Materialist atheist philosopher Michael Ruse chimes in with Christian Darwinists at BioLogos

_{Denyse O'Leary

June 11, 2011

Atheism, Christian Darwinism}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

… chimes in with them as they were portrayed in the recent article in Christianity Today (June 2011).

Maybe they aren’t really like that, to judge from Falk’s recent sponge over.

But Ruse is. At Huffpo, he says:

… science tells us that Adam and Eve are fictions. That Saint Paul or Uncle Tom Cobley and all thought otherwise is irrelevant. They were wrong. This is not to say that they were stupid or careless. Two thousand years ago, for a Jew to believe in Adam and Eve was perfectly sensible. But time moves on and with it our understanding of the world around us, and old beliefs have to give way to new ones. Aristotle thought that some people were born to be slaves. He was wrong. St. Paul thought we are descended from Adam and Eve. He was wrong.

[ … ]

This is not to say that this theology is now the only right one for evermore, but rather that giving up some thoughts in the face of science is not necessarily the end of faith.

[ … ]

But is there not the uncomfortable worry that religion — theology — is always going to play second fiddle, having to give way in the face of science? And never the other way around. When did a Nobel Prize winner ever change his or her mind in the face of a reinterpretation of the Trinity? It may be true that this is a one-way process, but in no way does this imply that theology is inferior.

Thoughts?

Comments

Incidentally, considering Biologos recently claimed that they do not regard Adam and Eve as fictional, I wonder if anyone over there will denounce Ruse's blather? Especially considering they've given him a soapbox over there more than once. I suppose they won't in the end. Because then, hey - no more pats on the head. And that's quite a high price for many TEs to pay.nullasalus_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
07:33 PM
7
07
33
PM
PDT}

science tells us that Adam and Eve are fictions. "Science" does no such thing. And that Biologos sees fit to give this gasbag a semi-regular soapbox is one of the biggest strikes against their organization. Yes, I get that he now and then is dismissive of Dawkins and the general cult of Gnu. That doesn't make him brilliant, much less an automatic ally. But apparently some TEs (and I say this as one) will team up with anyone with a degree willing to pat them on the head.nullasalus_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
07:23 PM
7
07
23
PM
PDT}

There can be only ONE ultimate authority, and it isn't the bible.
Having said that, he also said the theology is not inferior to science, which is quite a concession for him.
Snort. He's said that theology gives us fictional characters and that science informs us that they are indeed fictional characters. Quite the concession indeed. Color me not impressed.Mung_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
05:05 PM
5
05
05
PM
PDT}

Darrel Falk did not say that Adam and Eve were fiction. That is something that Michael Ruse has said on his own. Having said that, he also said the theology is not inferior to science, which is quite a concession for him.Jimpithecus_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
04:48 PM
4
04
48
PM
PDT}

authority*, that is.bbigej_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
04:40 PM
4
04
40
PM
PDT}

Adam and Eve are only fictitious if you accept man's fallible interpretations over the Bible. It comes down to an issue of ultimate authory--rather, who holds it.bbigej_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
04:39 PM
4
04
39
PM
PDT}

It may be true that this is a one-way process, but in no way does this imply that theology is inferior. Gould described his own personal view as "agnostic," appropriately conciliatory in pursuit of NOMA. Did he treat his own scientific theories in a similarly agnostic way? Did he say he is an agnostic about the concept of punctuated equilibria, one of his favorite theories? ~ William Provine The worldview of scientific naturalism preserves a place for religious beliefs: a place, that is, among the things to be explained by science. The Christian religion thus enters the university with a status precisely equal to that of other comparable religious systems -- say, the Aztec system of human sacrifice. Any individual, even a person of eminence in science, can make a personal choice to "be religious." Such choices are made on the basis of "faith," meaning subjective preference. A problem arises only if the Aztecs or the Christians claim access to knowledge. If they do that, they are claiming that their own beliefs are normative for unbelievers. Only scientists can claim that kind of authority, because what is endorsed by the scientific community constitutes knowledge, not belief. That is why Darwinian evolution can be taught in the schools as fact, however strongly parents or students object, whereas a simple prayer acknowledging God as our Creator is deemed unacceptable -- because somebody might object. ~ Phillip Johnsonbevets_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
04:36 PM
4
04
36
PM
PDT}

Well Mr Ruse, when you can produce evidence that Adam and Eve were fictitious and that the genealogy given in the Gospels from Jesus to them was allegedly all made up, then get back to me. ;-) Incidentally, Ruse believes humanity is not superior to any other living organism...so I wonder if Hallmark makes a card that reads: "Happy Father's Day Dad, you're no better than a maggot or a bacterium"??Blue_Savannah_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
03:59 PM
3
03
59
PM
PDT}

as to this comment: 'But is there not the uncomfortable worry that religion — theology — is always going to play second fiddle, having to give way in the face of science? And never the other way around.' The only thing that has had to continually 'give way' to science in the last hundred years is the materialistic philosophy. Theism is sitting quite well with the modern findings of science: ,,,The materialistic and Theistic philosophy make, and have made, several natural contradictory predictions about what evidence we will find. These predictions, and the evidence we have found, can be tested against one another within the scientific method. Steps of the Scientific Method http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_scientific_method.shtml For a quick overview, here are a few: 1. Materialism predicted an eternal universe, Theism predicted a created universe. - Big Bang points to a creation event. - 2. Materialism predicted time had an infinite past, Theism predicted time had a creation. - Time was created in the Big Bang. - 3. Materialism predicted space has always existed, Theism predicted space had a creation (Psalm 89:12) - Space was created in the Big Bang. - 4. Materialism predicted that material has always existed, Theism predicted 'material' was created. - 'Material' was created in the Big Bang. 5. Materialism predicted at the base of physical reality would be a solid indestructible material particle which rigidly obeyed the rules of time and space, Theism predicted the basis of this reality was created by a infinitely powerful and transcendent Being who is not limited by time and space - Quantum mechanics reveals a wave/particle duality for the basis of our reality which blatantly defies our concepts of time and space. - 6. Materialism predicted the rate at which time passed was constant everywhere in the universe, Theism predicted God is eternal and is outside of time - Special Relativity has shown that time, as we understand it, is relative and comes to a complete stop at the speed of light. (Psalm 90:4 - 2 Timothy 1:9)- 7. Materialism predicted the universe did not have life in mind and life was ultimately an accident of time and chance. Theism predicted this universe was purposely created by God with man in mind - Every transcendent universal constant scientists can measure is exquisitely fine-tuned for carbon-based life to exist in this universe. - 8. Materialism predicted complex life in this universe should be fairly common. Theism predicted the earth is extremely unique in this universe - Statistical analysis of the hundreds of required parameters which enable complex life to be possible on earth gives strong indication the earth is extremely unique in this universe. - 9. Materialism predicted much of the DNA code was junk. Theism predicted we are fearfully and wonderfully made - ENCODE research into the DNA has revealed a "biological jungle deeper, denser, and more difficult to penetrate than anyone imagined.". - 10. Materialism predicted a extremely beneficial and flexible mutation rate for DNA which was ultimately responsible for all the diversity and complexity of life we see on earth. Theism predicted only God created life on earth - The mutation rate to DNA is overwhelmingly detrimental. Detrimental to such a point that it is seriously questioned whether there are any truly beneficial mutations whatsoever. (M. Behe; JC Sanford) - 11. Materialism predicted a very simple first life form which accidentally came from "a warm little pond". Theism predicted God created life - The simplest life ever found on Earth is far more complex than any machine man has made through concerted effort. (Michael Denton PhD) - 12. Materialism predicted it took a very long time for life to develop on earth. Theism predicted life to appear abruptly on earth after water appeared on earth (Genesis 1:10-11) - We find evidence for complex photo-synthetic life in the oldest sedimentary rocks ever found on earth - 13. Materialism predicted the gradual unfolding of life to be self-evident in the fossil record. Theism predicted complex and diverse life to appear abruptly in the seas in God's fifth day of creation. - The Cambrian Explosion shows a sudden appearance of many different and completely unique fossils within a very short "geologic resolution time" in the Cambrian seas. - 14. Materialism predicted there should be numerous transitional fossils found in the fossil record, Theism predicted sudden appearance and rapid diversity within different kinds found in the fossil record - Fossils are consistently characterized by sudden appearance of a group/kind in the fossil record, then rapid diversity within the group/kind, and then long term stability and even deterioration of variety within the overall group/kind, and within the specific species of the kind, over long periods of time. Of the few dozen or so fossils claimed as transitional, not one is uncontested as a true example of transition between major animal forms out of millions of collected fossils. - 15. Materialism predicted animal speciation should happen on a somewhat constant basis on earth. Theism predicted man was the last species created on earth - Man himself is the last generally accepted major fossil form to have suddenly appeared in the fossil record. - references: https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1ubha8aFKlJiljnuCa98QqLihFWFwZ_nnUNhEC6m6Cys As you can see when we remove the artificial imposition of the materialistic philosophy, from the scientific method, and look carefully at the predictions of both the materialistic philosophy and the Theistic philosophy, side by side, we find the scientific method is very good at pointing us in the direction of Theism as the true explanation. - In fact it is even very good at pointing us to Christianity: General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy & the Shroud Of Turin - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5070355bornagain77_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
03:24 PM
3
03
24
PM
PDT}

Thoughts?
… science tells us that Adam and Eve are fictions. That Saint Paul ... thought otherwise is irrelevant.
I guess I'm left wondering why St. Paul is not also a fiction and how science was able to come to a conclusion on the (non)fictional nature of St. Paul? Do they now have a scientific test for fictional characters?Mung_{June 11, 2011
June
06
Jun
11
11
2011
02:43 PM
2
02
43
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply