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 Gods 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 Gods 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)

[Lotan]

1. Then I have no idea to the answer to the question you asked.

How in the world would information about me affect your (in)ability to answer the question...

If you don't have a basic understanding of the ideas that you 'copy and paste' to this forum then what do you do when someone refutes those ideas, or presents evidence to the contrary? Change the subject?

Ok number one from list of twenty five...
Energy creating energy. I say it never happened, what do you say?

I'd say that as far as I know there is no reason to suppose that either matter or energy have ever been created or destroyed. In that sense I agree with you. I can't definitively say that it could never happen, though.

In any case, which list are you referring to? The last one that you posted on this thread began so...

1. It is an established scientific fact that life cannot originate from non-living matter (the Law of Biogenesis).

[Sender]

1. Then I have no idea to the answer to the question you asked.

How in the world would information about me affect your (in)ability to answer the question....

I was refferring to your question "which half do you fall under". My answer is I have no idea.

[Lotan]

My answer is I have no idea.

Then maybe you should avoid making a ad hominem statement like...

Half of you guys have never read the bible yet you try to talk like you know what it says.

...when you couldn't possibly have evidence to support it. This is also addressed in the forum rules...

5. Support your assertions/arguments with evidence. Do not make blanket statements that are not supportable by logic/evidence.

Even if your statement was true, or you could show that it was, it doesn't excuse you from pasting the arguments of others that you clearly cannot understand or discuss intelligently. That's just spamming. If you would like to discuss Walt Brown's 25 reasons on this thread, then first maybe you could explain, at least, what relevance they have to the thread topic.

[Rob]

I am not ashamed to say I love the Lord Jesus with all my heart, I certainly wouldn't avoid the question like you say I do.

No one ever said you should be ashamed of your faith. But I cannot help but wonder what kind of faith it is that carelessly cuts-n-pasts statements and doesn't even take the time to determine if they are true or not? And then, having been shown that the claims/statements that you posted were blatantly false, ignoring this fact in a debate forum and refusing to acknowledge this fact, or learn therefrom, as though the truth really doesn't matter.

Sender, the truth does matter. If walked into your house, and made claims that you clearly knew were false, and you then pointed this out to me, and I ignored the truth, would you not begin to question my loyalty to truth, and even my integrity? You may believe these claims, but it is evident from the facts I have presented that some of the claims you have carelessly posted are flat our false. What do you have to say about that? Nothing I expect, and there is nothing Christ like in carelessly posting falsehoods (in a debate forum) and then ignoring the facts which reveal the truth that such claims are false.

I am NOT a liar as you so disrespectfully say, I believe what I am presenting is the truth. Because it differs from your beliefs, you say I am lying.

You have carelessly posted with no regard for truth the lies, half-truths, and deceptions of others. Is this what you think is fair or reasonable? What kind of faith and courage, when confronted in a debate forum with the truth that your posting of the claims of others are false, runs from the truth or ignores it? It took no great effort for me to uncover the facts which revealed the falsehoods of the authors you are parroting. Do you or do you not love, value, and believe in loyalty to truth Sender? That is the question.

These man of God are scientist, chemist, physicist, ect., yet you give NO ONE any credit for anything that doesn't jive with your theory. You are too closed minded to have an intelligent exchange of idea's and possibilities.

No Sender, once again you show you love not the truth and are willing to distort the truth for your own rhetorical ends. I critiqued specific issues which you posted, and showed that they were false statements. You ignore the truth and refuse to acknowledge that some of the claims that you parroted from your so-called "authorities" (which is the logically fallacy of appeal to authority) are falsehoods. My brother, if you love the truth you will follow it no matter where it leads, and in this case it leads to the truth that those "authorities" which you are parroting are spreading lies and falsehoods. Do you care? The truth does matter Sender, in both time and eternity.

If you have already heard of these, and don't care for them, why not just move along and not respond to my post?

This statement is a perfect example; you parrot the false claims of others, and when these falsehoods are exposed you want to ignore them and move on, and blame others for exposing these falsehoods in a debate forum to boot. Sender, the truth matters, and on the specific issues I responded to in my posts, which you are ignoring, it is clear the claims is false and even deceitful. What kind of faith condones lies and deceit my friend, and what kind of courage is unable to admit that with regards to these specific claims, they are not true?

Stop trying to control the forum, just don't respond would be the least best thing you can do.

Sender, simply posting the ideas of others because you 'believe' those ideas does not constitute a 'debate'. Unless you have enough basic understanding of those ideas to defend them according to some more objective criteria than your personal belief, then you are merely making (others') assertions, or 'preaching'. It would be no different if I, or someone else, posted one Stephen Jay Gould quote after another, and called that their 'argument'. The result isn't a debate; it's spam. If you are unable to support these assertions with evidence and argument as suggested in the forum rules, would you kindly restrict yourself to subjects of which you are at least knowledgable enough to carry on a simple exchange of ideas?

Lotan says it well. This is a debate forum. You are attempting to treat it as a spam forum if you refuse to debate the issues and respond to the evidence that proves you are posting claims that are false. Not to mention it reveals you loyalty to truth is less than Christlike.

My strength is knowing the word of God.

Let's see, you parrot falsehoods and lies in the name of the Word of God. Clearly your loyalty is to dogmatic beliefs rather than living faith in living truth and the guidance of the living Spirit of Truth, which would set you free to follow truth wherever it may lead.

Half of you guys have never read the bible yet you try to talk like you know what it says.

Besides the point that this is irrelevant to the lies and falsehoods which you are posting (Straw Man, Begging the Question, etc.), I suspect that many have read the Bible more than you give them credit for. The question is, did it teach you to love the truth, to do righteousness (not spread lies via unrighteous mindless parroting) and to walk humbly with your God? I must commend even the atheists for loving the truth better than the example you have shown so far. That says a lot about your loyalty to truth I am afraid.

I see no wrong in going to recourses that will articulate far better than I am able to get my point across.

What if those resources, which you apparently do not really understand or take the time to confirm if they are true, are actually false? If you would slow down, be willing to acknowledge the truth (on specific claims), then perhaps you will find others more willing to support you in the effort to find truth and follow it wherever it may lead.

I do not claim to know it all.

No one does; the best we can do is remain willing to follow the truth (as best we can understand it) wherever it may lead. You might consider slowing down, and taking the issues and points you are trying to make one point at a time, so all can learn, rather than spamming falsehoods mixed with half-truths and some truth and never caring which is which.

[Sender]

Again rob, showing your bigotted ways. Is this what you want to show your 11 year old? Closed mindedness, being a phoney for Christ? Disrespect? Lie's, false witness. Poor child, she doesn't stand a chance save you change your ways.

Considered yourself officially ignored.

[Sender]

My answer is I have no idea.

Then maybe you should avoid making a ad hominem statement like...

Half of you guys have never read the bible yet you try to talk like you know what it says.

...when you couldn't possibly have evidence to support it. This is also addressed in the forum rules...

5. Support your assertions/arguments with evidence. Do not make blanket statements that are not supportable by logic/evidence.

Even if your statement was true, or you could show that it was, it doesn't excuse you from pasting the arguments of others that you clearly cannot understand or discuss intelligently. That's just spamming. If you would like to discuss Walt Brown's 25 reasons on this thread, then first maybe you could explain, at least, what relevance they have to the thread topic.

Why are you being so off kilter? I can tell when someone has no idea what they are talking about when it comes to the bible. In your case I do not know because I have not heard you talk about the bible.

You asked the question, that is my answer.

As far as straying OT, you are correct, I should not do that, sorry.

You should tell others that as well.

[steen]

We are all adults here save for grumpy, so let's be cordial and not condescending, shall we?

That goes both ways. Spewing ignorant drivel and claiming it truth without having bothered to learn what the facts are, that is insulting. Misrepresenting science and claiming to be truthful is insulting. You don't get respect if you dis-earn it, Sender.

Since the days of Charles Darwin, over a century ago, naturalists have generally classified living things by their appearance. A zebra and a horse are said to be more closely related than a zebra and a whale. This has been the foundation of all those evolutionary trees that claim to show that all living things have supposedly come from older, simpler living things.

In recent years some scientists have been comparing another feature that all living things share. Today scientists are able to look for similarities and differences among the biological chemicals like hemoglobin. What they are finding does not agree with the evolutionary tree in their textbooks, according to Dr. Colin Patterson of the British Museum of Natural History.

Outdated. Now they use DNA.

Among the examples Dr. Patterson offered to American evolutionary scientists was a comparison of alpha myoglobin among mammals, birds and reptiles. According to evolution, comparisons between mammals, reptiles and birds should show mammals and birds to be most distantly related. Reptiles should have more similarities to each. However, when humans were compared with crocodiles and birds, birds were closer to humans than were crocodiles, the opposite of what evolution predicts. Dr. Patterson asked, "What's going on?"

Actually, such quote-mining is dishonest. You are deliberately bearing false witness, shame on you.

While Dr. Patterson has not become a creationist, he is dissatisfied with evolution.

And that would be a lie. Why are you lying?

References: Sunderland, Luther. 1988. Darwin's Enigma. El Cajon, CA: Master Books.

And yet, Patterson has publicly condemned the creationist misrepresentation of his position. So if you got that from patterson's book, then you are lying. If you are merely regurgitating other people's lies, then you obviously have nothing to say yourself and in either case you aren't worth dealing with. You are balancing on very thin ice regarding your credibility now.

[steen]

25 Reasons to Doubt the Theory of Evolution

(With acknowledgement to Dr. Walt Brown, Center for Scientific Creation)

1. It is an established scientific fact that life cannot originate from non-living matter (the Law of Biogenesis).

Oh, goody. A copy-and-paste job where even the very frist point shows extreme ignorance, trying to hinge evolution on abiogenesis. No need to go further. Sender, you are a waste of time. Have a nice life, spewing your false witnessing and erecting your golden calf of creationism.

[steen]

Half of you guys have never read the bible yet you try to talk like you know what it says.

Besides the point that this is irrelevant to the lies and falsehoods which you are posting (Straw Man, Begging the Question, etc.), I suspect that many have read the Bible more than you give them credit for.

Many of us have read the Bible. And many of us are Christians, and are deeply disturbed over somebody like sender, who seems to love dogmatic lies so much that he willfully bears false witness, spitting God in the eye and discrediting all Christians, bearing witness to all that is ugly on dogmatic fundamentalist deceptions.

Please don't judge Christians by sender. Christians reject such wilful bearing false witness as sender has displayed. It is far removed from what we who consider ourselves Christians are adhering to.

[Sender]

steen, are you a Christian, if so how were you saved?

Lotan, question...have you ever attended a church that speaks in tongues?