Originally posted by terrytnewzealand:
I don't think there is any argument fundys cannot contribute to science. It's just that they're extremely unlikely to contribute to our understanding of geology or evolution.
Terry,
Agreed. I have recently had my first birthday on this site (October 5th) and have spent the last year thinking about (amongst other things) the relationship and conflict between religion and science.
I would split Christians into two camps. Conservative Literalists and the rest of us.
Conservative Literalists are fundamentally opposed to science in two areas: Geology and Evolution. Their rejection of Evolution has become an article of faith and in many cases they see it as a defining factor in whether someone is a Christian or not.
The rest of us, Evangelicals and the like are not by definition opposed to science, but are more likely to see it as an extremely valuable tool that allows us to understand the world we live in, and improve the lot of humanity.
This is seen here in an extract from an article found on Evangelical Now, talking about why some Evangelicals believe in Evolution:
??it really is our Christian duty to encourage truthful reporting about God's creation. God has given us rational faculties, inquiring minds and abundant evidence. Stewardly earth-keeping (Genesis 2.15-20) surely includes the goal of understanding God's amazing creation using all the resources he has so abundantly given us.?
Science however, (and I am talking about the philosophical assumption that empirical investigation is the only path to reliable knowledge) is antithetical to Christianity and would deny any form of revelation, and relegates faith to a dangerous delusion. This is partly fuelled by the anti-science Christians.
The problem for the more reasonable Christian is this (from Evangelical Now):
?attacks on evolution help to keep alive the 'conflict thesis', the idea that science and faith are intrinsically incompatible, a Victorian idea which in many other respects has been laid to rest during the latter half of this century. The 'conflict thesis' is precisely what the likes of Richard Dawkins thrive on, so anti-evolutionary attacks unwittingly provide atheists with precisely the ammunition they need to keep their anti-Christian crusades going.?
So the Conservative Literalists do the damage and the rest of Christianity receives the backlash from the scientific community.
Blacknad.
