Is it time for religions to accept evolution?

Post Reply New Topic

No.

Absolutely it is. There is more than enough evidence for evolution, while the creationist response is based on ridiculous pseudoscience which only makes Christians look ignorant and fearful of science. It hardly matters that we got here through millions of years of evolutionary change instead of seven days of making things appear out of the air, as long as you give God credit for doing it.

I do not think that you should not force a groups beliefs on anyone.

Creation ... evolution ... whatever ... in any case, we'll still have wars, poverty, brutality, ignorance, famine, drought, pestilence ... our current condition and what to do about it is more important than arguing over where our earliest human ancestors allegedly came from.

I believe at least some religious authorities already accept evolution in conjunction with theology.

Agreed. The percent of Christians who reject evolution is actually very small. I haven't seen any statistics for other religions.

... people argue evolution v. creation while millions starve to death every year ...

Indeed. Bigger fish, frying and such.

It's more important to alleviate the suffering of starving people than to sit in an ivory tower arguing about fine points of theology.

But even most people in places like Niger or Eritrea would agree that arguing theology is important, too.

Of course. It seems to be the business of certain sects of religion to deny reality in favor of fantasy.

According to one essay by a Greek Orthodox priest the Eastern Orthodox churches never really had much of a problem with Darwin.

The Catholic Church, though notorious for picking on Galileo centuries ago, pretty much tacitly accepted Evolution by mid 20th Century. Each Pope in my lifetime stated something to the effect that "its up to each Catholic to pick either Genesis, or Evolution. Either way its okay with me."

Its the Evangelical Protestants who are making an issue out of clinging to evolution denial.

Pope John Paul II was a PhD-level scholar in philosophy. He was a professor of philosophy.

I don't believe he thought that evolution was incompatible with Catholicism.

Depends on how you want to interpret the question... yes I think it's time they accept that religion is nothing but a relic of the past and we've evolved into a reasonable and scientific way of living. All the medical and industrial revolutions that have come about the last ~200 years and drastically improved our living standards are there because of science and belief in science and nothing else.

As for the creationism vs evolution part, that's really up to religious people whether they choose to believe one or the other. My only consideration is that it's potentially harmful to believe in nonsense. Like I'd rather be stabbed for my money than get killed by some lunatic who believes he's serving some higher purpose, because at least the first person has a sensible motive. If I wasn't so dead I'd just be embarrassed and face-palming in the second situation. That's not to say that you can't do good things out of ridiculous motives though. Religious people generally do way more good than bad because of their beliefs which shouldn't be forgotten.

The Catholic church doesn't really believe in evolution. They insert god in the process, which is not a necessary part of it.

So?

They still accept that "evolution" (in the general sense of meaning "gradual change over time") occurred which contradicts Genesis. So that would still would be an example of "a religion accepting evolution".