Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: A Study in Apples vs. Oranges
As a christian with a great deal of respect for science, I find ID mildly offense.
Religious belief and science are two completely and totally different ways of looking at, and understanding the world. Science cannot explain the many times I have felt the hand of God in my life, just as religion cannot explain to me why water becomes a solid in low temperatures. ID is not science, because it is dealing with things which, by definition, can *never* be measured. Religion has everything to do with subjective experience and introspection, science is the exact opposit.
That being said, to use science to try and disprove religion is just as silly and foolish as trying to fit religion into science. I dont care if you come to me with footage of the big bang, all that it will mean to me as a christian is that my understanding of genesis is flawed, and in the grand scheme of things, that barely matters to me. Just like someone looking at the world through the scientific method wont care if you show him the undeniable impact of the all-mighty on a persons life. It is the acceptance of something through faith rather then objective proof, which is (or should be anyways) completely off the radar of the scientific process.
So should evolution or creation be taught in schools? In my opinion, religion has no place being taught by an institution that has anything remotely like a seperation of church and state. Being so highly subjective, the only way to fairly teach religion in a public school is to teach the tenants of EVERY religion. It is the responsability of the parents to teach children things like morality, and religion, and trying to dump this on the schools is nothing short of a shirking of responsability. Society is not responsable for teaching children wrong from right, although todays parents seem to expect it. The younger generations are a shining example of where such criminal negligence has gotten us.
On the flipside, as much as forcing a particular belief-set to be taught as fact (or a lowest common denomenator belief-set in the case of ID) is repugnant to any believer in freedom of religion, it is just as bad to turn science into the state religion. Science is very clear on the difference between fact and theory, and as a nominal creationist (in that I believe in creation, not that I put creation forward as a scientific theory), I can say that treating the theory of evolution as anything less then fact can get you in hot water, fast, with a large segment of the evolutionist population.
And I am *insanely* moderate in this particular belief.
I am willing to acknowledge that I have no idea on the factual validity of genisis, only that it contains what I need to know about the start of things. The lord created the heavens and the earth, and all that is in them. Does that mean he spoke, and poof, there it was? Does it mean that he took seven days? Does it mean that he kicked started the evolutionary process over millions of years? I have my opinions, but quite frankly, I have better things to do with my time then contemplate this, let alone argue about it. All that matters is that God is the one responsable, and for someone who is looking at the world through a religious viewpoint rather then a scientific one, that is the important part.
"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries. "
"An alliance or coalition between Government and religion cannot be too carefully guarded against......Every new and successful example therefore of a PERFECT SEPARATION between ecclesiastical and civil matters is of importance........religion and government will exist in greater purity, without (rather) than with the aid of government. "
- James Madison, Father of the American Constitution
Religious belief and science are two completely and totally different ways of looking at, and understanding the world. Science cannot explain the many times I have felt the hand of God in my life, just as religion cannot explain to me why water becomes a solid in low temperatures. ID is not science, because it is dealing with things which, by definition, can *never* be measured. Religion has everything to do with subjective experience and introspection, science is the exact opposit.
That being said, to use science to try and disprove religion is just as silly and foolish as trying to fit religion into science. I dont care if you come to me with footage of the big bang, all that it will mean to me as a christian is that my understanding of genesis is flawed, and in the grand scheme of things, that barely matters to me. Just like someone looking at the world through the scientific method wont care if you show him the undeniable impact of the all-mighty on a persons life. It is the acceptance of something through faith rather then objective proof, which is (or should be anyways) completely off the radar of the scientific process.
So should evolution or creation be taught in schools? In my opinion, religion has no place being taught by an institution that has anything remotely like a seperation of church and state. Being so highly subjective, the only way to fairly teach religion in a public school is to teach the tenants of EVERY religion. It is the responsability of the parents to teach children things like morality, and religion, and trying to dump this on the schools is nothing short of a shirking of responsability. Society is not responsable for teaching children wrong from right, although todays parents seem to expect it. The younger generations are a shining example of where such criminal negligence has gotten us.
On the flipside, as much as forcing a particular belief-set to be taught as fact (or a lowest common denomenator belief-set in the case of ID) is repugnant to any believer in freedom of religion, it is just as bad to turn science into the state religion. Science is very clear on the difference between fact and theory, and as a nominal creationist (in that I believe in creation, not that I put creation forward as a scientific theory), I can say that treating the theory of evolution as anything less then fact can get you in hot water, fast, with a large segment of the evolutionist population.
And I am *insanely* moderate in this particular belief.
I am willing to acknowledge that I have no idea on the factual validity of genisis, only that it contains what I need to know about the start of things. The lord created the heavens and the earth, and all that is in them. Does that mean he spoke, and poof, there it was? Does it mean that he took seven days? Does it mean that he kicked started the evolutionary process over millions of years? I have my opinions, but quite frankly, I have better things to do with my time then contemplate this, let alone argue about it. All that matters is that God is the one responsable, and for someone who is looking at the world through a religious viewpoint rather then a scientific one, that is the important part.
"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries. "
"An alliance or coalition between Government and religion cannot be too carefully guarded against......Every new and successful example therefore of a PERFECT SEPARATION between ecclesiastical and civil matters is of importance........religion and government will exist in greater purity, without (rather) than with the aid of government. "
- James Madison, Father of the American Constitution
posted by Google Ninja at 6:40 PM
2 comments
