(April 24, 2014 at 11:20 am)Crossless1 Wrote: You are aware that the overwhelming majority of mainstream Christian congregations have long since made their peace with modern biology, aren't you? You do know that there are Christians who work in the biological sciences and who don't have a problem with accepting the evidence for evolution and common descent, right?
For Revelation777
Crossless1 is right.
Francis Collins, who led the Human Genome Project, is a Christian while Richard Dawkins is an atheist. I've found the transcript of a debate they had - they disagree when it comes to whether or not God exists but they don't disagree about evolution itself.
God vs. Science - A debate between Richard Dawkins and Francis Collins
Quote:DAWKINS: The question of whether there exists a supernatural creator, a God, is one of the most important that we have to answer. I think that it is a scientific question. My answer is no.
TIME: Dr. Collins, you believe that science is compatible with Christian faith.
COLLINS: Yes. God's existence is either true or not. But calling it a scientific question implies that the tools of science can provide the answer. From my perspective, God cannot be completely contained within nature, and therefore God's existence is outside of science's ability to really weigh in.
Atheists, who lack a belief in deities, aren't going to be persuaded that God exists by your posting misinformation from Answers In Genesis. Science, including evolution, cannot provide concrete proof that God doesn't exist so you don't have to reject evolution in order to stay a believer. How can people stay believers? The following quotes are from an interview with Francis Collins where he explains it.
Collins - Why This Scientist Believes In God
Quote:So, some have asked, doesn't your brain explode? Can you both pursue an understanding of how life works using the tools of genetics and molecular biology, and worship a creator God? Aren't evolution and faith in God incompatible? Can a scientist believe in miracles like the resurrection?
Actually, I find no conflict here, and neither apparently do the 40 percent of working scientists who claim to be believers. Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.
But why couldn't this be God's plan for creation? True, this is incompatible with an ultra-literal interpretation of Genesis, but long before Darwin, there were many thoughtful interpreters like St. Augustine, who found it impossible to be exactly sure what the meaning of that amazing creation story was supposed to be. So attaching oneself to such literal interpretations in the face of compelling scientific evidence pointing to the ancient age of Earth and the relatedness of living things by evolution seems neither wise nor necessary for the believer.
I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith. The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. God can be found in the cathedral or in the laboratory. By investigating God's majestic and awesome creation, science can actually be a means of worship.
Where are the snake and mushroom smilies?