Darwin and Christianity: No Contradiction

John Haught, senior research fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center and Professor at Georgetown University, gives insight into a theological approach towards evolution. Faith and evolution are not, in fact, contradictions in terms. Part of "Evolution and God: Darwin and Theology 150 Years after The Origin of Species," a forum of the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Darwin
• Christianity
• Evolution
• Theology
• Christian
• Woodstock
• Georgetown University
• faith

[gorilla199uncensored]

" Faith and evolution are not, in fact, contradictions in terms. "

When you get smashed by science, there comes a time when you just have to lie about what the bible says to pretend its true and fits in with reality.

[lizardman77]

@STEPHENWRAYSFORD33 "it's a bit bizarre." So is Dawkins himself...lol

[Valelacerte]

@STEPHENWRAYSFORD33 I do like that quote, it sums up Ken Miller's, Francis Collins', and John F. Haught's rationalisations for the existence of God. The moment God is the topic, all rigour and logic goes out the window; they seem to sense no imperative to explain exactly where or what God is, how they know, or what empirical evidence there is to support such a claim. Suddenly Miller becomes a vague, obfuscating Theologian. For these men, God is clearly exempt from the scientific method.

[Oranjeklant]

Isn't a Doctor of Theology someone who knows everything about things that do not exist ? Like a Doctor in Astrology or a Doctor in Homeopathy ?

[STEPHENWRAYSFORD33]

@flockofseagulls87 Bertrand Russell once said, "I do like clear & exact thinking, because when you allow yourself to think inexactly, your biases & your predudices come in, in all kinds of ways which you don't notice, self-deception is very easy." 'The God delusion' is writen from a biased & personal viewpoint. If you go to Dawkin's website its not about evolution anymore, it's all about Atheism. It even has a merchandise section where with t-shirts, mugs & atheist hats, it's a bit bizarre.

[colourmegone]

@flockofseagulls87 "a rather second rate philospher and he is on the fringes of the "evolutionary basis of religion" field." In your opinion that is. But then anyone who disagrees with you is no doubt on the "fringes".

In fact I have seen quite a few people who hold Phds in religion, sociology, and psychology who agree with Dr Dawkins analysis. I think you are the second rate philosopher here.

[flockofseagulls87]

Dawkins, Dennet, Harris etc writing about religion is like Bob the red sox fan writing a book about the New York Yankees. Strong personal biases are beyond obvious. It isn't hard for intelligent minds like their own to present the facts in a twisted way so that those who don't know any better (you) take it as gospel.

[flockofseagulls87]

@colourmegone When Dawkins is talking about the mechanisms of bacterial flagellum in an attempt to refute intelligent design, he is presenting an intelligent and mainstream view. Now if he or anyone else says that science shows us that religion is a virus, he is no longer being a scientist, but a rather second rate philospher and he is on the fringes of the "evolutionary basis of religion" field.

[flockofseagulls87]

@colourmegone Yes, I said those who present such a view are on the fringes of the scientific field of the evolutionary and physical basis of religious belief. I did not say that those who present such a view are on the fringes of science. There lies the difference. Dawkins is a gifted writer and evolutionary biologist and was a very fine popularizer of science before his atheist evangelical streak took over.

[flockofseagulls87]

It's called playing devil's advocate. I tend to defend viewpoints when the opposing one is biased and baseless. You made a category error based upon ignorant assumptions. And as far as I know, the United States is a very religious nation. It is also the wealthiest nation in the history of mankind with a rather religious middle class who have a considerably higher standard of living than the middle class of more "secular" nations.