Christian Evolutionists (original) (raw)

	[16 Jun 2006\|09:32pm]
[ mood \| contemplative ] Hello people,I was very surprised to find a site like this!I've been wondering for some time whether it waspossible to be Christian and believe in evolution and what churches accept evolution if any?I am not totally religious, I used to befor a while but now I just want to have myown interpretations on the bible and other spiritualbeliefs that I have which of course conflicts with the beliefs of my church and others Christian groups I am in contact with.
5 comments\|post comment

[16 Jun 2006|09:32pm]

[ **mood** |

contemplative ] Hello people,I was very surprised to find a site like this!I've been wondering for some time whether it waspossible to be Christian and believe in evolution and what churches accept evolution if any?I am not totally religious, I used to befor a while but now I just want to have myown interpretations on the bible and other spiritualbeliefs that I have which of course conflicts with the beliefs of my church and others Christian groups I am in contact with.

5 comments|post comment

When I'm annoyed, I make long posts!	[06 Apr 2006\|01:08pm]
I work as a cataloger in a university library so I get to see a lot of good quality books. I also see some crappy ones. Here's one book that really pissed me off, called "Divided we stand: the rejection of American culture since the 1960s." ( Read more...Collapse )So anyway. I think that people who believe that science is all there is therefore there is no God, and people who write books like the one I just talked about, are making the exact same mistake. They are using the same misunderstanding of science and religion, and thinking that there are only two choices.
5 comments\|post comment

When I'm annoyed, I make long posts!

[06 Apr 2006|01:08pm]

I work as a cataloger in a university library so I get to see a lot of good quality books. I also see some crappy ones. Here's one book that really pissed me off, called "Divided we stand: the rejection of American culture since the 1960s." **( Read more...Collapse )**So anyway. I think that people who believe that science is all there is therefore there is no God, and people who write books like the one I just talked about, are making the exact same mistake. They are using the same misunderstanding of science and religion, and thinking that there are only two choices.

5 comments|post comment

Not just Christians...	[20 Jan 2006\|07:28pm]
A friend tipped me off to this. BTW, ISKCON = International Society of Krishna Consciousness = Hare Krishnas.Vedic Creationism in America, from "Frontline, India's National Magazine."Earlier this year, the Hare Krishnas filed an amicus curiae brief supporting I.D.-creationists. The case in question involved a school district in Cobb County, which wanted to put "warning stickers" on biology textbooks, as if books teaching Darwin's theory were injurious to the mental health of the students.... [T]he Hare Krishnas appealed to the court to keep the anti-Darwinian warning stickers. As the stickers only attack Darwin without endorsing a specifically Christian God, Hare Krishnas see them as an opportunity to introduce Vedic creationism into American schools. They know that once one religion gets its foot inside the door, all others will automatically get equal time to bring in their own creation stories and cosmologies into science classrooms in America.
1 comment\|post comment

Not just Christians...

[20 Jan 2006|07:28pm]

A friend tipped me off to this. BTW, ISKCON = International Society of Krishna Consciousness = Hare Krishnas.Vedic Creationism in America, from "Frontline, India's National Magazine."Earlier this year, the Hare Krishnas filed an amicus curiae brief supporting I.D.-creationists. The case in question involved a school district in Cobb County, which wanted to put "warning stickers" on biology textbooks, as if books teaching Darwin's theory were injurious to the mental health of the students.... [T]he Hare Krishnas appealed to the court to keep the anti-Darwinian warning stickers. As the stickers only attack Darwin without endorsing a specifically Christian God, Hare Krishnas see them as an opportunity to introduce Vedic creationism into American schools. They know that once one religion gets its foot inside the door, all others will automatically get equal time to bring in their own creation stories and cosmologies into science classrooms in America.

1 comment|post comment

ID resources	[14 Jan 2006\|08:18pm]
So I remember a long time ago, around the time I was getting ready to graduate with my bachelor's, that some new variant on Creationism called "Intelligent Design" had a book or two. I ignored it.Now that ID is the New Creationism (you wouldn't even know there ever were six-day literalists anymore), I'm wondering: what resources should a time-strapped evolutionist pick up to bone up on ID? I'd like to refute it a little more, ahem, intelligently.
3 comments\|post comment

ID resources

[14 Jan 2006|08:18pm]

So I remember a long time ago, around the time I was getting ready to graduate with my bachelor's, that some new variant on Creationism called "Intelligent Design" had a book or two. I ignored it.Now that ID is the New Creationism (you wouldn't even know there ever were six-day literalists anymore), I'm wondering: what resources should a time-strapped evolutionist pick up to bone up on ID? I'd like to refute it a little more, ahem, intelligently.

3 comments|post comment

	[27 Nov 2005\|02:50am]
Charles Darwin was Newsweek's recent cover boy, accompanied by a nice article. Did anyone else read it? =)
1 comment\|post comment

	[10 Nov 2005\|10:03am]
I just got bored at work, so I wandered over to the book piles that students were using for their research papers. One was called Evolution: Fact or Fiction? I thumbed through it, and noticed that all the creation chapters were written by such respected "scientists" as Duane Gish, Henry Morris, William Paley, and William Jennings Bryan. The evolution chapters were argued by the likes of Richard Dawkins. Well enough.Then I noticed at the front of the book a listing of the other titles in the "Fact or Fiction?" series: UFOs. Vampires. Ghosts & Poltergeists. ESP. Black Magic. Ape-Men. Lake Monsters. Alien Abductions. Werewolves.In complete disbelief, I went to the publisher's website, and found this description of the series: Do witches have the power to influence events? Can psychic mediums communicate with the dead? Are UFOs spacecraft from other planets? These and other questions come under scrutiny in Greenhaven Press's Fact or Fiction series. These anthologies expose the occult, the paranormal, and the mysterious to the light of critical thinking. Yeahhh.... could someone explain to me how evolution is "occult" or "paranormal"? Or even "mysterious"? This book would have fit right into the series if the title was "Creationism: Fact or Fiction." That would have belonged appropriately in the realm of people defending ridiculous, nonsensical ideas. Oops, I mean "paranormal." Then again, if we're redefining science to include things beyond the natural, maybe paranormal fits right in. Paranatural?
3 comments\|post comment

[10 Nov 2005|10:03am]

I just got bored at work, so I wandered over to the book piles that students were using for their research papers. One was called Evolution: Fact or Fiction? I thumbed through it, and noticed that all the creation chapters were written by such respected "scientists" as Duane Gish, Henry Morris, William Paley, and William Jennings Bryan. The evolution chapters were argued by the likes of Richard Dawkins. Well enough.Then I noticed at the front of the book a listing of the other titles in the "Fact or Fiction?" series: UFOs. Vampires. Ghosts & Poltergeists. ESP. Black Magic. Ape-Men. Lake Monsters. Alien Abductions. Werewolves.In complete disbelief, I went to the publisher's website, and found this description of the series: Do witches have the power to influence events? Can psychic mediums communicate with the dead? Are UFOs spacecraft from other planets? These and other questions come under scrutiny in Greenhaven Press's Fact or Fiction series. These anthologies expose the occult, the paranormal, and the mysterious to the light of critical thinking. Yeahhh.... could someone explain to me how evolution is "occult" or "paranormal"? Or even "mysterious"? This book would have fit right into the series if the title was "Creationism: Fact or Fiction." That would have belonged appropriately in the realm of people defending ridiculous, nonsensical ideas. Oops, I mean "paranormal." Then again, if we're redefining science to include things beyond the natural, maybe paranormal fits right in. Paranatural?

3 comments|post comment

Evolution Lecture: Body-Soul Dualism	[23 Oct 2005\|09:09pm]
Here's a continuation of my post on the lecture about evolution and ethics. This edition is light on the notes and heavy on my own reflections.Though the lecture was explicitly not aimed at criticizing or undermining evolution theory itself, I believe I was nevertheless the only person there (lecturer included) who accepts the theory. ( It's body-soul dualism.Collapse )
post comment

	[22 Oct 2005\|03:11pm]
Just a head's up: this week's Rolling Stone (Bono cover) and this month's Esquire (Jessica Biels on the cover) both have excellent articles on "intelligent design" versus evolution. The Esquire article is especially good, delving into the philosophical and theological problems with creationism, as well as the scientific failings.
1 comment\|post comment

Introduction and notes from a lecture	[19 Oct 2005\|12:39pm]
[ mood** \| nerdy ] Hello, I just found this community and I think it's for me! I'm a faithful Catholic with a B.S. in Zoology who has argued for evolution since my college days.I went to a lecture put on by my archdiocese called "Evolution and Ethics" (or something similar). I posted extensive notes and commentary in my journal, but it's friends-only, so I will post it here. With an LJ-cut, of course. This is the first of three posts I've made (so far, at least) on the lecture.Since this post consists of notes, it will likely read as being a little unfocused; it's not an essay, just ... notes, with commentary thrown in. I decided to break it into several posts.( Notes Collapse )**
1 comment\|post comment

Introduction and notes from a lecture

[19 Oct 2005|12:39pm]

[ mood** | nerdy ] Hello, I just found this community and I think it's for me! I'm a faithful Catholic with a B.S. in Zoology who has argued for evolution since my college days.I went to a lecture put on by my archdiocese called "Evolution and Ethics" (or something similar). I posted extensive notes and commentary in my journal, but it's friends-only, so I will post it here. With an LJ-cut, of course. This is the first of three posts I've made (so far, at least) on the lecture.Since this post consists of notes, it will likely read as being a little unfocused; it's not an essay, just ... notes, with commentary thrown in. I decided to break it into several posts.( Notes Collapse )**

1 comment|post comment

	[27 Sep 2005\|08:16pm]
So what do you all think of the court case going on right now in Pennsylvania?I have no problem whatsoever with a science teacher assuring his/her class that there doesn't have to be a conflict between religion and science. But I have a very serious problem with a science teacher who implies that evolution is in any way doubted by serious scientists, or that "intelligent design" is a valid scientific theory. It's clever, I must admit, how the creationist crowd are making it sound like they only want all viewpoints heard in the classroom. What would they say if a teacher suddenly decided to teach art in a science classroom? Or what if a teacher presented his firm beliefs on human origins through Scientology? Science classrooms are for science, right? Not art, not literature, not history - and certainly not religion.-----On another note, I administered the practice test for Mississippi's state biology test to a group of high school freshmen today, and as I walked around, I noticed that one of the questions had a picture of three embryos: one human, and two animals. It asked the students to explain what the similarities meant from an evolutionary standpoint. It made me happy. :D
1 comment\|post comment

[27 Sep 2005|08:16pm]

So what do you all think of the court case going on right now in Pennsylvania?I have no problem whatsoever with a science teacher assuring his/her class that there doesn't have to be a conflict between religion and science. But I have a very serious problem with a science teacher who implies that evolution is in any way doubted by serious scientists, or that "intelligent design" is a valid scientific theory. It's clever, I must admit, how the creationist crowd are making it sound like they only want all viewpoints heard in the classroom. What would they say if a teacher suddenly decided to teach art in a science classroom? Or what if a teacher presented his firm beliefs on human origins through Scientology? Science classrooms are for science, right? Not art, not literature, not history - and certainly not religion.-----On another note, I administered the practice test for Mississippi's state biology test to a group of high school freshmen today, and as I walked around, I noticed that one of the questions had a picture of three embryos: one human, and two animals. It asked the students to explain what the similarities meant from an evolutionary standpoint. It made me happy. :D

1 comment|post comment

Hi!	[26 Sep 2005\|04:42pm]
Well, I'm not a Christian, but DeeDee said she'd made this place and it sounded cool. :) So I'm here.
1 comment\|post comment

	[26 Sep 2005\|03:23pm]
[ mood \| optimistic ] Welcome to "God and Darwin," the discussion community for people who know they don't have to choose between religion and science. I created this community after reading several articles about the "Evolution v. Intelligent Design" debate going on in a Pennsylvania court this week - and after visiting several evolution communities where Christians (and religion in general) were assumed to be dumb. I thought there should be a place where Christian evolutionists (and indeed, any theistic evolutionists) could have discussions without worrying about "You're going to hell!!!!11" on one side and "You believe in God???!!!1" on the other.I thought I'd start off with a link to Kenneth Miller, a Christian biologist at Brown University. His book Finding Darwin's God is amazing, and I really believe that every creationist and evolutionist should read it. =)If you join the community, please post an introduction thread so we can get to know each other! You might want to tell us about your religious background, when and how you learned about evolution, etc. For my part, I was a fierce 6-day creationist until my freshman year in college, when one of my religion professors explained to me how evolution can fit neatly - even beautifully - into one's understanding of God. In the end, accepting evolution wasn't a compromise. It was an enhancement.
2 comments\|post comment

[26 Sep 2005|03:23pm]

[ **mood** |

optimistic ] Welcome to "God and Darwin," the discussion community for people who know they don't have to choose between religion and science. I created this community after reading several articles about the "Evolution v. Intelligent Design" debate going on in a Pennsylvania court this week - and after visiting several evolution communities where Christians (and religion in general) were assumed to be dumb. I thought there should be a place where Christian evolutionists (and indeed, any theistic evolutionists) could have discussions without worrying about "You're going to hell!!!!11" on one side and "You believe in God???!!!1" on the other.I thought I'd start off with a link to Kenneth Miller, a Christian biologist at Brown University. His book Finding Darwin's God is amazing, and I really believe that every creationist and evolutionist should read it. =)If you join the community, please post an introduction thread so we can get to know each other! You might want to tell us about your religious background, when and how you learned about evolution, etc. For my part, I was a fierce 6-day creationist until my freshman year in college, when one of my religion professors explained to me how evolution can fit neatly - even beautifully - into one's understanding of God. In the end, accepting evolution wasn't a compromise. It was an enhancement.

2 comments|post comment

navigation
[ viewing \| most recent entries ]