.png)
In Italy, Galileo Galilei (1564 - † 1642), even as a Catholic, was forced by the Inquisition to abjure the heliocentric theory, to go against the belief that placed the earth at the center of the universe. Pope John Paul II (1920 - † 2005) apologized for the mistakes men of the Church had committed throughout history. In the Galileo case, he proposed an honest and unbiased review, but the commission he appointed to that effect in 1981 (which concluded his work in 1992) repeated once more the thesis that Galileo lacked scientific arguments to prove heliocentrism , And maintained the innocence of the Church as an institution, And Galileo's obligation to obey him and acknowledge his teaching (thus justifying condemnation and avoiding rehabilitation).
During the Middle Ages and to the present day, the term " creationism " has served in Theology to designate the origin of the personal soul, and that each soul is the object of a special act of creation by God. Evidently, according to them, only human beings have souls. And that each soul is the object of a special act of creation by God. Evidently, according to them, only human beings have souls. And that each soul is the object of a special act of creation by God. Evidently, according to them, only human beings have souls.
Holy Inquisition
The rapid social success of the theory of Charles Darwin in the nineteenth century not only promoted the reaction of some important theologians but also on the part of scientists, which saw an important foundation for Darwinism philosophical materialism and a door Open to the refutation of the teleological and cosmological argument for the existence of God; The human being, provided with a soul by the hand of God, could not descend from inferior bodies devoid of spirit. Classical creationists, therefore, deny the theory of biological evolution, and especially that which refers to human evolution, as well as scientific explanations of the origin of life. This is why they reject all scientific evidence (fossil, geological, genetic, etc.). In classic Creationism of Christian origin, a literal interpretation of the Bible is made and the creation of the world, living beings and the cataclysm of the Universal Flood is sustained, as described in Genesis (without pretending to scientifically specify the origin Of the species and their kinship).
In current creationism, there are two sides; Living beings and the cataclysm of the Universal Flood, as described in Genesis (without pretending to scientifically specify the origin of the species and their kinship). In current creationism, there are two sides; Living beings and the cataclysm of the Universal Flood, as described in Genesis (without pretending to scientifically specify the origin of the species and their kinship). In current creationism, there are two sides;
The anti-evolution creationism, try using no - religious grounds, from discoveries or knowledge of disciplines within the natural sciences, presented as evidence against the theory of evolution. This is how we talk about scientific creationism, the name given by its supporters. However, unlike the natural sciences, in this type of creationism, the scientific method is not followed. Its main activity is to deny to a greater or lesser extent the validity and importance of evolutionary explanations about the origin of biological structures, to conclude that its creation is necessary by a direct intervention of an intelligent being.
Creationism pro-evolution believes in the existence of a creator and a purpose but does accept that living beings have been formed through a process of natural evolution. This form of creationism is not intended to interfere with the practice of science, nor is it presented as an alternative to neo-Darwinism, but as a philosophical or religious complement to the theory of evolution.
The Council of Europe, a body charged with ensuring respect for human rights in the Old Continent, began to discuss in October 2007 a report that warned of the dangers of teaching creationist theories in schools. Although pro-evolution creationism (which does not interfere with science), corresponds to the politically correct and official position of the Catholic Church, what is spreading and spurring is creationism that denies the evolution of species through selection Natural, holding that the Earth is not more than 10,000 years old and was created by God. This vision is supported by multiple Protestant Churches in the United States,
Science vs. Religion
Some of these people deny both evolution and extinction, holding that God would not create groups of beings that needed changes or adaptations to achieve the survival of their descendants, nor allow God-created beings to become extinct.
I suppose that because of the insanity and insinuation of such statements, there is another part that believes at least in the process of extinction (but produced only by an inter-intervention and divine will), and continue to reject the process of evolution (completely ignoring explanations and Scientific evidence of fossils ).
And finally, there is the sector that believes in evolution and extinction (but divine); That is to say, they accept that such processes occur, but that they are produced by intervention and will of God (they are those who promulgate the so-called " intelligent design "). These believers advocate the complexity of the human being and the universe as a demonstration that such a 'perfect' machinery has not been able to take place without the intervention of an omnipresent Creator God.
As we see, there are three completely contradictory positions, ranging from denying unflinching evolution and extinction to relying on its existence to explain that such complex processes, necessarily require a supreme intelligence. This strategy encompasses all possibilities, and despite openly excluding some arguments with others, through the disinformation and ambiguity that characterize these sectors, maintain a cohesion based on religious belief and blind faith.
Of the three positions, intelligent design is the most dangerous (because it proclaims itself scientific, becoming a candidate to be taught in schools). They claim that we live in a universe that is too well tuned, And with just characteristics so that life is possible (and that can not be attributed to luck or chance). For scientists, such an argument only shows the lack of imagination (to assume the impossibility of the existence of other forms of life ). Life, as we know it and understand it, may not exist under different conditions, but different forms of life might exist in its place. On the other hand, the multiverse hypothesis according to which there would be multiple parallel universes with different laws and variables would disrupt the argument because it implies that this universe is as probable as any other of the infinity that exists. And other scientists, They simply argue that the universe is not as well tuned as one thinks (or life is so perfect); Organisms evolve from their ancestors through mutations in DNA replication and retain past traits that are no longer used (often, characteristics detrimental to their survival). If everything were so in tune, would not we expect organisms to be really perfect? Should not natural selection be a really intelligent process, and not a card game in which if you hit a bad hand (little gene adaptation to the environment), you extinguish? Should it not be fair and equitable, and not a constant competition from which only the strongest are saved?
The other point that supports intelligent design is the " Are beginning to be subjected to new selective pressures for a second use. If we look only at the latter, the origin of the organ may become incomprehensible. Nowadays molecular biology, biochemistry, and other disciplines can increasingly explain these cases of supposed irreducible complexity.
Regarding the designer, the arguments of those who propose intelligent design are formulated in a way that makes no mention of the designer or his nature (they only conclude their existence and do not question it). But when the necessity of a designer is affirmed, naturally the possibility opens up and with this also arises the paradox of being able to ask itself who designed the designer?
The United States National Academy of Sciences and other scientific bodies classify intelligent design as pseudoscience.
Creationism
Despite this, support movements for intelligent design have succeeded in provoking a political mobilization in the United States with followers (including some members of the legislative chambers), who advocate the insertion of intelligent design into education programs as if it were a Theory alternates with evolution. In his last days at the head of the White House, George Bush interfered in the debate of creationist theories and assured that "the creation of the world is so mysterious that it requires something as big as an all-powerful". The Republican leader believes that creationist theory should be taught in schools along with the theory of evolution.
According to the European study, creationism was a phenomenon that occurred almost exclusively in the United States but is now gaining popularity in Europe (especially in communities evangelical Christian and Muslim ). The Council of Europe cited problems in Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, among others. Some examples are cited: Britain, a year earlier hosted a symposium international creationism, while in the German state of Hesse, the culture minister called for creationism be taught in schools along with the Theory of Evolution.
The Guardian newspaper reported that more and more in the schools of England is being taught the material that proposes an alternative of biblical bases to the theory of the evolution of Charles Darwin.
One of those who teaches these ideas, Nick Cowan (director of the department of chemistry at the Bluecoat school in Liverpool), told the newspaper that the fact that so-called "intelligent design" criticizes Darwinism does not mean that intelligent design theory Is not "scientific."
Conversely, Lewis Wolpert, a biologist at the University of London and vice-president of the British Humanist Association, stated that "the case for intelligent design is purely religious and has nothing to do with science."
According to the Council of Europe report, "there is a risk of confusing children between what is belief and what is science ." Religious beliefs do not allow changes in their approaches since they are based on some sacred writings supposedly revealed by God. By definition, a dogma is not open to being discussed, analyzed, or complemented. Science, on the other hand, admits doubt, adapts and shapes itself constantly, and therefore does not settle in absolute truths. The document asserted that creationist fundamentalism can become a threat to human rights. And indeed in the face of the events that occurred, it is.
Madeline Kara Neumann
In March 2008, Madeline Kara Neumann, 11 [ Photo ], died of a curable disease (diabetes), at home in a rural area, while a group of people surrounded her and prayed for her recovery. Dale Neumann, his father, told the state court in Wisconsin that he strongly believed that God would heal the child. His advocate claimed that he was absolutely persuaded that the "faith cure" was working, so he should not be charged with any crime. Prosecutors said Neumann underestimated her daughter's condition and allowed her to die, a selfish act in the name of a religious belief. Neumann, who is 47 years old and has studied to be pastor of the Pentecostal evangelical church, insisted that he was convinced that God would heal the child. "
The court found the man guilty of murdering his sick daughter because she preferred to pray for the girl's recovery rather than seeking medical attention. Neumann's wife, Leilani, was sentenced earlier this year for the same offense: second-degree murder by negligence. Last month in Oregon, a man was charged with a misdemeanor (the original charge was homicide), when he started praying instead of taking the doctor to his 15-month-old daughter who had pneumonia. Also earlier this year, a couple tried to flee to Mexico when authorities forced them to take their son to receive medical treatment.
The couple had refused medical care for religious reasons. The young Zachery Swezey agonized in the midst of tremendous pains, fever, and diarrhea for three days. His relatives were around the bed, praying for his healing. Finally, when it was obvious that he was about to die, they sought an extreme solution; They called the elders of the congregation to be anointed with olive oil and ... they prayed. His family, members of the church of the first born, believe in healing by faith (and no one thought of calling a doctor). The autopsy revealed that he died of a ruptured appendix (which could have been cured with a simple operation that is routine in any hospital).
Attempts to prosecute parents have been unsuccessful because the laws in Washington state are clear: "A person who is treated by an accredited practitioner of" Christian science "for the purpose of medical care,
Can not be considered as deprived or abandoned of the necessary medical care. " This law was promoted by the so-called" Christian Science "practitioners who have had sufficient legal capacity to implement such laws in several US states. Rita Swan, president of the "CHILD Inc" group, says there are at least 18 religions that are responsible for the deaths of children in the United States. , But there are laws that prevent those responsible from being tried.
Tom Henderson is a retired NASA engineer and engineer, who asserts that intelligent design reaffirms the existence of a creator. In his message, Henderson states that the first chapters of Genesis are literally true (as is the rest of the Bible). "For some people, evolution is a barrier to believing in the good news of Jesus. They think that if the theory of evolution is true, Christianity is false. And they are right. But if evolution is a myth, then they can accept the faith, "he said.
Under these approaches, in the Creationist Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, the institution has dioramas and models representing children playing near a group of dinosaurs, as well as an exhibition on Adam and Eve, and the Universal Flood. All employees of the museum have to subscribe to the belief that life was created in six days and reject the idea defended by most scientists that it took millions of years of evolution of matter for living beings to reach their shape current. [ In the photo, Ken Ham; Founder of the Kentucky Creationist Museum, USA ].
Creationist Museum of Petersburg, Kentucky
In this booklet ( the joint publication of "answer in Genesis" and "the creation museum") distributed by Kem Ham and John Morris, children are explained to what really happened to dinosaurs, and how those evil Have been lying:
Movements like intelligent design, struggle to replace with their theories the classes of evolutionary biology in the United States schools (and have obtained significant victories, especially in the south).
Entradas
0 comentarios:
Publicar un comentario