Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site sdcc6.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!sdcc3!sdcc6!ix415
From: ix415@sdcc6.UUCP (Rick Frey)
Newsgroups: net.origins,net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Origins Program on CBN TV
Message-ID: <2207@sdcc6.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Sep-85 14:55:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcc6.2207
Posted: Fri Sep 13 14:55:17 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Sep-85 06:18:06 EDT
References: <672@ihu1m.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U.C. San Diego, Academic Computer Center
Lines: 50
Xref: watmath net.origins:2393 net.religion.christian:1326
Summary: God, the Bible and evolution

In article <672@ihu1m.UUCP>, jho@ihu1m.UUCP (Yosi Hoshen) writes:
> 
> The bottom line is that evolution is the antithesis to Christianity.  
> Evolution should be opposed because propagating evolution undermines
> the faith.  As I did not see this argument previouly on the net, 
> I wonder whether any of you feel that if evolution is true then
> the logical conclusion is that Christianity is false.  Even if the question is
> not phrased as: "Either Christianity or evolution" do you think
> that teaching evolution undermines the religion?

Interesting question.  The biggest problem is that when Christians use
science to reinterpret the Bible, they get yelled at and screamed at for
cheating and being hypocrites.  When Ptolemy (et al) finally figured out
that the earth was not the center of the universe and that it revolved
around the sun, everybody laughed because Christians had to go back and
find a new interpretation to the story in Joshua (about the sun standing
still).  The same can be said on a smaller level with Christ's remark
that the mustard seed being the smallest seed.  It's not, there are other
seeds smaller than it, so as new science creeps in, now the parable is
analogous and figurative and no longer literal.

This is what is taking place with the evolution issue.  On the surface,
it sounds like God created the world in six days (actually the Hebrew
word isn't only used for days, but also for periods of time) and that He
made man out of the dust and women out of his rib and that the animals
reproduced each after their own kind.  But now that we've seen lots of
evidence that shows the high plausibility of evolution, both organic and
animal (that's not the proper scientific term but I couldn't think of
what it was) so now we go back to Genesis and start rethinking what
might have actually taken place.

I guess my only point is that why shouldn't Christians be allowed to
make mistakes in interpretting a document that has baffled people for
centuries.  A wider range of actions has been taken in the name of the
Bible than can be imagined.  Even on spiritual issues, religious leaders
have gone back and forth, trying to keep out heresies that have cropped
up (think about Luther and the Catholic Church of the time).  The only
thing I think scientists and modern philosophers and any Biblical
critics have the right to laugh at is that many Christians have CLAIMED
to KNOW that their interpretation was from God, when in reality, very
little of it came from God.  That has been one of the major factors that
makes re-interpretting the Bible today so difficult.  People want a book
from God to be perfect throughout time; and I claim that the book is.
It's just people's interpretations and biases that they bring to the
book that have the unfair consequesnce of reflecting back on it.  When
God finally reveals Himself to the world, fully, I believe that no one
will be able to hold the Bible up and say, "not so fast God, you screwed
up here."  Somehow, I'm not sure how, God said, "Let there be light" and
there was.
				Rick Frey


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com