My Take: Jesus would believe in evolution and so should you
Editor's Note: Karl W. Giberson, Ph.D., is vice president of The BioLogos Foundation and is the author or coauthor of seven books, including The Language of Science and Faith.
By Karl W. Giberson, Special to CNN
Jesus once famously said, “I am the Truth.”
Christianity at its best embodies this provocative idea and has long been committed to preserving, expanding and sharing truth. Most of the great universities of the world were founded by Christians committed to the truth—in all its forms—and to training new generations to carry it forward.
When science began in the 17th century, Christians eagerly applied the new knowledge to alleviate suffering and improve living conditions.
But when it comes to the truth of evolution, many Christians feel compelled to look the other way. They hold on to a particular interpretation of an ancient story in Genesis that they have fashioned into a modern account of origins - a story that began as an oral tradition for a wandering tribe of Jews thousands of years ago.
This is the view on display in a $27 million dollar Creation Museum in Kentucky. It inspired the Institute for Creation Research, which purports to offer scientific support for creationism.
And it’s hardly a fringe view. A 2010 Gallup poll indicated that 4 in 10 Americans think that “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so.” (http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/four-americans-believe-strict-creationism.aspx)
While Genesis contains wonderful insights into the relationship between God and the creation, it simply does not contain scientific ideas about the origin of the universe, the age of the earth or the development of life.
For more than two centuries, careful scientific research, much of it done by Christians, has demonstrated clearly that the earth is billions years old, not mere thousands, as many creationists argue. We now know that the human race began millions of years ago in Africa - not thousands of years ago in the Middle East, as the story in Genesis suggests.
The most compelling evidence for evolution comes from the study of genes.
And all life forms are related to each other though evolution. These are important truths that science has discovered through careful research. They are not “opinions” that can be set aside if you don’t like them.
Anyone who values truth must take these ideas seriously, for they have been established as true beyond any reasonable doubt.
There is much evidence for evolution. The most compelling comes from the study of genes, especially now that the Human Genome Project has been completed and the genomes of many other species being constantly mapped.
In particular, humans share an unfortunate “broken gene” with many other primates, including chimpanzees, orangutans, and macaques. This gene, which works fine in most mammals, enables the production of Vitamin C. Species with broken versions of the gene can’t make Vitamin C and must get it from foods like oranges and lemons.
Thousands of hapless sailors died painful deaths scurvy during the age of exploration because their “Vitamin C” gene was broken.
How can different species have identical broken genes? The only reasonable explanation is that they inherited it from a common ancestor.
Not surprisingly, evolution since the time of Darwin has claimed that humans, orangutans, chimpanzees, and macaques evolved recently from a common ancestor. The new evidence from genetics corroborates this.
Such evidence proves common ancestry with a level of certainty comparable to the evidence that the earth goes around the sun.
...
Read more here/Leia mais aqui: CNN
+++++
NOTA DESTE BLOGGER:
Esta opinião de Karl W. Giberson é para ser lida com o artigo de Marcelo Gleiser, Contra as formas de dogmatismo, Folha de São Paulo, de 10/04/2011. [Texto completo somente para assinantes da FSP ou do UOL] e os comentários deste blogger sobre o artigo de Gleiser.
Eu percebo uma tendência retórica desesperada dos evolucionistas para salvar a cara de Darwin de maiores vergonhas da falência epistêmica de sua teoria da evolução através da seleção natural e n mecanismos evolucionários de A a Z, com a polarização desta questão como sendo ciência vs. religião, ou ciência e religião compatibilizadas, quando a questão é estritamente científica. Uma tentativa blindar Darwin das críticas científicas.
+++++
NOTA DESTE BLOGGER:
Esta opinião de Karl W. Giberson é para ser lida com o artigo de Marcelo Gleiser, Contra as formas de dogmatismo, Folha de São Paulo, de 10/04/2011. [Texto completo somente para assinantes da FSP ou do UOL] e os comentários deste blogger sobre o artigo de Gleiser.
Eu percebo uma tendência retórica desesperada dos evolucionistas para salvar a cara de Darwin de maiores vergonhas da falência epistêmica de sua teoria da evolução através da seleção natural e n mecanismos evolucionários de A a Z, com a polarização desta questão como sendo ciência vs. religião, ou ciência e religião compatibilizadas, quando a questão é estritamente científica. Uma tentativa blindar Darwin das críticas científicas.
