Creationism VS. Darwinism debate II

After I posted the first portion of this article in a forum (I love Philosophy.com), a fellow philosopher responded:

"The theory of Evolution, on the other hand, gives scientific support to the belief that we are all related. That is, all humans come from the same pair, and all of life comes from the same primordial seed."

Until that hi-lited word becomes "absolute proof", I doubt the possibility of being on the same page about our existence will come to fruition. The word 'theory' leaves room for doubt just as the word 'faith' leaves doubt in the mind of the secular community for different religious affectations.

Unless both factions seriously explore the other's beliefs with equal interest and intent, it is doubtful the twain shall meld. For as both contend they are qualifiably viable in their own right, contentiousness make them polar to one another.

I replied:
I have studied both sides objectively, and as regards this contention, I see a crucial difference between the two sides:

The Creationist side begins with a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 & 2; an interpretation which many (perhaps most) well respected and well grounded theologians (such as Augustine) reject; an interpretation which is, in itself, a theory about what the Creator intended to communicate through those chapters. While you refer to your belief in this theoretical interpretation as Faith, it seems to be really more of a commitment to agree with the doctrine which your particular denomination promulgates. From the basis of that predetermined, theoretical interpretation of scripture, only that portion of the scientific evidence and deduction which supports that interpretation is accepted, while other evidence and the implications thereof is ignored.

The Evolution side begins with evidence, painstakingly accumulated and recorded. Observations of God's creation were made in detail by Darwin, an ordained minister himself, and those observations led him inevitably to the conclusion that the physical characteristics of earthly organisms came to be through the God-given process of natural selection. This theory was the only logical framework that could explain his data and observations. His faith in God was not shattered by this revelation, rather his awe and astonishment at the subtlety of God's creation was increased. His understanding of human foibles and failings, however, prevented him from publishing his work until another scientist (Wallace) made an new set of observations and came, independently, to the same conclusions.

Regarding the theologians of Creationism: Read Mathew 7: 15 - 20 which has as its theme "You shall know them by their fruits." If the fruits of Creationism are discord amongst Christians, the rejection of Christianity by the Scientific community, the rejection of science by a large potion of the Christian community, the atheists making a plaything of religion, and the followers of Creationism becoming blindly loyal followers of their clergy and tithers of their church to the detriment of their willingness to reason, then who will say that these are good fruits?

Creationism VS. Darwinism debate

I have been researching the history of the Creationism VS. Darwinism debate, and it appears that one strong impetus for opposition to Darwinian theory in general was the rise of Social Darwinism. One particular force for the development of this controversy in the U.S. was William Jennings Brian, who opposed the theory of evolution, and actively campaigned against, it for two reasons. First, he believed that what he considered a materialistic account of the descent of man through evolution undermined the Bible. (One might assume that he preferred a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 & 2.) Second, he saw neo-Darwinism or Social Darwinism, which tends to support forcefulness and aggressiveness over loving kindness and meekness, as a great evil force in the world promoting hatreds and conflicts, especially the World War.*

In The Literal Meaning of Genesis Saint Augustine argued that Genesis should be interpreted as God forming the Earth and life from pre-existing matter and allowed for an allegorical interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis. He argues that the six-day structure of creation presented in the book of Genesis represents a logical framework, rather than the passage of time in a physical way. Augustine recognizes that the interpretation of the creation story is difficult, and remarks that Christians should be willing to change their minds about it as new information comes up. He also warned believers not to rashly interpret things literally that might be allegorical, as it would discredit the faith. *

The entire Creationism vs. Evolution debate has been a real source of contention and conflict in this country. It has polarized the scientific community in opposition to the religious community to the extent that scientists have become embarrassed to confess their belief in religion and many Christians have come to distrust science. (There is even some thought that the distrust engendered by this debate has been used by greedy industrialists in their efforts to discredit scientific evidence for global warming.) There is evidence in the arguments made on the Creationist side that ignorance of the nature of scientific research and theory-building is not only prevalent but valued. There is also evidence that atheists see this vocal Creationism movement as representative of all religion and use it as a strong argument for their position.

It seems a great pity that such a destructive controversy as this might have arisen from a mistaken belief that the biological/historical theory of The Evolution of Species by Natural Selection leads inevitably to disbelief in God or to a belief that “might makes right.” The theory of evolution works both as an explanation for the known data about the nature of life and as a means for predicting other observations and forming testable hypotheses. Theories of social Darwinism, while predicting that a better armed country will win a war and that a bully will get his way on the playground, do not provide any basis for morality. Indeed, moral decisions that come from such theories could lead to the destruction of civilization and the end of life on Earth. The theory of Evolution, on the other hand, gives scientific support to the belief that we are all related. That is, all humans come from the same pair, and all of life comes from the same primordial seed. It would be better for Christianity if all Christians would graciously accept Evolution of Species, just as the Christian community finally accepted that the earth revolved around the sun.

*[Paragraph contains quotes from articles in Wikipedia]

Religion, Society and Civilization

There can be no doubt that religion has had a powerful effect on society. Some historians and historiographers have suggested that with the ascension of a new religion has come a renewal of civilization. Studies in the social sciences have suggested that religion facilitates cooperation among unrelated people, including strangers, within a culture or society (assuming that all or most members of the society are members of the same religion.) There have been cultures based around common religious belief and practice, theocratic states, and even theocratic empires. There have also been many conflicts caused by religious differences, including wars waged by the members of one religion against the members of another, the purging of heretics, and lesser conflicts in the form of verbal and social attacks.

IMHO, one of the central purposes and functions of religion is to unite people. We can look at this statement in two different ways:
1)The function of uniting people that religions have had in the evolution of social order. This would be the materialist view.
2)The purpose of uniting people that the founders of religions have had and that the Supreme Being has had in inspiring the revelation upon which each religion is founded. This would be the theist point of view.

Likewise, IMHO, the conflicts which religion has caused are due in part to the those tribal instincts which we share with our closest genetic relatives, the great apes. While religions have, through the ages, provided common identity, common goals, common moral laws, and cooperation within large groups of people, it has not eased competition and conflict between large groups with different religions. The tribal instinct is exacerbated by the human creativity of some clerics and pseudo-clerics who use the influence of religion for the promotion of their own power. It has been found in the villages of Pakistan and Afghanistan that education can strengthen a society against the influence of so called “fundamentalists”, who try to recruit terrorists by using lies about Islam. This is especially true when girls are educated the same as boys. (See the book "Three Cups of Tea" by Greg Mortenson.)

I believe that conflicts can be ended, and humankind's potential increased, by a religion which grows by its power to attract peoples hearts, which appeals to our highest aspirations and ideals while also satisfying our intellect, and which promulgates the oneness of humanity (that is, that expands the group to include all people everywhere, whatever their races, cultures, nationalities, or original religions), the oneness of religion, universal education, unity of nations and the development of a common world language and script.

Bahá’u’lláh says, “The fundamental purpose animating the Faith of God and His Religion is to safeguard the interests and promote the unity of the human race, and to foster the spirit of love and fellowship amongst men. Suffer it not to become a source of dissension and discord, of hate and enmity.” 'Abdu'l-Baha expands on this, saying, “if religious belief proves to be the cause of discord and dissension, its absence would be preferable; for religion was intended to be the divine remedy and panacea for the ailments of humanity, the healing balm for the wounds of mankind. If its misapprehension and defilement have brought about warfare and bloodshed instead of remedy and cure, the world would be better under irreligious conditions.”

It is because of human nature that an institution such as religion is needed to unite and facilitate cooperation among large groups of unrelated people. Human nature includes many characteristics that we share with chimps, bonobos and other great apes. Among these characteristics is a sort of tribal instinct. Tribes of great apes usually consist of 20 to 50 individuals. There is coherence and cooperation within each tribe, as well as a limited degree of competition. There is competition, between tribes, and inter-tribal warfare has even been observed. Human nature also includes a degree of creativity and individual expression far beyond that of the great ape. This creativity and ability to act outside of cultural norms and constraints is, I believe, what the book of Genesis refers to as “knowledge of good and evil”. Our creativity has also led us to form cooperative groups (societies, states, cultures, etc.) much larger than the tribe.

Cooperation in these larger groups requires shared identity, trust gained through a shared moral code, and shared allegiance to leaders who are perceived to have a strong claim to authority. All of these are provided by religion, along with guidance on how to practice being a good member of society and motivation (in the form of promised reward and punishment in the afterlife) for behaving within the norms. From a theist point of view, one sees that God, having created us and the universe in which we live, has given us religion to guide us along the path He has set for us. In the scriptures of most religions, we are urged and guided to strive toward the goal or purpose for which we were created. In the Christianity, Islam, and the Bahá’í Faith, that purpose has been stated in different, but compatible, ways. One of them is, “to know and worship God.” Also in those scriptures we are told that to knowledge of God is knowledge of our true selves. In the Bahá’í Writings we are told:

“The heights which, through the most gracious favor of God, mortal man can attain, in this Day, are as yet unrevealed to his sight. The world of being hath never had, nor doth it yet possess the capacity for such a revelation. The day, however, is approaching when the potentialities of so great a favor will, by virtue of His behest, be manifested unto men. ... All men have been created to carry forward an ever-advancing civilization. The Almighty beareth Me witness: To act like the beasts of the field is unworthy of man. Those virtues that befit his dignity are forbearance, mercy, compassion and loving-kindness towards all the peoples and kindreds of the earth.”