Religion

 From Michael Keas at Salvo: The truth is that science and biblical religion have been friends for a long time. Judeo-Christian theology has contributed in a friendly manner to such science-promoting ideas as discoverable natural history, experimental inquiry, universal natural laws, mathematical physics, and investigative confidence that is balanced with humility. Christian institutions, especially since the medieval university, have often provided a supportive environment for scientific inquiry and instruction. … We have documented the truth that Christianity was a major factor in the growth of science. Why do myths of science–faith disharmony dominate popular culture today? Misconception flourishes when famous and influential scientists make pronouncements about the history of science based on their own biased assumptions rather than the actual Read More ›

Concluding our religion News coverage for the week, From Wayne Rossiter, author of Shadow of Oz: Theistic Evolution and the Absent God: at his book blog: Over the weekend, I had a friend ask me about this story, in which Pope Francis has seemingly cast in with Darwinian evolution. Now, I have learned from previous experience, that pressing some Catholics on this will often result in some long response about the Pope being mis-interpreted. So, I’ll let others decide if this is really what the Pope said. But, let’s at least roll with what the story declares. “The theories of evolution and the Big Bang are real and God is not ‘a magician with a magic wand’, Pope Francis has Read More ›

Having rehearsed it all, he asks: 3.) If we don’t find life in the places and under the conditions where we expect it, can that prove the existence of God? Certainly, there are people that will argue that it does. But to me, that’s a terrible way to place your faith. Consider this: Do you want or need your belief in a divine or supernatural origin to the Universe to be based in something that could be scientifically disproven? I am very open about not being a man of faith myself, but of having tremendous respect for those who are believers. The wonderful thing about science is that it is for everybody who’s willing to look to the Universe itself Read More ›

As science culture tries to remake itself a the religion of naturalism, we can expect much more of this stuff. From Daniel Brown at LiveScience: 6. Moving stars Meanwhile, a wandering star on its path through the Milky Way might come so close to our sun that it would interact with the rocky “Oort cloud” at the edge of the solar system, which is the source of our comets. This might lead to an increased chance of a huge comet hurtling to Earth. Another roll of the dice. The sun itself follows a path through the Milky Way that takes us through more or less dense patches of interstellar gas. Currently we are within a less dense bubble created by Read More ›

In an age where “science” poaches everything religious, yet another end-of-the-world story whistles into the box, this time via Benjamin Groggin at Digg: The power of science has enabled humans to do everything from study distant galaxies to take high-res photos of Pluto. But one thing science has struggled with is understanding the limits of our universe, and particularly how it will end (or not end). To try to fill this gap in human knowledge, theoretical physicists have come up with a litany of possible ends for the universe, and they’re pretty darn interesting. More. The ends are scattered all over the map, actually. Big Freeze. Big Rip. Big Crunch. Big Slurp… Big everything but insight. And it says a Read More ›

Theistic evolution: Darwin was right and we defend Darwinism from critics from whatever quarter. But we feel that God did it somehow anyway (even though Darwin and most of his followers do not think that)… In a time of such ferment around evolution, theistic evolution attracts lazy people with theology credentials and a gift for easy sloganeering. In my line of work (O’Leary for News), one learns to spot these types, whether one wishes to use, abuse, confuse, or refuse them. Put simply: If I belonged to a church that wanted to “take a position” on evolution, I would ask, “Why? Even the Royal Society isn’t sure what its position should be. If we haven’t already gone and said something Read More ›

Relevant to that point, what proportion of the total are they? From a survey at philpapers: on where philosophers stand on stuff like God, free will, etc: Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will? Accept or lean toward: compatibilism 550 / 931 (59.1%) Other 139 / 931 (14.9%) Accept or lean toward: libertarianism 128 / 931 (13.7%) Accept or lean toward: no free will 114 / 931 (12.2%) God: theism or atheism? Accept or lean toward: atheism 678 / 931 (72.8%) Accept or lean toward: theism 136 / 931 (14.6%) Other 117 / 931 (12.6%) A friend notes that out of 931 target faculty 49.8% accepting or lean toward naturalism, and 25.8% accepting or leaning toward non-naturalism. Another friend Read More ›

Not just dumping on it. We get mail, only some of which we can quote*: At a recent alt-right meet up in Boston, a number of young alt-righters noted how they’ve given up on Christianity and have converted to neo-paganism (Asatru Folk Assembly). Their complaints about Christianity were as follows: … You have literal cuckolds adopting blacks and you have weak girly men crying about the need not to deport 3rd world invaders. This religion, they maintain, is a disgrace for any man with a healthy testosterone level.” … What happened? One professor of evolutionary psychology and religion, in a forthcoming book, argues that mainstream Christianity has been overtaken by girly men. It’s undergone a selection process where more manly Read More ›

At BioLogos, historian Ted Davis offers: Perhaps the greatest irony about the contemporary religion-science dialogue is the fact that, despite their own strongly articulated denials, many thinkers implicitly accept the “warfare” thesis of A. D. White—that is, they agree with White that traditional theology has proved unable to engage science in fruitful conversation. More than most others, John Polkinghorne understands just how badly White misread the history of Christianity and science, and how much theology has been impoverished by its failure to challenge this core assumption of modernity. … Nothing was more important to many modernists than the God they found within the evolutionary process itself, rather than in putative explanatory gaps in that process. What might be missed, however, Read More ›

From astronomer Chris Impey at Nautilus: Interdependence and impermanence. The words have different meanings to a scientist and a Buddhist, but they provide a common ground for a discussion of the interactions and transformations that pervade the physical universe. To a Buddhist, impermanence means there is no permanent and fixed reality; everything is subject to alteration and change. The Buddha said that life is a series of different moments, joining to give the impression of continuous flow, like a river. The scientific view is similar, from a human as a persistent biological pattern even as the cells are continuously living and dying, to the processes in the universe that continuously exchange and transform matter and energy. Buddhist interdependence means that Read More ›

Exhibit A: “If we made contact with aliens, how would religions react?” From Brandon Ambrosino at BBC: The discovery of life on another planet might seem incompatible with faith in a deity. Yet many theologians are already open to the existence of extraterrestrials, argues the writer Brandon Ambrosino. In 2014, Nasa awarded $1.1M to the Center for Theological Inquiry, an ecumenical research institute in New Jersey, to study “the societal implications of astrobiology”. Yes, we noticed that a few weeks back. And we are baffled as to why. Is there any religion on the planet that states as a dogmatic certainty that aliens do not exist? Those people might be worth a quote. Instead, we read This is not just Read More ›

At Themelios: The epistemology defended in this article leads to the recognition of plural Wissenschaften (see section 2.4 above). This has specific consequences for knowledge about our origins. There are facts about humans which fall outside the competence of the natural sciences, but which we learn from other disciplines. Psychology and sociology cannot be reduced to natural science, nor can philosophy and theology be discarded as providing no independent insights about human identity. This does not mean that natural science does not give us precious information about who we are and where we come from. But we cannot expect to know everything which is worth knowing about humans from this one source. Probably the oldest and best-known non-reductionist family of Read More ›

Scooby-Doo and the Case of the Silly Skeptic (David Wood) In “Scooby-Doo on Zombie Island,” the gang encounters real zombies and ghosts for the first time. But Fred explains away the evidence by appealing to increasingly absurd naturalistic explanations. In the end, even Fred recognizes that his explanations simply can’t account for the facts. Atheists often call themselves “skeptics.” But when we consider the methodology they apply when questioning God’s existence, we find that the atheist’s methodology rules out all evidence for God’s existence even before considering what the evidence is. In this video, David Wood uses some clips from “Scooby-Doo on Zombie Island” and some clips from his recent debate with Dr. Michael Shermer to show why it’s becoming Read More ›

From Suzan Mazur’s Public Evolution Summit: At a meeting last May in New York with Andrew Pohorille, NASA’s senior-most scientist on origins of life, Pohorille told me that there is a certain factor to life that far cannot be captured in the lab, i.e., life is not purely a technical matter, and that he does not expect “we” will find life anywhere else in the solar system, including Mars – he added that there is as yet o consensus on what life is. But what Andrew Pohorille did not tell me at the time was that just a few days prior to our meeting, NASA’s Astrobiology Program—headed by Mary Voytek—awarded $1.108 million (5% of its annual budget) to the Center Read More ›

From Times Higher: College Rankings 2017: top 20 colleges for engagement Dordt College 18.3 Brigham Young University-Provo 18.0 Texas Christian University 18.0 Cedarville University 17.9 Baylor University 17.8 Note: Even if you are not a Christian, it is okay to send your kid to a serious Christian U, as long as you don’t mind hearing that the kid is engaged to a Christian who wants to do mission work. See also: Baylor prof Robert Marks on evolutionary informatics Follow UD News at Twitter!