Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 90 (8839 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-27-2018 1:13 AM
228 online now:
Dr Adequate, edge, Faith (3 members, 225 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Calvin
Post Volume:
Total: 832,555 Year: 7,378/29,783 Month: 1,602/1,708 Week: 5/488 Day: 5/77 Hour: 0/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
4567Next
Author Topic:   Kenneth R. Miller - Finding Darwin's God
MrHambre
Member
Posts: 1494
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 31 of 94 (44181)
06-25-2003 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Minnemooseus
06-25-2003 1:40 AM


That's where Miller and I part ways. I admire the way he takes great pains to distance himself from 'theistic evolutionists,' since he won't ascribe intention to the admittedly hit-or-miss history of life on earth. I also respect his forthright denial that he could believe in a God who destroyed 99% of all the species He supposedly created, which is far superior to the cynical He-must-have-had-His-reasons attitude typical of creationists.

However, he does believe that God revealed Himself to the faithful when they had sufficiently evolved for the knowledge. I suppose Miller has to rationalize his beliefs in the most consistent manner, and I don't think there's a God scenario out there to which I'd be likely to subscribe wholeheartedly. All said, though, I've still never run across a better attempt to reconcile scientific expertise with honest religious faith.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-25-2003 1:40 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
MrHambre
Member
Posts: 1494
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 32 of 94 (74060)
12-18-2003 9:32 AM


I wanted to bump this topic because Kenneth Miller's work addresses a few hot issues being debated right now.

Message 16 of this thread quotes the passage in Miller's book concerning his meeting with Henry Morris.

Miller's Christian faith has not prevented him from understanding biology, accepting the reality of common ancestry, and affirming the mechanistic basis of evolution. Although I doubt any of our creationist members have read Miller's work, I wonder what they would make of his thoughts. Certainly Miller shines a harsh light on creationism's scientific shortcomings, but he also addresses the metaphysical concerns raised by creationists here at EvC.

Kenneth R. Miller writes:

convictions that allow science to be bent beyond recognition are not merely unjustified - they are dangerous in the intellectual and even in the moral sense, because they corrupt and compromise the integrity of human reason.

My impromptu breakfast with Henry Morris taught me an impor­tant lesson-the appeal of creationism is emotional, not scientific. I might be able to lay out graphs and charts and diagrams, to cite labora­tory experiments and field observations, to describe the details of one evolutionary sequence after another; but to the true believers of cre­ationism, these would all be sound and fury, signifying nothing. The truth would always be somewhere else.

------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

[This message has been edited by MrHambre, 12-18-2003]


Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Brad McFall, posted 12-18-2003 11:05 AM MrHambre has not yet responded

    
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 2810 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 33 of 94 (74091)
12-18-2003 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by MrHambre
12-18-2003 9:32 AM


Yes,
there is an "emotional" part but for me it had to do with human sexual reproduction so this is not as clear when one attempts to "abstract" the issue that is but mitosis vs meiosis to the unlearned undergraduate or high school student after all. That there are non conversional experiences is however fairly easy to imagine.
watchword was "sequence".
This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by MrHambre, posted 12-18-2003 9:32 AM MrHambre has not yet responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3638
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 34 of 94 (81022)
01-27-2004 2:28 AM


Bump for TripleA345
Bump.

Note: the book is subtitled "A Scientist's Search For Common Ground Between God And Evolution".

This is an evolution side book, written by a Christian biology professor. I think I've even encountered creationists who think well of this book.

Check upstring, and also, I suggest reading the book itself.

Moose


Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by MrHambre, posted 01-27-2004 9:57 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
MrHambre
Member
Posts: 1494
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 35 of 94 (81073)
01-27-2004 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Minnemooseus
01-27-2004 2:28 AM


Open Challenge to All Creationists
I feel Kenneth Miller is viewed by creationists as the 'token believer' in the evolutionist camp. Nothing could be further from the truth.

He's an accomplished cell biologist who's also a fine writer, and in this typically excellent article he asserts that "In many respects, evolution is the key to understanding our relationship with God." In short, he's not trying to draw a line between religion and science, he's trying to make sure we understand that these are two sides of the same coin. We have to be honest in the way we deal with both matters, or else we're not seeing the full picture.

I challenge the creationists here to read the essay on the link posted in the previous paragraph. It distills many of the points made in Miller's book Finding Darwin's God, which I have already read and recommended. These points are crucial to the debate here at EvC and I want to know why creationists continue to ignore them.


The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall
This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Minnemooseus, posted 01-27-2004 2:28 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by lfen, posted 09-11-2004 6:58 AM MrHambre has not yet responded
 Message 44 by Brad McFall, posted 09-11-2004 12:30 PM MrHambre has not yet responded

    
truthlover
Member (Idle past 1836 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 36 of 94 (81079)
01-27-2004 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Minnemooseus
05-31-2002 11:26 PM


I doubt that God would frown upon Ghandi, just because he didn't partake in the Judo/Christian/Islam axis of religious beliefs.

Off topic, but since you took the time to adjust your signature:

This depends on your definition of partake. He partook of Christianity more than most Christians I know and said that if Christians lived the Sermon on the Mount, he might be one. He compared the Sermon on the Mount to his beloved Bhagavad Gita.

I doubt God would frown upon him, either. Would that Christians gave themselves to Jesus' teachings the way Ghandi did!

Christianity: The only religion in the world where believing in the founder of the religion is all that's required; you can ignore his teachings.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Minnemooseus, posted 05-31-2002 11:26 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 1836 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 37 of 94 (81083)
01-27-2004 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by MrHambre
06-24-2003 11:57 PM


Miller doesn't think evolution is God's way of creating

Help me here. What are you saying? Miller believes in evolution, and he believes God created everything. So what does he believe is God's way of creating? I can't think of any interpretation oy this statement that makes sense to me.

The Darwinian mechanism is simply the only way we have freedom, exactly what we'd expect to see in a universe where we were not expected.

Huh? Help. I'm not understanding this at all. "The only way we have freedom"? What does that mean?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by MrHambre, posted 06-24-2003 11:57 PM MrHambre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by MrHambre, posted 01-27-2004 11:21 AM truthlover has responded

  
MrHambre
Member
Posts: 1494
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 38 of 94 (81087)
01-27-2004 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by truthlover
01-27-2004 11:13 AM


Teaching a Man to Fish
quote:
Huh? Help. I'm not understanding this at all. "The only way we have freedom"? What does that mean?
Here's a zany idea. Why don't you read Miller's essay? Or, knock yourself out, read his excellent book and find the answers to these questions and many more besides?


The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall
This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by truthlover, posted 01-27-2004 11:13 AM truthlover has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by truthlover, posted 01-27-2004 11:43 AM MrHambre has not yet responded

    
truthlover
Member (Idle past 1836 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 39 of 94 (81093)
01-27-2004 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by DBlevins
06-25-2003 5:24 AM


Therefore, evolution does not
support the position of the materialists.

But isn't this exactly what Miller was arguing against?

I don't think this is what Miller was arguing against. Miller was arguing against evolution supporting the position of the materialists or the creationists. It doesn't support any philosophical position at all.

I suggest that, if God is real, we should be able to find him somewhere else - in the bright light of human knowledge, spiritual and scientific.

It seems that again a limit is being placed on what we "can" know. We've only been around as a species for roughly 50k yrs. We are still young.

Again, I don't think he's saying this at all. I think he's saying that God ought to be found in what we know, not in what we don't know. He specifically says science keeps explaining all sorts of things that creationists said were unexplainable. He thinks if God created us with reason, then reason ought to help us find God, not eliminate God's hiding places (God hiding in the gaps of our knowledge).

So, there is no limit on what we can know. He's just saying that what we learn ought to help us understand God better.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by DBlevins, posted 06-25-2003 5:24 AM DBlevins has not yet responded

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 1836 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 40 of 94 (81098)
01-27-2004 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by MrHambre
01-27-2004 11:21 AM


Re: Teaching a Man to Fish
Here's a zany idea. Why don't you read Miller's essay?

Sheesh, sorry. What you wrote didn't look like something that would be explained by his essay. It looked like something very short and thus hard to follow. I figured a couple extra sentences would explain what you were saying.

I just finished Miller's essay before I found your reply to me, and you're correct, of course, that it explained what you were saying.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by MrHambre, posted 01-27-2004 11:21 AM MrHambre has not yet responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3638
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 41 of 94 (141405)
09-10-2004 1:23 PM


Bump for ID man
I strongly recommend Miller's book, as a Christian biologist evolutionist's perspective on the evolution vs. creation debate. Included is his discussion of Behe's ideas.

Moose

ps: Also read this topic.


    
lfen
Member (Idle past 2454 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 42 of 94 (141519)
09-11-2004 6:50 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Minnemooseus
06-07-2002 1:56 AM


quote:
I scanned the entire book into the computer (ain't big hard drives wonderful)

Scanned? OCR? or is it an image file of some sort? Would be much nicer as a document that could be searched.

lfen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Minnemooseus, posted 06-07-2002 1:56 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 2454 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 43 of 94 (141520)
09-11-2004 6:58 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by MrHambre
01-27-2004 9:57 AM


Re: Open Challenge to All Creationists
These points are crucial to the debate here at EvC and I want to know why creationists continue to ignore them.

Could be because it's science and not the Bible, or some theory derived from the Bible? It looks to me like most creationist just grab some quotes off a website and think that will vanquish scientific argument. As to actually reading and studying science? I've not seen an interest on their part.

lfen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by MrHambre, posted 01-27-2004 9:57 AM MrHambre has not yet responded

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 2810 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 44 of 94 (141549)
09-11-2004 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by MrHambre
01-27-2004 9:57 AM


Re: Open Challenge to All Creationists
Can anyone be assured that with,
quote:
leaving it, in Gould's words, forever "the unchallenged domain of insects and flowers."
M was not leaving a church of this opened door to Gould's USE of Goethe's plant that Croizat ALREADY dismissed to any plant part one would wish to sound out?

Yes, this "If that were true, evolution would long since have passed, in the public mind, from controversy into common sense, which is exactly what has happened within the scientific community "HAS happened to some extent and HAS spread at least to the 'spouces' so involved BUT WITH IT CAME the *acceptance* of a superfludity of sufficiency"" (to quote my Agnostic Grandmother) but this CAN BE DIMISSED rather easily philosophically and so what has become of this common sense on reflection?

I can challenge M'sG of flowers and insects one degree at a time but you see if c/e were a matter of ANY temperature flucutation we can not expect any resolution any time soon. I really found that I do not think in the same economy as this representation in fact and so it is hard to for me not understand

Could such Darwinian ruthlessness be part of the plan of a loving God?

Yes, it could. To survive on this planet, the genes of our ancestors, like those of any other organism, had to produce behaviors that protected, nurtured, defended, and ensured the reproductive successes of the individuals that bore them. It should be no surprise that we carry such passions within us,

as anything other than the child rearing classes said Grandmother took while biologist husband was teaching the evolution to future high school teachers all the while not adapting to the email world around us.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by MrHambre, posted 01-27-2004 9:57 AM MrHambre has not yet responded

    
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3638
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 45 of 94 (145082)
09-27-2004 1:42 PM


Miller not a theistic evolutionist
In Intelligent Design is NOT Creation[ism], Miller's being a theistic evolutionist is being argued.

In message 31, MrHambre says:

quote:
I admire the way he takes great pains to distance himself from 'theistic evolutionists,' since he won't ascribe intention to the admittedly hit-or-miss history of life on earth. I also respect his forthright denial that he could believe in a God who destroyed 99% of all the species He supposedly created,...

I'll also repoint out Miller's article here.

Moose


Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Percy, posted 09-27-2004 3:07 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
Prev12
3
4567Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018