The rest of the article is found here.

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.

I.d. is simply "creationism" in sheep's clothing and it is a religious concept devoid of the use of the scientific method, which is the technique used by scientist throughout the world.

So here we go again.

Shalom,
Vern

The French have a better word than "again." "Encore" means "again," but it also means "still."

This argument will never end. It will never end because those who favour ID (or creationism) cannot bear the idea of evolution. Evolution is not just everything that happened up until now. Evolution continues into the future. That means that man, in his present state, may not be the end-point of their God's universe. "Made in the image of God," would take on an impossible meaning for the literalist if evolution were to be understood as the truth.

Sorry, but for the literalist, that is simply an unacceptable situation, and so they will never stop trying to force everyone into accepting that God created Adam as a fully-modern human, complete with an unnecessary navel.

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

I agree with the majority of your post, but I want to qualify your sentence above.

One could be a fundamentalist, which is not exactly the same as a "literalist", and still believe in the basic process of evolution. When I have posted on this, I very often mention that orthodox Jews mostly see the creation accounts as allegory, and yet they tend to believe that all scripture is divinely inspired.

I also will mention the fact that most Christians today see Jesus' parables as being allegorical. This was a controversy in the early church, whereas some argued that Jesus' parables must have actually occurred since Jesus would not lie. However, the view that a parable need not be an actual event eventually won out, and most Christians today seemingly accept that approach.

Therefore, if a fundamentalist is willing to accept Jesus' parables as stories with morals being taught (what we call "myth" in anthropology), what's the problem with seeing the creation accounts as allegory? Within these accounts one can find many lessons that are being taught, which is quite similar to what we find with the parables.

Shalom,
Vern

Ah, but Vern, I didn't say "fundamentalist" -- I said "literalist." A literalist, in the definition I'm using here, is someone who takes scripture as literal descriptions of actual events -- not allegorical at all.

I have no difficulty with scripture as allegory, because allegory is always open to interpretation, and that which is understood to be perfectly allegorical is more difficult to build orthodox dogma on.

Literal readings of scripture lend themselves beautifully to dogma leading to all sorts of ugliness.

Now, I will also agree with your comment that "most Christians" today see scripture as at least somewhat allegorical. But it is my reading that in the U.S. there are more than the usual percentage of literalists, and that's what drives the continual battle to get ID or some other form of creationism taught in schools. That's not a battle that's happening in any other nominally Christian nation in the world.

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

I'm aware of that, and that's why I chose to use a different word. Not all fundamentalists are literalists as you state.





Europeans generally laugh at us in this arena, and I can see why. It's a matter of taking what is a terrible way to translate scripture and then using that translation to negate what has been scientifically observed for almost a century now, namely that the basic concept of evolution is considered axiomatic within the scientific community. Who says the "dark ages" are over?

Shalom,
Vern

Amazing! I remember reading once where the devil himself was seen turning green with envy as to the ingenious methods of self deception Man was able to develop.

Yet it seems that virtually from the beginning there have always been these remarkable people that have not been victimized by all this self deception and the relationships between the cosmoses that maintained existence were evident.


What a profound elegant description of Intelligent design. Yet for a person to get to the meat of it they must dodge the bullets of literalists, secularists and perhaps some additional insulted groups ending in "ist."

Simone, when I read what the "experts" are trying to do to the kids now, my gratitude for those like you increases. At least you give the kids a chance to become more than just an automaton.

Peace, Love, & Light

__________________

The Peaceful Place: http://www.agedhippy.plus.com/

"An object is perceived, or not perceived, according as the mind is, or is not, tinged with the colour of the object. "
Patanjali - Sutra 4:17

Ah, thanks for the link for those stats. I've seen this poll before but never copied it for future reference. The results of the survey really don't surprise me any-- unfortunately.

Shalom,
Vern

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein