|
My case against fundamentalist Christianity, by Johnny Skeptic
For reader information, I am an agnostic.
All Scriptures are from the King James Version of the Bible unless otherwise noted.
Table of contents
1. The separation of church and state
f. The spread of the Gospel message
h. The global flood and the sorting of fossils and sediments
i. Young Earth Creationism (YEC)
l. Summary and conclusion of chapter 2
1. The separation of church and state
The separation of church and state is a much debated issue in the U.S. Debates address legal issues regarding the Constitution, and moral issues regarding what government policy ought to be aside from what the Constitution says and means. For purposes of this essay, I will only discuss what government policy ought to be aside from what the Constitution says and means.
Many conservative Christians support and oppose legislations based solely upon religion. It is my position that it is immoral to support and oppose legislations based solely upon religion. If Muslims were to one day comprise the majority of voters in the U.S., and supported legislations based solely upon the Koran, surely conservative Christians would object. Therefore, I encourage conservative Christians who support and oppose legislations based solely upon religion (and that includes the issues of same-sex marriage, abortion, physician assisted suicide, and allowing openly homosexual people to join the military) to support and oppose legislations only if some of their reasons do not have anything to do with religion. After all, in the New International Version of the Bible, Matthew 7:12 says “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
Regarding allowing openly homosexual people to join the military, I invite readers to visit the IIDB (Internet Infidels Discussion Board), which is a part of the Secular Web, and read a thread (topics are called threads at the IIDB) regarding this issue. The link is http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=238648. Regarding the issue of physician assisted suicide, I invite readers to read a thread at http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=226918. Regarding the issue of the separation of church and state, I invite readers to read a thread at http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=237228. Anyone can join the IIDB at no cost and make posts in existing threads, or start their own threads. Moderators enforce proper behavior. There are forums at the IIDB where non-religious topics can be discussed. Since the Secular Web and the IIDB are worldwide, readers and participants derive benefits from the diverse audience.
Back To Top
Most Christians place great emphasis upon faith, but a number of Scriptures put great emphasis upon tangible, firsthand evidence. Consider the following Scriptures:
Consider the following Scriptures that emphasize faith:
Matthew 14:28-31 “And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water. And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus. But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?” Matthew 17:20 “And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.” Mark 16:14
“Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.”
John 20:24-29
“But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”
Hebrews 11:1
“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
Consider the following Scriptures that emphasize faith AND tangible firsthand evidence:
John 2:23
“Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.”
John 3:2
“The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.”
John 10:37-38
“If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.”
John 11:43-45
"And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go. Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him."
John 20:30-31
“And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book. But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.”
Those texts show that some people would not accept Jesus based upon his words alone, and that he provided them with tangible, firsthand evidence that convinced them to accept his words. Even after the Holy Spirit supposedly came to the church, in the NIV, Acts 14:3 says “So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders.” Considering that Jesus had performed many miracles in front of thousands of people, including many miracles that were not recorded, and had appeared to hundreds of people after he rose from the dead, and had criticized his disciples for their unbelief, and that there were thousands of surviving eyewitnesses who were still around, and that the Holy Spirit had come to the church, I find it to be quite odd that God provided even more tangible, firsthand evidence. In my opinion, this brings into question the truthfulness of the claims.
Now imagine what would have happened if there had been 10,000 only begotten Sons of Gods all over the world instead of only one only begotten Son of God, and had performed miracles all over the world, and had been crucified, and had risen from the dead. In such a case, in for instance the first century, the Christian church would have been much larger than it was. Surely the Middle East was not the only place in the entire world where people placed great emphasis upon tangible, firsthand evidence.
Back To Top
Kosmin and Lachman wrote a book
that is titled 'One Nation Under God.' Consider the
following from the cover:
Kosmin and Lachman provide a lot of documented evidence that shows that geography, family, race, ethnicity, gender, and age are important factors regarding why people believe what they believe. I will discuss each of those six factors. Although the authors did not intend for their book to be used to attack Christianity, that is what I will do. If the universe is naturalistic, Kosmin’s and Lachman’s research makes sense. If a God exists who is not the God of the Bible, and has chosen to mimic a naturalistic universe, Kosmin’s and Lachman’s research also makes sense. I do not believe that it is likely that a God who wanted people to believe that he exists, and wanted people to accept him, would mimic a naturalistic universe in many predictable ways, thereby needlessly undermining his attempts to try to convince people to believe that he exists, and to accept him.
Kosmin and Lachman:
Chapter 3 - 'Geography is Destiny.'
“We would not claim to explain the spiritual disposition of the inhabitants of a locale in terms of the natural environment. Yet it must have some impact. The geographic diversity of the United States may in some way be reflected in religious preferences. Surely a relationship exists between the particular local environment and the regional differences in religious preference among the Pacific Coast , the Rocky Mountain states , the South, the Northeast, and the Midwest . A warm climate and plentiful supplies of surface water in lakes and rivers undoubtedly encourages the practice of adult baptism by immersions in the southern states. Can it be an accident that the airwaves of the south are full of gospel country music? A 1991 Gallup Youth Survey showed that 94% of teenagers living in the American Midwest believe in Heaven, compared with only 84% in the East. Teens living in the South are more likely to read the Bible (55%) than those in the eastern (31%) or western (45%) United States .
“When we refer to the geography of American religion, we are really speaking about social rather than physical scenery. Certain locations and habitats attract certain types of people and religion is an activity practiced in groups.......People literally search for compatible life-styles, and so a sorting process operates as to where people live and with whom they mix. As the figures mentioned above show, peer-group influences are important, especially on the young. The peer group perpetuates traditional and reinforces majoritarian tendencies, which in turn produce the regional religious cultures we will describe.
“Until the 1960s, the South was the region most removed from the mainstream of American industrial society. Unlike in the West, few newcomers entered the South, and immigrants from overseas with religious influence were few and far between in the region. "Baptist culture was almost palpable," as the University of Chicago religious scholar Martin Marty has aptly stated. in the early part of this century, the First Baptist Church in a southern community often owned the town's swimming pool and other recreation facilities. The Baptist student union dominated the campus life of the colleges. Huge evangelistic rallies competed for attendance with high-school football. Remarkably, the emergence of the "New South" over the last few decades has not altered things very much, as residents of the South are still more church-oriented than people in other sections of the country.
“The West and new religious movements
“The relative lack of older people also explains why the frontier served as the breeding ground for the religious experimentation we saw was a particular feature of California . As the sociologists [Rodney] Stark and Bainbridge have stated, the West is ‘especially hospitable to novel and exotic religions.’ The West has cults, or, more politely perhaps, ‘New Religious Movements’ (NRMs), while the South and Midwest have sects, enthusiastic offshoots of established churches. As some would see it, eccentrics of all description go west
“One example of the NRM-frontier phenomenon in recent Oregon history was Rajneeshpuram. Based upon his teachings of the guru Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, this movement revolved around a mixture of Indian mystical ontology, Western psychotherapy, and New Age psychology. It attracted social experimenters working on self-improvement. Its devotees were mainly baby boomers born around 1950, who by 1980 could be described as veterans of the hippie generation.”
Johnny Skeptic: It is quite important to note that geography plays an important role regarding why people believe what they believe across all cultures, which is to be expected if the universe is naturalistic, or if a God exists who is not the God of the Bible and has chosen to mimic a naturalistic universe.
Back To Top
Consider the following:
Kosmin and Lachman:
“Statistical evidence supports the existence of a link between the nuclear family and religious participation. The birth of a child often leads to a baptism, christening, circumcision, or naming ceremony. All evidence suggests that married people increase their religious participation and often join churches, synagogues, or temples if and when they have children of school age.”
Johnny Skeptic: Since the important influence of family regarding what people believe is so obvious, there is no need for me to discuss any more of what Kosmin and Lachman said about that issue. Suffice it to say that if the universe is naturalistic, the important influence of family regarding what people believe is understandable. In addition, if some other God exists, and chose to mimic a naturalistic universe, the important influence of family regarding what people believe is understandable.
Back To Top
Consider the following:
Kosmin and Lachman:
“In no area of American and social life are stereotypes so far from the truth as in the relationship of religion and ethnic origin. As we shall see, growing ethnic diversity has not led to religious fragmentation. On the contrary, religious identification and belief tend to crosscut racial and ethnic divisions among Americans and to provide a largely unappreciated level of social cohesions and consensus on core values. In fact, for many new immigrants the church rather than the public school is the new melting pot aiding their acculturation into their new society.”
Johnny Skeptic: If the universe is naturalistic, or if some other God exists and chose to mimic a naturalistic universe, the important influences of race and ethnicity regarding what people believe are understandable.
Back To Top
Consider the following:
Kosmin and Lachman
Male
Age group
18-24 81.1% 25-44 81.3% 45-64 87.6% 65-74 88.4% 75+ 84.1%
Female
Age group
18-24 86.5% 25-44 87.9% 45-64 92.4% 65-74 92.7% 75+ 92.7%
Johnny Skeptic: It is important to note that the percentages of women who are Christians are significantly higher than the percentages of men who are Christians.
Consider the following:
Kosmin and Lachman:
“It appears that Christianity is especially associated with female spirituality. Adolescent girls exhibit stronger belief in the inerrancy of the Bible, and higher rates of participation in religious services. One explanation may be that women are more religious than men because of their different standing in society, reflecting a fundamental division of labor by sex. Religious and family spheres in the West were feminized and separated from the mainstream workplace activities, which were male-dominated. Another interpretation has it that men are less religious than women because of what psychologists refer to as sex-type personalities. In this view, being religious is consistent with a feminine orientation, which includes a religious experience of ‘otherness,’ a personal experience of ‘connectedness,’ and a sharing of the ‘WE-ness’ of a religious community. In the jargon of the men's movement, being religious is not conducive to maleness since it demands submission and is more left-brain-oriented.
“Participation in churches has always been lower for men in all major Protestant and Catholic denominations in America . Historically, European Christianity, with its experience of feudal society and monarchy, has shown antipathy to maleness - the heroic, the hunter, the achiever, activism, and assertiveness.”
Aside from Kosmin and Lachman, consider the following:
http://fazeer.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/why-are-women-more-religious-than-men/
“Bryan Caplan points to a fascinating survey by Rodney Stark and Alan Miller on the difference between men and women in their religious beliefs. Two striking facts emerge: (1) across all cultures, women are more religious than men, (2) in the least traditional cultures (i.e. those who approve of single motherhood, have with a high abortion rate, low fertility, and high female labor force participation) the gap between men and women is wider. How can this be explained?
“One can think of three approaches to religion. Sociologists focus on the role played by religion in society. For Durkheim, religion is what binds a moral society together, while for Marx, it is the opium of the mass. For Weber, on the other hand, there is no universal law that govern society in the way there are laws that govern nature. Hence, religion stems from the individuals who comprise society and the importance they attach to things such as magic, charismatic individuals and ideas, spirits, ecstatic feelings, symbolism, the soul and supernatural powers in their lives.
“Psychologists focus on the psychological needs for human to believe. Freud identifies three such needs, while tracking the development of an individual. A baby is born ‘incomplete’ (as opposed to chicks, say, who can walk and start pecking early enough) and, as such, undergoes a dependence phase upon others, namely parents. While awaiting the attention of the latter, the baby develops a state of “blissful hallucination,” which is perpetuated later in life through religious beliefs. As a child leaves childhood, he leaves a world of affection and fairy tales to fall in the cruel, real world. Religious beliefs is an attempt to recreate this fair, yet magical world. The adult also needs to create a utopic world where there is a sense and order to things.
“Given their stance, sociologists (apart from Durkheim, perhaps) and psychologists generally tend to view religion as a receding force in the face of scientific advancement and mass education. There is evidence that support this: apart from a few outliers (the US being the most obvious one), as countries advance (technologically and in terms of educational attainment), their citizens tend to lose in religiosity. But, paradoxically, Robert Barro and Rachel McClearly have found that religiosity is an important contributor to economic growth.
“I’m not quite sure though how sociologists and psychologists would view Stark and Miller’s gender gap in religiosity. There is indeed a gender gap in educational attainment which may be a factor. But then why are women much more religious than men in modern societies where this education gap is narrower?”
Johnny Skeptic: If the universe is naturalistic, or if a God exists who is not the God of the Bible and has chosen to mimic a naturalistic universe, genetic and sociological factors would account for the fact that the percentages of women who are religious across all cultures are significantly higher than the percentage of men who are religious.
Back To Top
Consider the same statistics that I mentioned previously:
Male
Age group
18-24 81.1% 25-44 81.3% 45-64 87.6% 65-74 88.4% 75+ 84.1%
Female
Age group
18-24 86.5% 25-44 87.9% 45-64 92.4% 65-74 92.7% 75+ 92.7%
Johnny Skeptic:
If the universe is naturalistic, or if a God exists who is not the God of the Bible and has chosen to mimic a naturalistic universe, since it is well-known that elderly people are much less likely to change their worldviews than younger people are, the statistics are understandable.
Back To Top
f. The spread of the Gospel message
If the universe is naturalistic, or if a God exists who is not the God of the Bible and has chosen to mimic a naturalistic universe, the only way that a person could hear the Gospel message would be if another person told them about it. As far as I know, no one has ever heard the Gospel message unless another person told them about it. This same argument applies to all religions that have books. If a God exists, he might partly use humans to let people know about him, but if a God does not exist, or if a God exists who is not the God of the Bible and has chosen to mimic a naturalistic universe, the only way that a person could hear the Gospel message would be if another person told them about it.
Do Christians consider the spread of the Gospel message to be more important than the spread of a cure for cancer? If a Christian discovered a cure for cancer, and was able to make the cure available to everyone in the world who had cancer within one week, would he do so, or would he choose to allow the existing means of distributing cures for diseases to distribute the cure, which would result in needless suffering? Does God consider the spread of the Gospel message to be more important than the spread of a cure for cancer?
If the universe is naturalistic, or if a God exists who is not the God of the Bible and has chosen to mimic a naturalistic universe, the only way that people could obtain enough food to eat would be through human effort. If a God exists, he might partly use humans to distribute food to people, but if a God does not exist, or if a God exists who is not the God of the Bible and has chosen to mimic a naturalistic universe, the only way that people could get enough food to eat would be through human effort.
Back To Top
h. The global flood and the sorting of fossils and sediments
If the universe is naturalistic, or if another God created the universe, and for some reason decided to mimic a naturalistic universe, that explains why fossils and sediments are sorted in ways that are convenient for skeptics, and why many Christians do not believe that a global flood occurred. Even some evangelical Christian geologists do not believe that a global flood occurred. If a God exists, he would certainly have the option of sorting fossils and sediments in ways that are convenient for skeptics, and have convinced many Christians that a global flood did not occur, but I do not believe that there is sufficient evidence that a God who wanted to convince people to believe that he inspired the Bible would do that.
Consider the following:
http://members.shaw.ca/tfrisen/evolu...ism/flood.html
“Davis Young is a working geologist who also is an Evangelical Christian. He has personal doubts about some aspects of evolution, but he makes a devastating case against ‘Flood Geology.’ He writes (Christianity and the Age of the Earth, p. 163): ‘The maintenance of modern creationism and Flood geology not only is useless apologetically with unbelieving scientists, it is harmful. Although many who have no scientific training have been swayed by creationist arguments, the unbelieving scientist will reason that a Christianity that believes in such nonsense must be a religion not worthy of his interest...Modern creationism in this sense is apologetically and evangelistically ineffective. It could even be a hindrance to the gospel. Another possible danger is that in presenting the gospel to the lost and in defending God's truth we ourselves will seem to be false. It is time for Christian people to recognize that the defense of this modern, young-Earth, Flood-geology creationism is simply not truthful. It is simply not in accord with the facts that God has given. Creationism must be abandoned by Christians before harm is done.......’”
Back To Top i. Young Earth Creationism (YEC) A lot of fundamentalist Christians believe that the earth is 8,000 years or less old, and that dinosaurs did not predate humans. Two of the leading fundamentalist Christian organizations who promote YEC are the Institute for Creation Research (http://www.icr.org/), and Answers in Genesis, (http://www.answersingenesis.org/). One of the biggest problems that those organizations have is that a large percentage of fundamentalist Christians believe that the earth is old. Consider the following: Consider the following: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html “Dr. Wiens has a PhD in Physics, with a minor in Geology. His PhD thesis was on isotope ratios in meteorites, including surface exposure dating. He was employed at Caltech's Division of Geological & Planetary Sciences at the time of writing the first edition. He is presently employed in the Space & Atmospheric Sciences Group at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. “Dr. Wiens received a bachelor's degree in Physics from Wheaton College and a PhD from the University of Minnesota , doing research on meteorites and moon rocks. He spent two years at Scripps Institution of Oceanography ( La Jolla , CA ) where he studied isotopes of helium, neon, argon, and nitrogen in terrestrial rocks. He worked seven years in the Geological and Planetary Sciences Division at Caltech, where he continued the study of meteorites and worked for NASA on the feasibility of a space mission to return solar wind samples to Earth for study. Dr. Wiens wrote the first edition of this paper while in Pasadena . In 1997 he joined the Space and Atmospheric Sciences group at Los Alamos National Laboratory, where he has been in charge of building and flying the payload for the solar-wind mission, as well as developing new instruments for other space missions. He has published over twenty scientific research papers and has also published articles in Christian magazines. Dr. Wiens became a Christian at a young age, and has been a member of Mennonite Brethren, General Conference Baptist, and Conservative Congregational, and Vineyard denominations. He does not see a conflict between science in its ideal form (the study of God's handiwork) and the Bible, or between miracles on the one hand, and an old Earth on the other.” Johnny Skeptic: As the article shows, Dr. Wiens is a conservative Christian, and a distinguished scientist. Dr. Roger C. Wiens: “Radiometric dating--the process of determining the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements--has been in widespread use for over half a century. There are over forty such techniques, each using a different radioactive element or a different way of measuring them. It has become increasingly clear that these radiometric dating techniques agree with each other and as a whole, present a coherent picture in which the Earth was created a very long time ago. Further evidence comes from the complete agreement between radiometric dates and other dating methods such as counting tree rings or glacier ice core layers. Many Christians have been led to distrust radiometric dating and are completely unaware of the great number of laboratory measurements that have shown these methods to be consistent. Many are also unaware that Bible-believing Christians are among those actively involved in radiometric dating. “This paper describes in relatively simple terms how a number of the dating techniques work, how accurately the half-lives of the radioactive elements and the rock dates themselves are known, and how dates are checked with one another. In the process the paper refutes a number of misconceptions prevalent among Christians today. This paper is available on the web via the American Scientific Affiliation and related sites to promote greater understanding and wisdom on this issue, particularly within the Christian community. “[YEC's claim that] different dating techniques usually give conflicting results. This is not true at all. The fact that dating techniques most often agree with each other is why scientists tend to trust them in the first place. Nearly every college and university library in the country has periodicals such as Science, Nature, and specific geology journals that give the results of dating studies. The public is usually welcome to (and should!) browse in these libraries. So the results are not hidden; people can go look at the results for themselves. Over a thousand research papers are published a year on radiometric dating, essentially all in agreement. Besides the scientific periodicals that carry up-to-date research reports, specific suggestions are given below for further reading, both for textbooks, non-classroom books, and web resources.” Johnny Skeptic: consider the following: http://www.reasons.org/resources/apo...rs/index.shtml “Notable Christians Open to an Old-universe, Old-earth Perspective “The following individuals—respected authors, Bible scholars, scientists, pastors, linguists, and more—hold to a diversity of views on the timing of God’s creation. And yet all have affirmed, in documented sources, that an ancient universe and Earth (including big bang cosmology) pose no threat to Christian orthodoxy, but rather may be considered plausible and valid interpretations, even literal interpretations, of the biblical text. Not one sees the question of age as a crucial doctrinal issue. John Ankerberg Gleason Archer John Battle Michael Behe William Jennings Bryan Walter Bradley Jack Collins Chuck Colson Paul Copan William Lane Craig Norman Geisler Robert Godfrey Guillermo Gonzales Hank Hannegraff Jack Hayford Fred Heeren Charles Hodge Walter Kaiser Greg Koukl C. S. Lewis Paul Little Patricia Mondore J. P. Moreland Robert Newman Greg Neyman Mark Noll Nancy Pearcey Perry Phillips William Phillips Mike Poole Bernard Ramm Jay Richards Hugh Ross Fritz Schaefer Francis Schaeffer C. I. Scofield Chuck Smith Jr. David Snoke Lee Strobel Ken Taylor B. B. Warfield”
Johnny Skeptic: If the universe is naturalistic, or if another God created the universe, and for some reason decided to mimic a naturalistic universe, that explains why there is a lot of agreement between different kinds of dating methods that are convenient for skeptics, and why many Christians believe that the earth is old. If a God exists, he would certainly have the options of making different kinds of dating methods agree that the earth is old, and convincing lots of Christians that the earth is old, but I do not believe that there is sufficient evidence that a God who wanted to convince people to believe that he inspired the Bible would do that.
Back To Top A large percentage of fundamentalist Christians believe that the story of Adam and Eve is true, but many prominent fundamentalist Christians who are scientists disagree. Consider the following list of prominent fundamentalist Christians who are scientists and believe that God has partially used evolution to create humans: http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/evolut...utionists.html DR. RICHARD G. COLLING Dr. Colling is a fundamentalist Christian and chair of Biology at a fundamentalist Christian college, and also author of Random Designer: Created From Chaos To Connect With Creator. According to Dr. Colling, "It pains me to suggest that my religious brothers are telling falsehoods" when they say evolutionary theory is "in crisis" and claim that there is widespread skepticism about it among scientists. "Such statements are blatantly untrue," he argues. "Evolution has stood the test of time and considerable scrutiny... What the designer designed is the random-design process," or Darwinian evolution, Colling says. "God devised these natural laws, and uses evolution to accomplish his goals." ["Teaching Evolution at Christian College " by Sharon Begley, The Wall Street Journal ( December 31, 2004 )] DR. DENIS O. LAMOUREUX Dr. Lamoureux is a biologist/evolutionist and Evangelical Christian. He was involved in a written debate with Phillip E. Johnson, the lawyer and advocate of the "Intelligent Design hypothesis," which was published in book form as Darwinism Defeated? A debate between Phillip E. Johnson and Denis O. Lamoureux. DR. KEITH B. MILLER Dr. Miller is professor of geology at Kansas State University (not to be confused with Dr. Kenneth Miller) He edited, Perspectives on an Evolving Creation, (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003) that included essays by the following Christians: Terry Gray ( Colorado State ) James Hurd ( Bethel College ) Ted Davis ( Messiah College ) Robin Collins ( Messiah College ) David Wilcox (Eastern College) Mark Noll ( Wheaton College ) Jeff Greenberg ( Wheaton College ) Laurie Braaten ( Judson College ) John Munday, Jr. ( Regent Univ. ) Loren Haarsma ( Calvin College ) Howard Van Till ( Calvin College ) Deborah Haarsma ( Calvin College ) Warren Brown (Fuller Theological) David Campbell ( University of Alabama ) Jennifer Wiseman (Johns Hopkins Univ.) Conrad Hyers ( Gustavus Adolphus College ) George Murphy (Trinity Lutheran Seminary) Bob Russell (Center for Theology and Natural Sciences) DR. DAVID N. LIVINGSTONE Dr. Livingstone is the author of, Darwin 's Forgotten Defenders: The Encounter between Evangelical Theology and Evolutionary Thought (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987) DR. HOWARD J. VAN TILL Dr. Van Till is a Professor of Astronomy at Calvin College, and is the author of 1) The Fourth Day: What the Bible and the Heavens Are Telling Us about the Creation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986), 2) Science Held Hostage, and 3) "The Creation: Intelligently Designed or Optimally Equipped?" Theology Today 55 (1998): 344-364 DR. DAVID L. WILCOX Dr. Wilcox has a Ph.D. in Population Genetics, and is Professor of Biology at Eastern College , St. David's , PA. He is the author of God and Evolution (Nov. 2004) LARRY ARNHARDT Larry Arnhart is a Christian and also Professor of Political Science at Northern Illinois University . He is the author of Darwinian Natural Right: The Biological Ethics of Human Nature; and, Darwinian Conservatism (2005), whose blurb reads, "The Left has traditionally assumed that human nature is so malleable, so perfectible, that it can be shaped in almost any direction. Conservatives object, arguing that social order arises not from rational planning but from the spontaneous order of instincts and habits. Darwinian biology sustains conservative social thought by showing how the human capacity for spontaneous order arises from social instincts and a moral sense shaped by natural selection in human evolutionary history." Arnhardt has also debated I.D.ists at their conferences DR. FRANCIS COLLINS Dr. Francis Collins is Director of the Human Genome Project. Collins has stated: "I am unaware of any irreconcilable conflict between scientific knowledge about evolution and the idea of a creator God; why couldn't God have used the mechanism of evolution to create?...In my field, biology, because of the creationists the standard assumption is that anyone who has faith has gone soft in the head. When scientists like me admit they are believers, the reaction from colleagues is 'How did this guy get tenure?'" (Gregg Easterbrook, "Science and God: A Warming Trend?" Science, Vol. 277, No. 5328, Aug. 15 1997 , p. 890-893) DR. JOHN POLKINGHORNE Dr. Polkinghorne is an ordained Anglican priest, former Cambridge professor of theoretical physics. He is also the author of 1) Quarks, Chaos, and Christianity: Questions to Science and Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1994), 2) Science and Theology: An Introduction (London: SPCK, 1998), and 3) The Work of Love: Creation as Kenosis (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001) A book of essays by assorted theistic evolutionists that explores the Biblical concept of kenosis (self-emptying) and the doctrine of creation in light of evolutionary thought. DR. DONALD NIELD Dr. Nield is Professor of Engineering Science at Auckland University , and author of God Created the Heavens and The Earth. DR. GRAEME FINLAY DR. Finlay is a Cell Biologist who lectures in General Pathology in the Department of Molecular Medicine and Pathology at Auckland University, and is the author of 1) A Seamless Web: Science and Faith; Evolving Creation, and 2) God's Books: Genetics and Genesis. DR. DENIS EDWARDS Dr. Edwards is the author of 1) The God of Evolution: A Trinitarian Theology (New York: Paulist, 1999), and 2) Jesus and the Cosmos (New York: Paulist, 1991) DR. JOHN F. HAUGHT Dr. Haught is the author of 1) Deeper Than Darwin: The Prospect for Religion in the Age of Evolution ( Boulder , CO : Westview, 2003), and 2) God After Darwin: A Theology of Evolution ( Boulder , CO : Westview, 2000). DR. STANLEY L. JAKI Dr. Jaki is a Benedictine priest with doctorates in both theology and physics, and the author of 1) Cosmos and Creator (Scottish Academic Press, l979; Regnery Gateway, 1980), An analysis of the bearing of modern cosmological theories on the Christian dogma of the creation of the universe, followed by the history of that dogma, its philosophical presuppositions, and its relation to evolutionary theories of man, 2) Genesis 1 Through the Ages (London: Thomas More Press, 1992) with illustrations. A history of the interpretations of Genesis 1 from biblical times to the present day, with an emphasis on the ever-present lures of concordism. Eight lectures delivered April 25- May 9, 1992, in New York on behalf of Wethersfield Institute, and 3) Bible and Science (Front Royal, VA: Christendom Press, 1996) An analysis of the biblical world view and basic Biblical propositions insofar as they relate to science and to its history. CHRISTIAN WEBSITES THAT DEFEND EVOLUTION John Polkinghorne's web site with helpful links. Darwin 's Forgotten Christian Defenders Three Cheers For Christian Evolutionists From Abandoning Geocentrism To Accepting Evolution: A "Liberal Trend" Among Evangelical Christians? Evolving Interpretations of the Bible's "Cosmological Teachings"--Or--Does the Bible "Teach Science?" DWISE1'S Creation/Evolution Page (On the Danger of Losing One's Faith Due to Fallacious Creationist Arguments, and why Christians must remain open to theistic evolution) Christian Evolutionists (and lots of old-earth arguments, including testimonies of former Young-Earthers) Dr. Robert J. Schneider's Science and Faith essays Dr. Allan H. Harvey's essays Dr. Anthony Garrett (former atheist and member of Australia 's skeptic society who became a Christian evolutionist) John D. Callahan (author of Science and Christianity, and his debate with YEC Kent Hovind is on the web) ChristiansForEvolution newsgroup The Pope's Message On Evolution Fine-Tuners Who Reject I.D. Arguments Howard J. Van Till (Professor Emeritus of Physics and Astronomy at Calvin College ) Carl Drews Christian Evolutionism at the ASA website (American Scientific Association, an organization of Evangelical Christians who are scientists, includes both old-earth creationists and theistic evolutionists) Glenn Morton Stephen Meyers's website Humans and chimps share an extensive collection of particular genetic markers. For example, our DNA shares with that of other primates a vast catalogue of genetic parasites--several million in number, comprising 50% of the human genome--that provide a consistent outline of primate evolutionary relationships. Remarkable studies using the 'Alu' genetic parasite as an evolutionary marker have been done by Salem A-H, Ray DA, Xing J et al (2003). Alu elements and hominid phylogenetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100, 12787; Xing JC, Salem AH, Hedges DJ et al (2003). Comprehensive analysis of two Alu Yd subfamilies. J Mol Evol 57 Suppl 1, S76. The shared history to which such common markers testify establishes conclusively that human and chimp genomes have been copied from the same line of ancestors. It is a conclusion that we must live with. And when the details of the chimp genome are published with great fanfare in the scientific literature and the popular media, it is a conclusion for which we must give a Christian interpretation. Back To Top
l. Summary and conclusion of chapter 2. If the universe is naturalistic, or if some other God exists who chose to mimic the ways that things would be if the universe is naturalistic, 1) all religions that have books would be spread entirely by word of mouth, which is the case 2) humans would only able to obtain food through human effort no matter what their worldview is, which is the case, 3) it would not be surprising that the percentage of women who are theists is significantly higher than the percentage of men who are theists in every culture, which is the case, 4) it would not be surprising that the percentages of elderly people who change their worldviews are much smaller than the percentages of younger people who change their worldviews, which is the case, 5) hurricanes would kill people, animals, and plants, and destroy property as if there were not any differences between them, which appears to the case, 6) all tangible benefits would be indiscriminately distributed at random according to the laws of physics without any regard for a person's needs, requests, or worldview, and the only benefits that anyone could ask God for and expect to receive would be subjective spiritual/emotional benefits, which appears to be the case 7) it would not be surprising that fossils and sediments are sorted in ways that have convinced the vast majority of geologists, including some evangelical Christian geologists, that a global flood did not occur, which is the case, 8) it would not be surprising that humans are very similar genetically and anatomically to other primates, which is the case, and 9) no religious book would contain any indisputable prophecies, which is the case.
|