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!"
Reader Comments ( Page 31 of 115)
451. it's also contrary to scripture, though 'purple' Hays won't necessarily care about that fact.
fanman at 12:39PM on Jun 14th 2008
452. If Dinesh eventually decides that the answer is no, I wonder if he'll take that into account the next time he decides to use the "there are more of us than there are of you, so we have to be right" argument to prove that the magic rabbi was God. Because if that premise, or any premise that implies that to be a Christian you have to believe every word of both testaments is both literal and factual, there aren't a hell of a lot of them, especially when you take into account the myriad of nonsensical taboos found in the Old Testament, many of which are almost universally ignored by today’s Christians.
Ed W. at 12:47PM on Jun 14th 2008
453. Lloyd the Lurker
I see the creation myth as not only a creation myth, but as a metaphor for a pre-existent life--an accepted Mormon belief (granted, I'm sure to get flak from many people that there is no such thing as souls living before this life), but the point of the story beyond whether it's true or real or not, is the familial nature of the human species. That to me is the important thing.
I agree with the metaphor idea in that the creation myth is the primeval history of hunter gather societies who "Fell" after the establishment of agriculture, domestication, marriage and warfare. They "fell" due to climate change and population growth that forced them into hard labor. The easy life was over so to speak and the new Patriarchal God appeared just in this era of human culture to introduce man the laws of morality since they must now live in close proximity with other tribes and clans that needed to work together in order to create a functioning society of men who would commit to the hard labors mentioned above for the sake of a large groups.
But I had no idea that Mormons believed in Premortal Existence. It is also found in the bible Moses 3:5 and elsewhere, can't look them all up right now but if you know of some others please post them.
"For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth.... And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them"
Pre mortal existence is also found all over extra biblical text. Many ancient heroes were gods before they were born, Hercules, or turned human, Horus reborn as each Egyptian king. The idea was perfect divinity to eventually loss of immortality, the same theme occurring with Adam and Eve. For acquiring knowledge they lost their immortality.
Why do Mormons believe that sons of gods were reincarnated in mortals? Was it punishment for Adam and Eve or is it for different reasons?
"I am with what it says about relationships, living well, serving man and God, and so forth
Another thing that is important to me is the social group. Mormons are my "tribe"
Funny you call them your tribe. I agree with that the tribe concept is what makes people well adjusted, educated, kind and respectful adults. I find the lack of social groups or extended families in our society the reason why children are worse of today than they were 100 years ago.
People in America had up to recent colonial times lived in groups of extended families. They were communal in that they shared the duties of the household including the discipline and education of the children. I believe it is the lack of extended families in our societies that have raised the most disgusting children I've ever seen and met.
I have been appalled to often with how parents lack in education and disciplining their children as they substitute it for TV and video games. My neighbor's son in 8 years old and I swear any conversation revolves around toys he wants from commercials he sees and he usually responds to questions with a popular cartoon quote or latest Movie saying. He has nothing original to offer since his whole education is TV based. I find it sad that people still believe in the concept that children should be seen not heard.
I have made an effort to keep my son surrounded by his grandmas, grandpas, aunts and uncles and cousins from both sides of our family. I believe this is what makes my son respectful outgoing and extremely smart. Every single one of my family or my husband's family is around and I know they all contribute in his proper education and discipline in a loving way. We are all usually around each other 6 days a week and our focus as a group is watching how our children entertain us and learn from us. They are usually the center of attention and they love to entertain us and interact with our conversations. The concept of large families or tribes as you refer to is lost in America.
Hi Jesse
Thanks for the recommendation, I'll look through it.
goddess1prevail at 12:48PM on Jun 14th 2008
454. "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"
Actually, all of his Charles' statements reeked of stupidity.
Ed W. at 12:57PM on Jun 14th 2008
455. "Brandon, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a pure fictional joke. Jesus and the apostles and John the Baptist and the Nazarene sect are historical persons.
I'm not surprised you couldn't tell the difference between historical persons and fictional ones.
preteristvision at 11:17PM on Jun 12th 2008"
David Koresh and Jim Jones were historical persons too, that doesn't prove any of them knew anymore about God than the next guy.
Ed W. at 1:17PM on Jun 14th 2008
456. "So, for this atheist it's the ol' Hate the Sinner, And Not the Sin. So to speak." Michael
What are you going on about? I don't hate any of you. Sure people like PV and Renzo and others are intentionally out to annoy people. I don't hate people BECAUSE of what they believe. I simply have zero tolerance for their beliefs AND for their actions they take that ARE CAUSED by or out of their beliefs. I don't hate you Michael. I simply think your prayer to me was repugnant since your mythical god is one hell of an evil bastard regardless of if he existed or not. Unfortunately it's enough that he exists for you faith freaks. Unless you commit a truly horrific crime that really hurts someone then your conversion to objective reality away from any and all dogma's could save you from dementia and delusion. Maybe, but that is yet to be seen. Universal forgiveness of the catholics? I don't know about that, but in practice aren't there somethings that just can't be forgiven? Take Bush for example, he's a man who has committed mass murder - NOT IN SELF DEFENSE - but because he choose to for his own revenge. Evil is in your deeds. Please refrain from sending me wishes from mass murderers. Thank you.
Peter at 1:18PM on Jun 14th 2008
457. Had you been observing Observant you'll have noticed that goddess1prevail is into astrology. I've not seen any clear cut statements from her that she doesn't believe in spirits or the super natural. Maybe she doesn't and I'll have to stand corrected but until there is a clear cut statement anyone who takes guidance from astrology is a total nut job in need of professional help, as are you Observant, for you see you have a very deep dementia where you think that your wishful thing about a mythical god is real. It's a wonder you can function in life at all. Seek help from a deprogrammer.
Peter at 1:23PM on Jun 14th 2008
458. "Sure people like PV and Renzo and others are intentionally out to annoy people."
I will not apologize for annoying you by pointing out the many, many falsehoods and fallacies your arguments -- when you actually present arguments -- contain.
Renzo at 1:25PM on Jun 14th 2008
459. "Peter is such a genius he doesn't recognize humor?" - mac
Humor is notoriously difficult in plain text over the Internet. Humor that works in conversation usually won't work in plain text as context is missing. But then you already knew that didn't you?
Peter at 1:25PM on Jun 14th 2008
460. "I wonder what time Peter gets up? I feel like I need to get a few posts in before he comes on shift. Hopefully Mac, he's out smelling a few roses today, although he seems to have a 'Spocklike' disregard for such trivial human pursuits." - fanman
Funny.
Unfortunately I do need sleep and to eat. I'm back on shift now so I did give you sometime while I snoozed.
Spock actually liked the smell of flowers as do I - well most of them anyway.
This morning I was rudely awakened by the gardeners pruning the flowering garden outside my window. I live in a very green and colorful city with flowers all over so it's quite easy to smell them at this time of year.
Peter at 1:30PM on Jun 14th 2008
461. Those of you who want to claim that religion dumbs people down, makes them immoral, renders them intolerant, leaves them dogmatic and lacking in skepticism, etc. will have to explain the example of Tim Russert, a devout Catholic who attended mass several times a week, a brilliant man, a moral man, a tolerant man, and an inquisitive man. His example makes utter nonsense of your categorical claims.
Renzo at 1:34PM on Jun 14th 2008
462. 434 sees Observant observing good christian ethics and morals as the bible commands.
I mock you for your religion and your beliefs and your deeds of evil not for you being a human being with potential to improve. You can change Observant and become a better person Observant. Give up your hateful religious beliefs and learn what it means to be a human being who cares about others. You can do it.
Peter at 1:34PM on Jun 14th 2008
463. 443. 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
----------------------------------------
Your right, my mistake...
I knew one of them needed a brain or I do.lol
Must be that dumbing down effect christianity has on people Hays is allways talking about.
I'll take a smart pill in the mourning.
Observant at 1:37PM on Jun 14th 2008
464. ATHEIST
One problem modern Christians have... they've LOST the ability to decide whether a STORY is credible or not.
Let's go back to the first century and look at other places where stories about exorcism are found.
Exorcism - in spite of its magic character for modern eyes - was in actually a therapeutic operation. The ancient world believed that sickness is caused by spirits that entered the body, hence removal of the spirits will effect his a cure
The following is told about Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa who lived in the first century:
Once Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa went to immerse himself in a cave. Kuthim (Samaritans) came and placed a large rock over the mouth of the cave. The spirits came and removed it. Subsequently, an evil spirit haunted a poor woman in Rabbi Hanina's neighborhood.
His students said to him: Rabbi, see how this poor woman suffers grief from the evil spirit.
Rabbi Hanina addressed the spirit: Why do you cause grief to the daughter of Abraham ?
The spirit responded: Are you not the one who went down to dip in the cave, and so on, ...till I came with my brothers and my father's household and removed the rock. Is this how you pay me for the favor I did you ?
He answered her: I decree... (end of passage)
In spite of the abbridged nature of the story, it probably ended with Rabbi Hanina ordering the spirit to leave and the woman was cured, revealing the power of Rabbi Hanina.
This story is not known from Talmudic literature but from the writing of a twelfth-century Ashkenazi wise sage. The question arises: is this a rabbinic text from the Talmudic period that for some reason, intentional or not, is unknown from Talmudic literature
... or a pseudoepigraphic text invented centuries after the period to which it is attributed?. First it has to be noted that the fact that the cited text is known only from medieval times does not necessarily show that it is fabricated.
Indeed the text itself shows signs of abridgement by the copier ('and so on', 'till I came') and the end is missing. It is possible that it was intentionally censored from a Talmudic text because of its blunt magic character. (end)
____________
Interesting point.
In the first century, there were many stories about exorcists.
so many, in fact, later editors ADDED parts to the Gospel of Mark where Jesus was
A MAGIC RABBI
who could command demons.
Is this CREDIBLE?
No, it's just a STORY.
The resurrection accounts in the Gospels... are just STORIES.
simple. now you've been educated. Hopefully.
William Hays at 1:43PM on Jun 14th 2008
465. Actually rbray7 you are another human being suckered into the continual con. How much to do you donate each week?
Peter at 1:43PM on Jun 14th 2008