sigh. Back in the 40's the debate on science vs creationism

SEARCH VEGSOURCE:

Reply To This Post Return to Posts Index VegSource Home

From: Jaq (3psb83.psbnewton.com)
Subject: sigh. Back in the 40's the debate on science vs creationism
Date: April 1, 2008 at 9:46 am PST

In Reply to: Reference to any would give support posted by Saysfaa on March 31, 2008 at 7:16 am:

American Science Association rejected George McCready Price's introduction of Creationism not because he was Christian (as many of the scientists were also Christians) but because the basis of his argument was faulty. Same as today. Creationist myths can be interjected in school. Yet, what precious time is afforded in biology classes, Creation myths are an inappropriate subject. All of this can all be reviewed in religious, political or social science classes.

I understand that what I have just stated is disturbing to many Christians. I don't intend to make people angry or upset. And yes, I realize that not taking the bible literally is challenging to people's faith. Certainly, my purpose is not to erode anyone's beliefs.

However, as Christians with opposing views, we have to live with each other with some semblance of peace. How do you propose we do that?

Vatican astronomer likens creationism to superstition

Glasgow, Dec. 6, 2007 (CWNews.com) - A Jesuit astronomer from the Vatican Observatory has said that scientific creationism is a form of superstition.

Speaking in Glasgow this week, Brother Guy Consolmagno said that scientists should protect against the tendency of religion to slide into superstition. In turn, he said, science needs religion "in order to have a conscience." In the case of creationism, he said, believers have constructed a theory that is not supported by scientific facts.

"Religion needs science to keep it away from superstition and keep it close to reality," Brother Consolmagno said-- "to protect it from creationism, which at the end of the day is a kind of paganism."
...