tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post7659686984246672370..comments2024-03-28T12:34:14.649-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: A presentation I did on the 150th Anniversary of Darwin at Glendale Community CollegeVictor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-84117125830633972202009-12-03T06:42:08.804-07:002009-12-03T06:42:08.804-07:00The most notable point of Darwinism (note that I d...The most notable point of Darwinism (note that I did not say "evolution" is that it says that life evolved without the aid of any supernatural intelligence.<br /><br />Many religious people are able to easily reconcile the idea of religion with evolution - the idea that life evolved over a very long time - directed by God.<br /><br />There is also Deism, the idea that God created the physical laws of the universe and then stepped away, and that evolution was an inevitable progression of the laws of physics. (Not that far from the Darwinist, no-God-necessary-at-all viewpoint).<br /><br />The views of fundamentalist Christians are not representative of the views of all religious people on Earth.Marcia Earthhttp://www.earthfacts.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-25095695824873502142009-12-03T06:41:52.520-07:002009-12-03T06:41:52.520-07:00The most notable point of Darwinism (note that I d...The most notable point of Darwinism (note that I did not say "evolution" is that it says that life evolved without the aid of any supernatural intelligence.<br /><br />Many religious people are able to easily reconcile the idea of religion with evolution - the idea that life evolved over a very long time - directed by God.<br /><br />There is also Deism, the idea that God created the physical laws of the universe and then stepped away, and that evolution was an inevitable progression of the laws of physics. (Not that far from the Darwinist, no-God-necessary-at-all viewpoint).<br /><br />The views of fundamentalist Christians are not representative of the views of all religious people on Earth.Marcia Earthhttp://www.earthfacts.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-34751584363838222102009-12-03T05:46:41.886-07:002009-12-03T05:46:41.886-07:00Of course Jeremy's reactionary post did nothin...Of course Jeremy's reactionary post did nothing to undermine the point I made, rhetoric aside.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-15061523780634575922009-12-03T03:44:19.278-07:002009-12-03T03:44:19.278-07:00I think what is often stated by Evolution advocate...I think what is often stated by Evolution advocates is that ID proponents, and/or Creationists, are trying to sneak God into science.<br /><br />I think that the writings of William Dembski and Phillip Johnson---among others---have demonstrated that God was pushed out of science with the advent of Darwin. That's why this quip from Dawkins is very significant:<br /><br />"Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."<br /><br />Darwin, contrary to the long intellectual heritage of teleology, was proposing a non-teleological understanding of biology. In fact, his teachings have been scrupulously applied to the whole of nature. Nowadays, the teachings of Darwin have extended into, and permeated, every aspect of culture. So it would true to say that Darwin was as much a <i>Prophet</i> as he was a Scientist. You see, his theory has not been restricted to the realm of mere empirical observation. Indeed, his theory has mandated the "truth" in every vital area of culture....whether ethics, politics, the social sciences or religion.<br /><br />Darwin's theory is much more than a humble observation. It is both the Philosopher's Stone <i>and</i> the Rosetta Stone. It is not only the most respectable and acquiesced theory of Alchemy to date, but it has also become the "seer stone" by which everything can be seen, understood and interpreted. Daniel Dennett's comment about the "universal acid" is quite true.<br /><br />And someone will say:<br /><br />"Darwin a Prophet, you say? Nonsense."<br /><br />Ah, but he was. As that cackling diviner of DNA, James Watson, told Charlie Rose:<br /><br />"Nothing of real importance had been said until Darwin."<br /><br />and <br /><br />"Darwin is the most important person who ever lived."<br /><br />Darwin is a Prophet....a Diviner of Mysteries.....a man holding <i>the</i> Crystal Ball, and having in his possession the <i>Keys</i> to Pandora's Box....to some ancient kingdom of "light". But what door has he opened?<br /><br />"Now, when the 1000 years have expired...."Gregorynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-45758851614741118742009-11-30T18:30:12.168-07:002009-11-30T18:30:12.168-07:00insistence on insisting...oh what I'd give for...insistence on insisting...oh what I'd give for an edit button.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12239401198873423972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-29514475441515934252009-11-30T18:29:34.407-07:002009-11-30T18:29:34.407-07:00And towing the party line when it becomes apparent...And towing the party line when it becomes apparent that our current understanding of something may be deeply flawed isn't problematic?<br /><br />There is absolutely nothing undermining about considering the idea that God may act in more ways than abracadabra sorts of magic tricks. He's displayed great patience in guiding the course of human history, so I fail to see how an eternal being would have any problem with taking a few million years to make something happen. It's not like he's in a hurry or has anything to prove.<br /><br />If anything, the Christian insistence on insisting on miracles when maybe none exist, is more undermining of legitimate miracle claims than detrimental. (Note: I think the existence of the universe is one heck of a miracle. I just don't see how it needs to be poofed into existence to qualify.)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12239401198873423972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-35314323772919244912009-11-30T12:56:26.120-07:002009-11-30T12:56:26.120-07:00I'd like to see your scientfic argument agains...I'd like to see your scientfic argument against Jesus turning water into wine. After all he did it quickly and wine grapes take a long tome to ferment. <br /><br />Same with Adam's descended testicles. He had them the first day he was born.<br /><br />6 day creationism has its problems, but objections that undermine miracles seem problematic when used by Christians.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com