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 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-206 next last
To: MHGinTN
Oh, wait ... my second wife took most of those in the divorce. Never mind ...

One of life's lessons is, "Learn from your mistakes!"

81 posted on 07/10/2006 1:24:39 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

Sure, that's easy for you to say, you're still holdin' out on the six basic things life is all about ... while the rest of us keep plodding along in the dark.


82 posted on 07/10/2006 1:31:36 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu
About your link, while bacteria can swap genetic material, there still needs to be at least two types of bacteria.

Start with one kind of bacterium. Create some strong selection pressures on it and pretty soon you have two kinds. Something that eats nylon, maybe. So, no big deal there. It happens by itself.

Also, the fact is that it is far more probable for cellular life to mutate itself into extinction rather than become supposedly higher forms of life.

Do you consider yourself a cellular life form? Chances are you have three or so mutations not present in either of your parents. They are novel and unique to you but you didn't die.

Furthermore, while bacteria can get genetic material (from other bacteria), similar processes haven't been shown in any multi-cellular organism.

Every organism has some means of acquiring genetic variation, even those that reproduce by budding. That said, prokaryote (big cells with nuclei) budders evolve slowly compared to sexual reproducers because sexual recombination creates more variation faster.

Rather than being considered evolution, the gene swapping could be considered a form of mating (without production of immediate offspring) in that there is a mixing of genetic material. bye again.

Bacterial conjugation is not an important mechanism of evolution in non-bacteria. You are evidently misreading some paragraph in some linked material somewhere beyond all intent or proportion.

You also have a funny idea of what the word "bye" means, but I don't mind helping you educate yourself.

83 posted on 07/10/2006 1:35:03 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Given the first seven, I would think working out the remaining six is a trivial exercise.
84 posted on 07/10/2006 1:36:01 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
OK, OK! Food, water, respiration, the Krebs Cycle, urination, defecation.
85 posted on 07/10/2006 2:14:57 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu
Furthermore, while bacteria can get genetic material (from other bacteria), similar processes haven't been shown in any multi-cellular organism.

This is untrue in every possible sense.

Multicelled organisms get additional genetic material from viral insertion, from gene duplications, and from chromosome duplications. All of these processes have been observed.

86 posted on 07/10/2006 2:56:08 PM PDT by js1138 (Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: DManA; Alamo-Girl; curiosity; betty boop
In what sense is our planet remote? Remote from what?

~~~~~~~

Ummm -- remote from all this?

BTW, all but a handful of those objects are not stars, but galaxies (like our own Milky Way Galaxy) -- each composed of untold millions of stars like our sun.

You can read a description of the photo at this NASA website.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

FWIW, no matter how important you may think this ball of mud (and you) are, Earth isn't the most significant thing the universe...

87 posted on 07/10/2006 4:00:08 PM PDT by TXnMA ("Allah" = Satan in disguise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

Ooops...sorry. Since I "answered in your behalf", I intended to copy you on #87...


88 posted on 07/10/2006 4:03:53 PM PDT by TXnMA ("Allah" = Satan in disguise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA

FWIW, no matter how important you may think this ball of mud (and you) are, Earth isn't the most significant thing the universe...

Billions of galaxies with billions of stars each...and that's a very, very conservative estimate. This always puts things in perspective for me.

89 posted on 07/10/2006 5:05:41 PM PDT by ml1954 (NOT the BANNED disruptive troll who was seen frequently on CREVO threads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I knew it! I just knew you'd get to that Krebs thingy ... I consume plenty of anti-oxidants, btw. I'll move my enjoyment of beer into the Krebs list grouping. But I have a funny feeling you're holding out on us. There has to be at least one more ... the numinous one.
90 posted on 07/10/2006 5:11:13 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
I just put the Krebs cycle in there for filler. It's part of respiration.

The real last one .... (Drumroll!)

... i-i-i-i-is ...

REPRODUCTION!

Which is what somebody was trying to say is the whole show, but he wasn't reckoning with the Three Stooges.

91 posted on 07/10/2006 5:20:08 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

Some have accused me of inhaling my beer ...


92 posted on 07/10/2006 5:47:18 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Some have accused me of inhaling my beer ...

Pikers do that. Try inhaling a mouthful of egg roll with Chinese mustard sometime.

93 posted on 07/10/2006 5:49:24 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
You think I'm kidding. Really strong Chinese mustard makes me sniffle and cry so that pretty soon I can't breathe through my nose. But I'm still chewing on my egg roll.

So now I'm fighting for air, trying to breathe through my mouth, but there's egg roll and hot mustard still in there.

You can guess the rest. I pretty much gave up the mustard. Still like the occasional egg roll.

All that is part of life, too, but it didn't make the final cut. We're down into "honorable mention" stuff, now.

94 posted on 07/10/2006 5:52:44 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

"The more you know, the more you marvel" placemarker.

It is so sad Creationists want to limit God so much. It is important to them, IMHO, to create a God that they can deal with. One that creates such a wonderous Universe with such complex rules and processes is too much for them.

Better the God of Moses and Jacob -- like David Copperfield or Gandalf writ large.


95 posted on 07/10/2006 6:02:20 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Let them die of thirst in the dark.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA
FWIW = not much. Where does this impulse to denigrate this miraculous planet come from?

this ball of mud (and you)

96 posted on 07/10/2006 6:59:26 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: DManA; freedumb2003; Alamo-Girl; curiosity; betty boop
Where does this impulse to denigrate this miraculous planet come from?

"Miraculous"? Where does the impulse to aggrandize this ordinary planet over the rest of God's awesome and mighty creation come from? Is it because you are here -- and you think more highly of yourself than you ought?

"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork." (Psalms 19:1)

"When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?" (Psalms 8:3–4)

"Whatsoever the LORD pleased, that did he in heaven, and in earth, in the seas, and all deep places." (Psalms 135:6).

"It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in" (Isaiah 40:22).

"For I say, through the grace that was given me, to every man who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think reasonably, as God has apportioned to each person a measure of faith." (Romans 12:3)

BTW, it might not hurt to read Freedumb2003's post (#95) immediately preceding yours...

97 posted on 07/10/2006 8:47:00 PM PDT by TXnMA ("Allah" = Satan in disguise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA

Thank you so much for the beautiful Scriptures and astronomy picture!


98 posted on 07/10/2006 9:19:49 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Wow, snortin' Chinese mustard ... now that could lead to a numionous experience. BTW, how many chemical steps are there again, in the Krebs energy cycle? The chemistry has faded from my memory over the years since first 'introduced' to the production of more ATP. When one considers the trillions (literally) of protein assimilations going on continuously in the human body, and then realizes that someone is perhaps studying those very productions while they occur and can actually apprehend the order involved in the use of all that information driven chemistry (and that ATP to which you alluded with the Krebs cycle) ... well, that function of mind (a non-physical reality truly emergent from physical processes) dependent upon a physical brain is numinous.
99 posted on 07/10/2006 9:43:27 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl

This has been a great thread, Alamo-Girl! I think the head of the human genome project is on to something!


100 posted on 07/11/2006 12:38:15 AM PDT by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 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