Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

FaithandEvolution.Org

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

[This just in:]

New Website on Faith and Evolution Explores
if the Two are Friends or Foes?

Find out at FaithandEvolution.Org

SEATTLE – In recent years, debates over faith and evolution have continued to intensify. On the one hand, “new atheists” like Richard Dawkins have insisted that Darwinian evolution makes it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. On the other hand, “new theistic evolutionists” like Francis Collins have assured people that Darwin’s theory is perfectly compatible with faith and need have no damaging cultural consequences.

Who is right? And why does it matter? A new website being launched today at www.faithandevolution.org by the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute explores the issue in-depth.

“FaithandEvolution.Org is for anyone who wants to dig deeper into the scientific, social, and spiritual issues raised by Darwin’s theory, but who is tired of the limited options they are currently being offered by the media,” says Dr. John West, Associate Director of the Center.

“Increasingly, the only voices being heard in the faith and evolution conversation come from two wings of the evolution lobby: atheist evolutionists like Richard Dawkins, and a handful of theistic evolutionists like Francis Collins. But there are a lot of thoughtful scientists and scholars who are skeptical of Darwin’s theory whose views aren’t being heard.”

“Thus, the first goal of FaithandEvolution.Org is to present the scientific information about evolution and intelligent design that is typically left out of the discussion,” says West. “A second goal is to tackle tough questions that are usually ignored about the consequences of Darwin’s theory for ethics, society, and religion.”

Visitors to FaithandEvolution.Org will find information addressing such questions as: Does evolution undermine belief in God? Are there scientific challenges to Darwinian evolution? What is the scientific evidence for intelligent design? And does Darwinism devalue human life?

FaithandEvolution.Org is packed with free tools and resources, including:

* Audio, video, and articles featuring leading scientists and scholars, including biologists Michael Behe and Jonathan Wells, mathematicians William Dembski and David Berlinski, and philosopher of science Stephen Meyer.
* A questions page answering people’s top questions about evolution, intelligent design, and related issues; and topics pages addressing key topics such as theistic evolution, evolution and science, evolution and ethics, and evolution and culture.
* Curriculum ideas and discussion questions for small groups, Sunday School classes, adult educational programs, and private school science classes.
* A searchable database of thousands of articles about evolution and intelligent design, and a glossary of key scientific terms.

West notes that unlike most pro-Darwin sites dealing with faith and evolution, FaithandEvolution.Org contains a prominent section titled “Debates” highlighting the views of both supporters and critics of Darwin’s theory on a variety of contested issues.

“It’s ironic that many of the pro-Darwin groups that claim to be promoting ‘dialogue’ about science and religion are really offering only a monologue,” says West. “They do their best to exclude those who disagree with them. But we have nothing to fear from a free and open exchange of ideas. That’s why we decided to have a section of our site where people could explore divergent views on such issues as the evidence for intelligent design, the limits of Darwin’s theory, and the connection between Darwin’s theory and Social Darwinism.”

West explains that since its inception in 1996, the Center for Science and Culture has devoted most of its resources to supporting research, publication, and education about the scientific aspects of the debate over Darwinian evolution and intelligent design.

“Nothing is going to change that,” he says, adding that much of FaithandEvolution.Org is focused on presenting scientific information in a clear and understandable manner.

“But we’ve always been clear that science has larger worldview implications, and so we want to encourage open and informed discussion of the implications of Darwin’s theory as well. This has become especially important in recent years as both the ‘new atheists’ and the ‘new theistic evolutionists’ have tried to monopolize the faith and evolution conversation. FaithandEvolution.Org is an effort to inject some balance back into the discussion.”

For more information:
www.faithanevolution.org
www.evolutionnews.org
www.intelligentdesign.org

For Immediate Release
Contact: Anika Smith
Discovery Institute
(206) 292-0401 x155
asmith@discovery.org

Comments
Graham: Nothing hard about that as this is an aspect of the fallen natural world that sometimes we can be "moral" or Nice which is often a behavior masking an ulterior motive that may not be so nice. However, this has effectively Nothing in compatibility with Christianity except in how all men should behave. What the world needs now - right? (You know the song) I think if you really assess human nature you might even come to this -"I've never had a selfless thought since I was born" C.S. Lewis So - your comment begs a question - Do you even know what Christianity is? - as your comment indicates an extreme misunderstanding which is the main tenant of this new website. Just in case the subject morphs into "faith" it is helpful to realize that "Golden Calves" are everywhere and Christianity is not about "faith", but about "The Faith" and the Faith of Christ in the redeemed. Evolution has NOTHING in common with this Truth, not to mention the real truths of nature, its origins and its ability to adapt to changing conditions for survival.alan
May 27, 2009
May
05
May
27
27
2009
08:06 AM
8
08
06
AM
PDT
Tribune7, your claim that "it's not natural" to be "nice to others in our group" is supported only by your assertion that natural actors are sometimes not nice. Your assertion does not support your claim, because natural actors may be "nice" at some times and "not nice" at others.Learned Hand
May 27, 2009
May
05
May
27
27
2009
07:40 AM
7
07
40
AM
PDT
Nakashima-san What is not natural about something good for survival? What is not natural is being nice to others in one's group. Consider that you are the stud happily procreating with 7 or 8 females, and some poor young critter comes along wanting one of them -- perhaps even the ugliest one -- and you drive him off by pounding his head in. Now, that's not very nice. It may not even be good for survival -- it can be argued either way. But it is natural. And you can find other examples -- animals eating their offspring (or the offspring of sexual competitors), killing their mates after fertilization, abandoning the weak etc. Nature is not nice.tribune7
May 27, 2009
May
05
May
27
27
2009
06:00 AM
6
06
00
AM
PDT
Mr Tribune7, What is not natural about something good for survival? It seems to be basic kin selection theory, ne?Nakashima
May 27, 2009
May
05
May
27
27
2009
04:04 AM
4
04
04
AM
PDT
Dr. Dembski informs us:
A questions page answering people’s top questions about evolution, intelligent design, and related issues...
Unless I overlooked something, there doesn't appear to be anywhere on the site to post questions. I am therefore curious as to how the "people's top questions" were arrived at.Alan Fox
May 27, 2009
May
05
May
27
27
2009
03:14 AM
3
03
14
AM
PDT
On the one hand, “new atheists” like Richard Dawkins have insisted that Darwinian evolution makes it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. On the other hand, “new theistic evolutionists” like Francis Collins have assured people that Darwin’s theory is perfectly compatible with faith...
I don't necessarily see a conflict between these two viewpoints. In this statement, Dawkins was saying that evolutionary theory is necessary to become an intellectually fulfilled atheist, not that it is sufficient. Although he does also state that he believes that evolution is corrosive to religious faith.Tajimas D
May 26, 2009
May
05
May
26
26
2009
11:49 PM
11
11
49
PM
PDT
Being nice to others in our group is good for our survival. Whats so hard about that ? It's not natural.tribune7
May 26, 2009
May
05
May
26
26
2009
09:00 PM
9
09
00
PM
PDT
I see the usual stuff about how we must all be amoral if evolution is true. However, some quite recent research suggests (yet again) that other animals have morals (just like us) which is exactly what you would expect from an evolutionary model. Being nice to others in our group is good for our survival. Whats so hard about that ?Graham
May 26, 2009
May
05
May
26
26
2009
08:03 PM
8
08
03
PM
PDT
1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply