.... is a way to make people stupid.

No matter HOW Dinesh LIES.... the first creation myth in Genesis (Seven Days of Creation) says there were trees bearing fruit on earth... and then there was an evening... and on the NEXT DAY, our sun and the other stars were made.

this is PROOF that the people who wrote this Creation MYTH had no clue.

100% Proof.

What do I have to do to get Dinesh to ADMIT this.

Dinesh is a FOOL. He LIES about something that if obvious, because the truth is something he doesn't want to admit.

Reply to: My position is in line with professor Ken Miller's (a Catholic and an ardent defender of evolution who teaches molecular biology at Brown), viz. it's ridiculous to suppose that Christianity and evolution are incompatible. Renzo(end)

Again, STUPIDITY.

There is NO component of a human being that survives death.

Evolution had no reason to favor such an odd thing.

We are physical creatures. When we die, we die.

christianity is based on a promise of resurrection.... at the Day of Judgment, a God will perform a supernatural event to return the dead to life.

apparently in the resurrection of Lazarus, a dead body is simply reanimated.

In Jewish lore, you need to preserve the bones of the skeleton, and they will be the basis of the new body.

In words attributed to Jesus, the new bodies will live as angels, without marriage.

Evolution is not a SILLY STORY. christianity is a silly story based on Resurrection.

resurrection does NOT happen.

So, no modern Evolution proponent (or Darwinian either, for that matter) would ever consider being a Christian.

Because christianity refutes a basic rule of evolution, that we evolved... and the idea of a soul or a spirit would require something else to have happened.

William Hays at 11:57AM on Jun 14th 2008

446.
Re#439

uh, mac,
you're proving my point.
and then down the page Hays posts.
lol !

Chris at 12:07PM on Jun 14th 2008

447. EVOLUTIONISTS = MORONS / NON-SCIENTISTS ALL

SCIENCE = AN INDISPUTABLE, PROVEN FACT, PROVEN BY YOU AND OTHERS, IN CONCERT, BEYOND ANY DOUBT, ON YOURS AND ALL OTHERS' PARTS

BIBLE = WRITTEN BY CHRIST, PROVEN ON JUDGMENT DAY, WHICH LIKELY IS COMING TO PASS ON 5/21/2011, PER ACTUAL SCIENTISTS, I.E. GOD'S PEOPLE (CHRISTIANS / THE ONE AND ONLY ELECT

LOST = OVER 99% OF ALL SOULS, THROUGHOUT HISTORY

WHY LOST = THEY CHOSE TO BE / WILLINGLY IGNORANT
OF THE TRUTH

WHY AGAIN = THEY ALL MADE EXCUSE FOR THEIR DISOBEDIENCE, TILL THE LAST DAY!!!

Charles at 12:28PM on Jun 14th 2008

448. Hey Obs: would that be the 'cowardly' lion? Now you're in for a beating when Peter wakes up.

fanman at 12:31PM on Jun 14th 2008

449. ltl; please tell Charles about the caps.

fanman at 12:32PM on Jun 14th 2008

450. ATHEIST

All caps mean you're shouting. Well, trying

Reply to: BIBLE = WRITTEN BY CHRIST, PROVEN ON JUDGMENT DAY, WHICH LIKELY IS COMING TO PASS ON 5/21/2011, PER ACTUAL SCIENTISTS, I.E. GOD'S PEOPLE (CHRISTIANS / THE ONE AND ONLY ELECT
_____________

This is Stupidity.

Trying to attribute a comment to "Per Actual Scientists."

These people have been Dumbed Down by years of sitting in church while the ministers talk NONSENSE.

they think that christianity makes sense because so many people claim it does.

but if you simply look at the claims of Christianity, they're NONSENSE.

How "likely" is Judgment Day to occur in 2011? Just that one statement REEKS of Stupidity. In so many ways.

William Hays at 12:37PM on Jun 14th 2008

Previous 15 Comments | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Add your comments

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.

When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.

To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.

Mo's Video

The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...
Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...

Coming Soon

Most Commented On

Coming Soon

Mo's Bio

Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.