Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reason to Believe : A leading geneticist argues that science can lead to faith
Washington Post ^ | 07/09/2006 | Scott Russell Sanders

Posted on 07/09/2006 8:40:40 PM PDT by SirLinksalot

Reason to Believe A leading geneticist argues that science can lead to faith.

Reviewed by Scott Russell Sanders

THE LANGUAGE OF GOD

A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

By Francis S. Collins

Here we are, briefly, under the sun, one species among millions on a gorgeous planet in the remote provinces of the universe, our very existence a riddle. Of all the words we use to mask our ignorance, none has been more abused, none has given rise to more strife, none has rolled from the tongues of more charlatans than the name of God. Nor has any word been more often invoked as the inspiration for creativity, charity or love.

So what are we talking about when we talk about God? The geneticist Francis S. Collins bravely sets out to answer this question in light of his scientific knowledge and his Christian faith. Having found for himself "a richly satisfying harmony between the scientific and spiritual worldviews," he seeks to persuade others that "belief in God can be an entirely rational choice, and that the principles of faith are, in fact, complementary with the principles of science."

As a researcher who helped discover the genetic basis for cystic fibrosis and other diseases and as the director of the Human Genome Project, Collins brings strong credentials to the scientific side of his argument. For the spiritual side, he draws on Christian authorities such as Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas and C.S. Lewis. His aim is to address "extremists on both sides of the science/faith divide." On one extreme are those scientists who insist that the universe is purely and exclusively matter, and on the other are literal interpreters of the Book of Genesis who reject the last two centuries of scientific discovery.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: asshatathiests; atheisttruebeliever; bewareofluddites; bewareyeccult; bloodbath; crevobloodbath; crevolist; droolingpavlovians; faith; geneticist; godsgravesglyphs; herecometheyecs; humangenome; keywordwar; keywordwars; lookout; pavlovian; pettykeywordfight; science; slaughterhousefive; timhardin; whatsayek
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-206 next last
To: Coyoteman
Among Collins’s most controversial beliefs is that of “theistic evolution”, which claims natural selection is the tool that God chose to create man. In his version of the theory, he argues that man will not evolve further.

Considering his accomplishments perhaps he believes further improvements in man will be artificial rather than by natural selection.

21 posted on 07/09/2006 11:04:24 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
“I see God’s hand at work through the mechanism of evolution. If God chose to create human beings in his image and decided that the mechanism of evolution was an elegant way to accomplish that goal, who are we to say that is not the way,” he says.

There's a lot of people who like to tell God how to do things, and I'm not talking about the scientists.

22 posted on 07/09/2006 11:06:11 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: puroresu

Possibly, but they'd stick him in a P.E. class rather than science...


23 posted on 07/09/2006 11:12:34 PM PDT by Triggerhippie (Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
Wondering about the title.

Maybe he's been looking at Reasons to Believe

24 posted on 07/09/2006 11:41:40 PM PDT by skeptoid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA

Yep! There's an awful lot of assuming that goes into those millions of miracle mutations which supposedly accompany all that natural selection and adaptation.


25 posted on 07/10/2006 4:53:49 AM PDT by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Happens every day.


26 posted on 07/10/2006 4:55:52 AM PDT by DennisR (Look around - God is giving you countless observable clues of His existence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

"Hot climate favors darker skin, low sunlight favors lighter skin up to a point."

Huh? A lighter-skinned person would be able to survive a hot climate better than a dark-skinned person.


27 posted on 07/10/2006 4:59:36 AM PDT by DennisR (Look around - God is giving you countless observable clues of His existence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Triggerhippie; tallhappy

Some scientists may be finally realizing that the universe is more complicated than they thought. I wouldn't be surprised to see more prominent scientists coming forward to suggest that reality is way beyond mere happenstance.

To partially paraphrase a famous physicist, not only is the universe stranger than we imagined, it's stranger than atheistic scientists wanted to imagine.


28 posted on 07/10/2006 5:05:31 AM PDT by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: puroresu
Wouldn't those examples be natural selection, not evolution?

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

Evolution = variation + selection

I gather you accept selection. Do you think variation does not exist?

29 posted on 07/10/2006 5:40:13 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

Natural selection and evolution aren't the same thing. Unless you presume that all the current traits of every creature on earth existed within the original single cell that supposedly started all this. Evolution requires countless millions of mutations to add new information.


30 posted on 07/10/2006 6:55:48 AM PDT by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: puroresu; Ichneumon
Natural selection and evolution aren't the same thing.

I explained to you in my post what the relationship is. Your answer is no answer to it. I'll repeat. The only other component of evolution is variation. Do you not believe in that?

Unless you presume that all the current traits of every creature on earth existed within the original single cell that supposedly started all this.

False dichotomy. At one point, that guru of stealth creationism, Behe was claiming to believe this. Do you think mainstream science believes this? If you don't know what mainstream science even says on the subject, how do you know it's wrong?

Evolution requires countless millions of mutations to add new information.

A nice Ichneumon post regarding increases of information with some related ID nonsense disposed of along the way.

31 posted on 07/10/2006 7:06:01 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
The only other component of evolution is variation.

Posting defensively, I'll anticipate a nitpick from the usual snide distractors and evaders. A case can be made for neutral drift having some role.

32 posted on 07/10/2006 7:08:01 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

I believe there's variation, of course. There has to be for selection to occur. Breeders of dogs and other animals take advantage of variation all the time.

But can the countless life forms that have existed on earth have come from a single original cell via mutations? It can be theorized that that occurred, but it does stretch the imagination, and I expect that's why the head of the human genome project is now suggesting that God has something to do with all this.

I've always said that evolution may be true. I'm not a scientist and thus not qualified to declare it to be impossible. But I do also believe in God and believe there is more to the universe and life than the material. I don't believe life can come from its absence, or that all the life on earth is the result of natural processes without God's handiwork being involved.


33 posted on 07/10/2006 7:18:21 AM PDT by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: puroresu
So is the scientist who headed up the team that cracked the human genome qualified to teach public school science classes?

Probably not. The education establishment has it fixed in most places so you need a teaching certificate or a degree in "education."

But what does that have to do with my post?

34 posted on 07/10/2006 7:23:44 AM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: puroresu
I believe there's variation, of course. There has to be for selection to occur. Breeders of dogs and other animals take advantage of variation all the time.

That doesn't leave much room for evolution not to happen.

But can the countless life forms that have existed on earth have come from a single original cell via mutations?

Yes, as already pointed out in the post to which you are supposedly responding here. TRY TO CATCH UP!

It can be theorized that that occurred, but it does stretch the imagination, and I expect that's why the head of the human genome project is now suggesting that God has something to do with all this.

Hello? There is nothing so far identified to stop it continuing indefinitely over time. Of course it happens, as you yourself admit. Nothing stops it. There have been billions of years on Earth already. That's about all you need to know.

I've always said that evolution may be true.

When you get yourself unstupid about the evidence for it, it becomes even more likely.

35 posted on 07/10/2006 7:24:07 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DennisR
Huh? A lighter-skinned person would be able to survive a hot climate better than a dark-skinned person.

Dark skin is an adaptation to intense ultraviolet light. It helps reduce skin cancers.

Light skin is an adaption to minimal ultraviolet light. It allows more ultraviolet light to penetrate the skin, which in turn is critical for vitamin D production.

36 posted on 07/10/2006 7:27:45 AM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

Well, all you're telling me is that you believe there's an unlimited capacity for variation and that that must be how we all got here. That's a belief, not a fact.

Do you know for a fact that all life on earth descended via this method from a single original cell?

Of course, you don't. No one does.


37 posted on 07/10/2006 7:37:18 AM PDT by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: tickmeister
Sorry, makes no sense to me.

Your choice, of course. But this article is a hit to the "argument" of some evols who try to dismiss the belief in intelligent design of some scientists. The extent of their argument is generally just that these guys are nutcases, blah, blah, blah.

You've admitted (perhaps not intentionally) that it is a matter of faith either way, and I can respect that.

38 posted on 07/10/2006 7:39:13 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

Not everyone believes that natural processes alone could produce the varied life forms we see on earth, that's what it has to do with your post. Here we have a leading scientist who feels that God had something to do with it.


39 posted on 07/10/2006 7:40:46 AM PDT by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Huh.... While I think I'll give the book itself a look, the reviewer's own beliefs are the most noticeable thing about this review.


40 posted on 07/10/2006 7:43:07 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-206 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson