Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiFrench Scientists Rebut U.S., Muslim Creationism
With creationism now coming in Christian and Muslim versions, scientists, teachers and theologians in France are debating ways to counteract what they see as growing religious attacks on science.
Bible-based criticism of evolution, once limited to Protestant fundamentalists in the United States, has become an issue in France now that Pope Benedict and some leading Catholic theologians have criticized the neo-Darwinist view of creation.
An Islamist publisher in Turkey mass-mailed a lavishly illustrated Muslim creationist book to schools across France recently, prompting the Education Ministry to proscribe the volume and question the way the story of life is taught here.
The Bible and the Koran say God directly created the world and everything in it. In Christianity, fundamentalists believe this literally but the largest denomination, Catholicism, and most mainline Protestant churches read it more symbolically.
This literalism led Christian fundamentalists to reject the theory of evolution elaborated in the 19th century by Charles Darwin, the foundation stone of modern biology. Muslim scholars also dispute evolution but have not made this a major issue.
"There is a growing distrust of science in public opinion, especially among the young, and that worries us," said Philippe Deterre, a research biologist and Catholic priest who organized a colloquium on creationism for scientists at the weekend.
"There are many issues that go beyond strictly scientific or strictly theological explanations," he said at the colloquium in this university town southwest of Paris. Deterre's Blaise Pascal Network promotes understanding between science and religion.
Barred from teaching creationism in U.S. public schools, some conservative Christians now advocate the "intelligent design" argument that some forms of life are too complex to have simply evolved. Scientists call this creationism in disguise.
These American concerns caught notice in Europe after Vienna Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, a confidant of Pope Benedict, attacked neo-Darwinist theories in 2005 in what seemed to be a move to ally the Catholic Church with "intelligent design."
GROWING ISSUES IN FRANCE
These theoretical debates became a pressing issue in France last month when schools unexpectedly received free copies of an "Atlas of Creation" by Turkish Islamist Harun Yahya that blames Darwinism for everything from terrorism to Nazism.
Herve Le Guyader, a University of Paris biology professor who advised the Education Ministry on the Atlas, said high school biology teachers needed more training now to respond to the increasingly open challenges to the theory of evolution.
"It's often taught in a simplistic way," he said. "We have to give them the philosophical arguments they need to respond."
Paleontologist Marc Godinot said creationists and their critics drew overblown conclusions from a theory that explains how life developed but not how it was created. The ultimate origin of life is not a question science can answer, he said.
Creationists reject evolution because some scientists say the role of chance in it proves that life has no final meaning.
"We have to decode this, but that's a job for philosophers and theologians," Godinot said . "Creation is actually a big mystery."
Jacques Arnould, a Catholic priest who works at France's National Center for Space Research, said Christians in Europe should not look down with bemusement at creationists abroad.
"They are believers, as we are," the Dominican theologian told the meeting of about 100, mostly Catholic scientists with a few Muslims as well. "There are Christian, Muslim and Jewish approaches that we have to respect."
Arnould said the question of life's purpose arose naturally in biology class but science could not answer it. Instead of offering simple creationism, he said, theologians should develop views that respect modern science and faith in a divine purpose.
He said Catholic thinkers should update "natural theology," the teachings of Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) that married philosophy and science in a view that dominated European thought until the 18th-century Enlightenment divorced the two fields.
"Natural theology was based on the knowledge of the time," said Arnould. "That knowledge keeps changing, so natural theology has to change too."
Copyright © 2007 Reuters
37 Comments so far
Show AllPeace Be Upon You
PLEASE have a look at the information contained on the following links:
The Bible, the Quran, and Science by Dr. Maurice Bucaille THE HOLY SCRIPTURES EXAMINED IN THE LIGHT OF MODERN KNOWLEDGE [Notes: 1. Copied from Witness Pioneer web site with permission.
2. Does not include the entire book.] :
http://www.islam-guide.com/bqs/
Also:
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_index.html
Thank You
Peace Be Upon You
Mysticism isn't really a tool that can be used for something. It also isn't an answer in response to any question of need. It isn't something that can be used to control anyone - politically, economically, socially, spiritually. It is a way of life, a way of knowing, that provides us the tools and answers we need as well as the wisdom for using them.
Mysticism is a relationship between an individual and Something that is greater than the individual in any and every way you or anyone else might ever be able to imagine. As such, mysticism is completely individual, it cannot be organized, it cannot be controlled. It is the ultimate path in freedom to think, feel, act, believe, grow, evolve. It is also the ultimate path of responsibility - to one's self, to others, to all beings, both individually and collectively. It allows for the ultimate in personal freedom as well as the ultimate in self control. It is not about control of others, it is about service to others.
Mysticism is a path that con only be traversed alone yet, paradoxically, it is best traveled in groups. There are many mystical paths - at least one path for each individual - though some paths may be very similar to others. Regardless of where mystics begin their journeys, regardless of the paths they follow, even within organized religions, there comes a point in their progress at which they all reach the same realizations, and at which they all start sounding pretty much the same as they try to report on their experiences, their insights, their understandings, their realizations, their visions.
The mystics all report on love and light and joy and freedom. They all mention compassion and service, mercy and grace. They all recommend some manner of prayer or meditation - recognition, praise, thanksgiving, forgiveness, supplication. They all realize the power of the breath and of the heart and of the body and of the mind. They all embrace individual experiences as being valid and valuable. They all point toward growth and expansion, boundlessness and infinitude. They all feel the pull of oneness and unity, and that we are each born out of unity and long to return to it.
This Unity / God / Allah / YHVH / Asha / Brahman Oneness is so expansive as to embrace all and everything without distinction, yet this can all be fully embraced within the human heart.
As you may have noticed, organized religions are not very good at instilling this message within the minds and hearts of their adherents, in spite of the fact that these same religions were all originally inspired out of mystical experiences.
As MA_Matriarch suggested, do go outside and breathe deeply of the air we all share. Also open fully to the spirit in all living beings and be inspired by the miracles and majesty of nature. Hold your head high and your body tall, spread your arms and your chest wide to embrace all and everything - all that you see and all that you don't, all that you know and all that you don't, all that you feel and all that you don't, all that you understand and all that you don't. Embrace yourself - your body, your heart, your mind, your breath, your spirit. Continue on your own mystical journey toward Love and Light and Oneness.
If you have a chance go outside today and take a walk. Take some deep breaths and take this thought with you. You are alive and so isn't everyone around you because they are all breathing the same living breath. If that doesn't give you the feeling of we all live within the one....nothing will.
And Nietzsche,to add to MA's last comment, there are literally thousands of documented examples of people both remembered and forgotten who have had spiritual experiences over the centuries.
It is true that some of these may not have been true stories. However, the abundance of cases is ovewhelming and can't be dismissed as rubbish.
As I am always doing, I will mention another book: The Varieties of Religious Experience, written by William James in the early 1900's. While it is a difficult book to read, it gives scores of examples of the many types of mystical expeiences different people have had over the centuries. Any objective person would have to admit that there is truly a mystical realm which some people have experienced and they simply can't be ignored. The evidence is overwhelming.
Unfortunately, there will always be people who use this very real aspect of life for their own, selfish reasons. But that doesn't mean it isn't a reality to thousands or even millions of people who experience this gift.
You see Nietzshe I don't believe we live apart from Divinity, I believe we live "within it". If we were unble to breath the breath of God then we would be dead and mysticism would be meaningless, but most things are taken for granted due to what has been taught.
Nietzsche, let me tell just "one" purpose it served me. My family has been suffering from a strange illnesses for generations. When I learned how to communicate which is something a mystic learns how to do I was able to learn of a genetic disease doctors had totally overlooked. In doing so I broke the chain for future generations. Quite frankly, I don't believe there is nothing meaningless about that!
That is just ONE example!
MA, Mysticism serves no "purpose". It is an answer, not a question. It is not a tool but a reason for tools to exist. It is an appropriate human construct in answer to meaninglessness.
Shane, as with anything else mysticism can be used for control, but being able to discern and deflect it is the soul purpose for which mysticism serves.
Shane, Mysticism is not irrational. The mystics in the middle ages were also known for their contributions in mathematics and philosophy, but they recognized that the ultimate concern of a human being could not be contained within a rational system. --A rough paraphrase from Paul Tillich.
hmmm... or perhaps it was J. Bolen?
The ignorance about Islam displayed in both the article and the comments here is quite astounding.
Muslims believe that God created everything, but NOT--I repeat, NOT-- in the same way that Christian ID proponents do. For one thing, the Qur'an is MUCH more vague about the exact details of how and when things were created, as opposed to the Bible which is specific about what was allegedly created when. To the person who said that the Koran is one of a series of religious books that assumes that the Earth is the center of the universe: this is flatly incorrect. In fact, the language of the Qur'an suggests the opposite, and it was Muslim scientists who pioneered evidence-based astronomy.
I have not read the books of Harun Yahya myself, however I think the ridiculous self-aggrandizing I have read on his website speaks for itself and makes me doubt his credibility from the outset. Not realizing what they are buying into, some Muslims do jump on the "ID" bandwagon without realizing that Islamic theology is MUCH more progressive and open to scientific ideas than "Biblical creationism". The use of the term "Islamist" to denote Yahya is also a bit offensive here. Is any conservatively Muslim person now being called an "Islam-ist" a label which is equated in the press with terrorism, intolerance, and extremism?!
Frankly, I'd like to see people stop trying to equate Islam with fundamentalist Christiantiy simply because you assume all broadly defined "conservative" people must be the same.
The truth, as always, is somewhere in the middle-- between the assertions of those who promote evolution as the death-blow to religion in order to promote an anti-religion, anti-spiritual atheist agenda, and those who reject all science in the name of flawed religious beliefs which cannot withstand simple scrutiny.
and to Shane, given the right conditions it becomes a question of critical mass, where just one more small act of kindness can tip the balance against the rabid herd... the stories told by C. Estes reminds us of that
hahaha, hybridoma2001... what I purposefully left out before was answer to that question. Joseph Campbell has answered it: only from the depths of the abyss may the voice of salvation be heard. So we have them to thank, for leading us so deeply into the abyss. And I do think it commendable you would help them, though I believe they're beyond it.
An interesting thread, and interesting people to boot! But I see even mysticism as another scam to control people, just like religion and science.
I see Man as the most vicious, predatory animal on the planet. Man has no soul, no saving graces. True, there are some good individuals (Gandhi, and maybe some folk who have commented here), but their goodness is overrun by the rabid herd. Sorry if this appears negative, but that is the history of Man, that gets worse as our population, and subsequent competition for limited resources, increases.
edladysmith: I agree with Janten completely. It is an obligation we all have to develope our various abilities to their fullest, both physical, mental, and spiritual. In fact, I see that as one of my purposes in life. But I also must think of others and how my actions affect them. We can't simply strive to be the best we can be ourselves, we must also strive to be the best we can be with others. I want to write "no matter who they are" but I'm no saint and there are some people in this world like Bush or Cheney who I would have a hard time walking the talk. But I think if it came down to it, I would help them if I ever had to, and those aren't easy words to type.
Evolution as a theory was seriously questioned by Darwin himself before he died, and in recent years it has been shown to be a compilation of theories based on multiple suppositions without solid scientific proof to back them up. Yet, so many cling desperately to a theory shown to be far short of true science. That tells me that there are other factors not being taken into consideration here. To even begin life, the odds are 10 to the 18th power it would happen by chance. Then you have all the variations that come through evolution and the equation jumps to 10 to the 80th power! It is beyond rational imagination to believe that an explosion in a junk pile would ever, ever result in the pieces falling into place to become a perfectly functional two bedroom house. Yet that is as likely as to happen as the theory of evolution is to be true. The answer lies in the fact that many people would rather believe that than to believe there is a God who created us. Why such resistance? I believe it is because most of us have grown up with a picture of "God" that we do our best to not think about, and if asked, we would rather say, "there is no God" than to admit that he exists and has formed us into his image. Therefore we leave ourselves no option but to believe the impossible. I can understand that because I have felt that way. The truth lies not in science, but our picture of who God is. Consider that perhaps he is not the kind of person his enemies have made him out to be. Research why there is so much disinformation about God. Perhaps he is the essence of love in its purest form. If we can get a clear picture of his character, then the natural beauty of our world makes so much sense. It nurishes the rational mind. The infinite variety of life takes on its original grandeur, and instead of arguing about evolution, we could spend our time enjoying the rich beauty of life as it was meant to be.
MA_Matriarch: exactly. And that's why, although we must follow the laws of the physical world in which we live, the mind can enter at any moment and begin to act. Thus, we can decide to go left instead of right, and by extension we can believe or not believe in the unknowable.
There's plenty of room for faith or belief. A little over 100 years later, William James wrote the "Will to Believe." Although this work was derided in its time, to me it captures the ideas I have about belief but don't have the skill to capture with words
Yes hybridoma2001, Kant via you provided half of it, Janten supplied the other half..., and I formed the whole from what was already there.
Why is it that creationism and evolution must be mutually exclusive?
Godinot points out in this article that evolution only explains how life developed, not how it was created. Evolution theory posits that a single cell emerged in the sea as the sole source of life. What created this single cell?
Any scientists knows that for a theory to enter the realm of science, it must be able to be proven wrong. Every hypothesis must have the potential to fail. If it doesn't than it is not science. Accordingly, evolution is a theory that cannot be proven wrong, so it is not a science. It is merely another theory, in the same way that creationism is a theory.
To edladysmith. Those aren't my words but the words of Immanuel Kant. If you read the entire Critique of Pure Reason, you would understand what he meant by those words. All he meant was that matters invloving God, Free Will, and immortality are beyond our understanding because none of these can be proven empirically. He later goes on to posit that there is a possibility of a God just as much as there is the possibility that there is no God. However, for anyone to say there is proof of either of these options is to make an unprovable claim because we can't arrive at a definitive answer using our powers of reason.
I know it is difficult reading but I find that he treats this issue in a very methodical and objective manner as he sets out the limitations of our ability to know anything for certain which cannot be provided by experience.
Of course there is a wide range and long history of religious experiences which can't be simply dismissed and I believe that many people have mystical or religious experiences. But back to Kant. All he was attempting to do was define the limits of our knowledge through reason alone. He had nothing to say about any other issues - just our limits of gaining knowledge through pure reason.
What an absolute beautiful thread!
Evolution has been proven, it is not a theory as many religious groups would like to believe. The reality is that religion co-opted the idea of God and the fear of sucha being into a large money making institution. This goes back to the Pharoahs of Egypt and probably further still than that. The Vatican was the center of power for centuries in Europe, and the Imam's held control over the Muslim world for centuries from Mecca and other places. Religion has long been used to acquire power and money. The few who lead the masses by fear and coersion. In the end if there is a God, religions are the last things that have any knowledge of such a being. Religion is interested in controlling large masses of people in order to maintain power and control. Evolution will have taken another step forward in the human story when we evolve past religion to realize that we are all spiritual beings tied to the same source and that no one theology (the words root is similar to theory isn't it?) has the answers most of us seek. Until someone can prove that they have died, seen the afterlife and come back to the physical realm we live in today... there are no religious groups who can lay claim to the concept of God.
Knowledge can never be undone. Maybe the obvious idiocy of this will do in religious fundimentalism as it shows itself for what it is. Certainly it demonstrates that education is the best way to combat such ignorant raving.
MA_Matriarch, I too am glad that it's such a great mystery. The world, the stars - all of it is a great mystery and I don't need to know anything except what I am doing right now.
There is one mystery I would like to find an answer to and that is: why George Bush and Dick Cheney at this moment in time? There must be some reason, don't you think?
hmmm... via hybridoma2001: these questions "transcend every faculty of the mind"... and janten: "Each of our life experiences is a manifestation of potentials that enriches the universe and contributes to its evolution."
God is the great unknowable so long as we constrain ourselves to the duality, which was necessary to first experience life in the physical realm... and as we ever evolve there will come a point where we can truly transcend this limitation. The way has been known (and feared) from nacent humanity, we only need re-member.
Some of the ideas I have seen this morning resonate with me. Those who speak of Mysticism make more sense, because when we get down to belief,only that can keep us walking the path we're on. The Mystic can feel the reality of meaning of science's description of how things work and also the reality the oneness of all creation. I also am a Matriarch, and it's the wonder of all of it that gives me hope to keep living out my years.
Meaning and purpose in life are found through living life as fully and as completely as possible by developing our potentials to the fullest and by utilizing all of our capabilities and capacities to learn about and understand the nature of all things. Living such a life can be approached either along the path of science or along the path of mysticism or some combination of the two. Either path ultimately leads to a realization of the Oneness of all things and all beings, and this realization of Oneness is religion, which means a rejoining and rebinding in Oneness.
[Mysticism is the root of all religions. It is the path of individual experience in the non material realms. Some have had deep mystical experiences and tried to share these experiences with others, which is something that is quite impossible to do. Others have then taken their limited and distorted understandings of such reported mystical experiences and created organized religions from them. In that process, the essence of the original mystical experiences is lost and only vague clues and outer trappings remain, heavily shrouded within various moral and political agendas.]
The path of science leads us through the material realm utilizing the capabilities and capacities of our minds to discern and analyze everything we see, hear, touch, taste, and smell (directly or indirectly). The path of mysticism leads us behind and beyond the material where we must rely on the capabilities and capacities of our hearts to discern the essential nature of everything. Neither path is better than the other, they are simply different paths with different views, and there should be no conflict between them. Neither path is sufficient unto itself for providing us with a full knowledge, understanding and realization of the world we live in. Rather than conflict, harmonious cooperation between these two paths is the ideal we should strive toward.
Behind everything is the "intelligence of the universe" which can be conceptualized or understood from both secular and spiritual viewpoints. The scientist is guided by the laws of science, laws of physics and chemistry, while the mystic is guided by divine laws, laws of the soul and spirit, and they each create stories that try to explain the workings of things as they have come to know and understand them. Neither path alone leads to the complete story; both paths together in harmony can provide us with the most complete story and the most complete lives.
If we could all only understand and accept this, we would realize there is no need to argue about which way is right and which is wrong because there is no such right or wrong. Then each person could get on with following his or her path toward developing his/her potentials and living life more fully. We are each unique and each of our life experiences is valid and valuable in the greater scheme of things. Each of our life experiences is a manifestation of potentials that enriches the universe and contributes to its evolution.
hybridoma2001, I am actually glad creation is a big mystery.
Ron, I try to keep on open mind but I had a difficult time with Buddhism. Perhaps it was what I was reading. I was reading that one should give up all one's desires. Quite frankly it just didn't sit with me very well.
When I was very young I used to experience phenomenal things that could not be explained and when I searched for answers there were none to be found. All I ever was told was that the mean old devil was after my soul! To be truthful with you I was quite afraid. Everything that could not be logically explained was totally taboo to speak of.
Things have changed in the last thirty years thank goodness!I understand what you are saying but I believe in order to live in peace and for people to respect life etc.,creation it has to be on a collective conscience level.
With the results of last election and with the way this world is going the world still has a long way to go.
Why suppose that the start of the universe (as we know it) involved CREATION of any sort?
Really, what does it add to the question of why the universe began, to say that it was 'created?'
'Science' leaves room for religion. Okay. But religion adds NOTHING by way of explanation.
This should be requiered reading for all those who try to sneak religion into science.
At the beginning of Immanuel Kant's "Critigue of Pure Reason" he makes the following statement:
Human reason, in one sphere of its cognition, is called upon to consider questions, which it cannot decline, as they are presented by its own nature, but which it cannot answer, as they transcend every faculty of the mind.
It falls into this difficulty without any fault of its own. It begins with principles, which cannot be dispensed with in the field of experience, and the truth and sufficiency of which are, at the same time, insured by experience. With these principles it rises, in obedience to the laws of its own nature, to ever higher and more remote conditions. But it quickly discovers that, in this way, its labours must remain ever incomplete, because new questions never cease to present themselves; and thus it finds itself compelled to have recourse to principles which transcend the region of experience, while they are regarded by common sense without distrust. It thus falls into confusion and contradictions, from which it conjectures the presence of latent errors, which, however, it is unable to discover, because the principles it employs, transcending the limits of experience, cannot be tested by that criterion. The arena of these endless contests is called Metaphysic.
And that's where this whole dicussion of creationism, Intelligent design, whatever the theological matter, belongs: in a Metaphysics class. End of discussion.
I would also like to add that those folks who want to discredit science should take a course in Quantum Physics. At the sub atomic level, strange things indeed happen. Things pop in and out of existence all the time. So don't be so afraid of science. It hasn't declared any God null and void. If anything, Quantum Physics brings us back to the question of God and creation.
"We have to decode this, but that's a job for philosophers and theologians," Godinot said . "Creation is actually a big mystery." Indeed it is.
hybridoma2001, in my mind I believe it happened so that change could take place.
I believe there is another war taking place besides the one in Iraq. It is between those who want to control by fear, violence and ignorance and those like us who have voiced their thoughts in this thread.
I believe the truth will always prevail and a positive change will be the end result. Let's face it, money doesn't have the power "Divinity" does. I only wish it could speeded up somewhat.
We all have to keep in mind that a woman is the cause of the fall of human kind.
She had to pay for her sin by child bearing. Not only for human kind but for the entire animal kingdom. Quite the price to pay for knowledge!
Knowledge is a bad, bad thing. Science is seeking knowledge.
I could go on this subject forever.
It is too bad people can't realize that God and science can work hand and hand. People don't want to accept the big picture. It is just too bad people can't understand that the human race is evolving. It is evolving to a higher spiritual level. One that unites us in love with the creator.
I am angry with the three main religions. It is what that has caused things the way they are today. It is brainwashing pure and simple for power and control.
I just wonder how they are all going to feel the day they find out how they have all been sadly misled. I can't imagine how devastating that will be.
Organized religion has never missed an opportunity to frighten as many people as possible whenever it could make a buck by offering relief. Everybody wants meaning in their lives but I can't understand how belief in creationism gives meaning to anything.
Religion, any one of them, is the crux of all that is wrong with this world.
Most of these books, the Bible, Koran, Torah were written by people near two thousand years ago who thought that the Earth was the center of the Universe.
If God is all powerful and mighty, then why does he/she/it have an inferiority complex? This can be gleaned from the very first Commandment. "Thou shalt have no Gods before me". If he/she/it were really that omnipotent, then surely he/she/it must have known that there are no other Gods. One can tell that these books were written by Humans, not Humans listening to the word of he/she/it. Get a clue people. Whatever created this world surely must not have wanted us to continue killing each other and the planet we live on just for the sake of going forth to propser!
Dear MA_Matriarch: Well said. One quibble: Judaism is one of the three main religions? There are many more Buddhists and Hindus than Jews...Although some argue that Buddhism may not qualify as a religion since its founder admitted he was a human. Buddhism, which encourages each person to search for the truth, whatever it may be, is the only religion that is not threatened by science. As the world's theistic religions are eventually discarded as people reject their psychological terrorism, only the Buddha Dharma will remain. By the way, there never was a moment of creation and there never was a creator. Everything that begins must end. Time can't end so we know it has no beginning. Moreover, we have never been separate from reality so we are not in need of a re-union. Evolving to a higher spiritual level is not needed - we have never been below the highest spiritual level. Understanding these truths requires contemplation, but we are all timeless and indestructible. Please refer to Affirming Faith In Mind at www.clearwaterzen.com (under Chants) for a more complete exposition. It requires deep study.
I think biological evolution is one of God's most beautiful creations. I have no problem believing in the existance of both. It's the religious literalists that really get me, people who insist that their own religion is a literal interpretation of history and reality. We're never going to agree on where all this stuff came from, where it's going, or what, if any, literal meaning it has. If you can't accept the mystery of life, then you know less than you think you do. BAHippie
Because science is never wrong. Just ask the Greeks and Africans.
Within fields is alot of politics. Science and religion are two not so different perspectives or political tools seeking a monopoly on truth. Literal interpretation of faith-based to many, myself included, appears to be just silly; science, however, has proven to be just as destructive and anti-progressive. Interpretive manipulation of unquestionably subjective information has seeked to justify such opressive structures as racism, capitalism, classism, zionism, anti semitism and more. Consider for a second the now ever-lacking correalion between skull size(cognition) and race and then compare that to the equally manipulative techniques applied in texts like the Bell Curve. If science means objective truth then these examples are that of the grey area of non falsifiable, ambiguously misleading pseudo-science*, but what does that say about a field that fails to filter out such, and in fact renders truth a reciprocal of Western arrogance. Truth is not a black and white backdrop, its a struggle for self, this coming from one of science's own.
*consider, the joke of a field, evolutionary psychologiy, where anybodys guess is as good his/her peers, nothing can be proved or disproved, and the our current economic and social situation is considered probabilistically static...