#42373: — 10/01  at  12:12 PM
It isn't religion per se that's the problem, it's ignorance combined with an unwillingness to honestly face up to truths that discomfit one's dearly held worldviews that is. Spong is one of the more thoughtful Christians who is willing to acknowledge some truths that others prefer to ignore or, like Michael Behe, deliberately mislead others about. When the truth conflicts with faith, like Twain's Huck Finn when confronted with the humanity of Jim, we should be willing to go to Hell rather than deny it.

#42374: MAJeff — 10/01  at  12:13 PM
I completely agree with you. My sister, a Methodist minister in the Twin Cities, always provides me with a good reminder that all Christians aren't weak minded bigots. She marches in the gay pride parade, and upon seeing the Flying Spaghetti Monster remarked that it was the funniest thing she'd ever seen, and that she and her pastor buddies giggled for an entire weekend (She also once got some parishoners fussy because she embraced evolution).

#42376: — 10/01  at  12:17 PM
But I don't want to speak out louder!

#42377: — 10/01  at  12:18 PM
FYI, here's the passage from that my last post makes reference to:

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

So I was full of trouble, full as I could be; and didn't know what to do. At last I had an idea; and I says, I'll go and write the letter - and then see if I can pray. Why, it was astonishing, the way I felt as light as a feather right straight off, and my troubles all gone. So I got a piece of paper and a pencil, all glad and excited, and set down and wrote:

Miss Watson, your runaway nigger Jim is down here two mile below Pikesville, and Mr. Phelps has got him and he will give him up for the reward if you send. Huck Finn.

I felt good and all washed clean of sin for the first time I had ever felt so in my life, and I knowed I could pray now. But I didn't do it straight off, but laid the paper down and set there thinking - thinking how good it was all this happened so, and how near I come to being lost and going to hell. And went on thinking. And got to thinking over our trip down the river; and I see Jim before me all the time: in the day and in the night-time, sometimes moonlight, sometimes storms, and we a-floating along, talking and singing and laughing. But somehow I couldn't seem to strike no places to harden me against him, but only the other kind. I'd see him standing my watch on top of his'n, 'stead of calling me, so I could go on sleeping; and see him how glad he was when I come back out of the fog; and when I come to him again in the swamp, up there where the feud was; and suchlike times; and would always call me honey, and pet me, and do everything he could think of for me, and how good he always was; and at last I struck the time I saved him by telling the men we had smallpox aboard, and he was so grateful, and said I was the best friend old Jim ever had in the world, and the only one he's got now; and then I happened to look around and see that paper.

It was a close place. I took it up, and held it in my hand. I was a-trembling, because I'd got to decide, forever, betwixt two things, and I knowed it. I studied a minute, sort of holding my breath, and then says to myself:

"All right, then, I'll go to hell" - and tore it up.

#42378: — 10/01  at  12:19 PM
I do my bit by kicking the intellectual snot out of such creationists as I come across, while identifying myself as a Christian.

I get fewer opportunities than you might, as the creationists are neither as thick on the ground (just as thick in the head though) nor as open about it here, in Canada, as they are in the US. When a previous national party leader (Stockwell Day of the then Reform Party) and potential challenger for prime minister in an election turned out to be a creationist, he was the subject of nothing but ridicule in the mainstream of society and media here and it did him serious political damage.

#42385: — 10/01  at  12:41 PM
'It isn't religion per se that's the problem, it's ignorance combined with an unwillingness to honestly face up to truths that discomfit one's dearly held worldviews that is. Spong is one of the more thoughtful Christians who is willing to acknowledge some truths that others prefer to ignore or, like Michael Behe, deliberately mislead others about. When the truth conflicts with faith, like Twain's Huck Finn when confronted with the humanity of Jim, we should be willing to go to Hell rather than deny it.'


Thats a great comment. Except for the last line, I don't think hell is real

But the sentiment is well taken.

#42386: Josh Smith — 10/01  at  12:45 PM
It's rather unfortunate that these folks aren't more numerous.

However, I'd venture to say it's a mixture of the 15th century dipsticks in charge of churches around the world, the 19th century-style American idiots, and the liberal intelligent Christians that are bringing Christianity down in one big heaping, flaming carcass. I went to Pepperdine University last year (an interesting experience for an avowed agnostic) and I found that my arguments about religion with my religion professor usually came down to the same simple explanation by him. He made no stupid sweeping statments about how I just didn't understand. All he said is that for him - and for most other people - belief tends to function as nothing more than an astoundingly large trust system. His father believed; his grandfather believed; his great-grandfather believed; so no matter how ridiculous it may sound, a much younger religion-professor-to-be grew up thinking that there was no reason he should not trust the people he loved and respected most. Why should he throw that all away?

I have no doubt that in different circumstances the man could have been astute defender of evolutionary theory. I always considered it somewhat of a shame that we had to be on opposite sides of the argument.

But this generational understanding of belief as a sort of trickle-down system lets us also realize that in a world of debunking mythology, of science and its pervasive effects on the whole of humanity, that in a matter of a few generations, religion will soon be helpless, composed only of a minority. The televangelists continue to create an air of antipathy towards religion in general. Speaking from my own experience, it's quite possible that my generation is one of the largest to have rid ourselves of religion. Couple that with the slow acquiescene of the liberals within the churches, and you'll get an idea that Christianity is quite quickly pulling itself apart. The church can't continue to suffer the indignities of the televangelists, the rational thought of the liberal insiders, and the persistent air of rational, scientific progress outside its vaulted doors. Sooner or later, the whole thing is going to come tumbling down.

#42399: — 10/01  at  03:37 PM
I seem to remember that Pope Pius XII and Pope John Paul II said something very similar to this some years ago, in the case of John Paul, and over 50 years ago in the case of Pius. I'm sure they didn't mention ID (since I think it did not exist at the time), but their sentiment was similar. Too bad it now seems that the catholic church is trying to back-track on these previous endorsements of evolution.

#42413: Ms Cornelius — 10/01  at  08:54 PM
I have said it. See my post for August 2.

I just said it, and nobody cared.

#42414: Wesley R. Elsberry — 10/01  at  08:56 PM
How much louder do you want me to be?

#42419: — 10/02  at  02:51 AM
Something strikes me as I peruse this quote: a creationist could, as they always do, take these sentiments, substitute words, and fire them back at theistic evolutionists, fooling uneducated citizens:

Darwinian evolution is just one more smoke screen. The task of creationists is to study the sources of the life of this world. They should be free to follow wherever their scientific research carries them. If evolution is threatened by Truth (capital T), it is already too late to save it. Imagine worshiping a God so weak and incompetent that theistic evolutionists must defend this God from creationists etc,,,,

And, anyway, creatonists do not consider those of this viewpoint, to be "True" Christians, merely compromisers. YEC's and Anti-Evol's define words to suit themselves....

#42420: Alon Levy — 10/02  at  04:31 AM
The best way to mend this, Pete, is to make the claim more content-based. That is, instead of writing passages like this, maybe liberal Christians should write about how evolution is solidly factual and how Christianity needs to be reality-based. That way switching words won't be effective because it'll strip the quote of its substance.

Trackback: The World Eyes American Ignorance Tracked on: Cosmic Variance (70.96.188.28) at 2005 10 02 07:12:07
The absurd spectacle of a post-enlightenment society seriously discussing the relative merits of evolution and creationism is being watched with a mix of abject horror and ridicule back in my home country. Today’s Observer article, describing t...

#42449: Leah — 10/02  at  11:30 AM
I'll speak loud here! I'm a Christian, and I'm also a biologist, and I solidly believe in the theory of evolution. I intend to teach my children, and any others I may encounter, the strength of evolution, biodiversity, and our changing world.

If you're looking for more Christians like this one, talk to people in the United Church of Christ (http://www.UCC.org). Note: I don't suggest you go to church, and I don't want to change your beliefs. I'm just saying that the UCC has many more liberal-minded folk than the average church denomination. My dad, a UCC minister, preaches on the crucifixion and resurrection as a metaphorical event for rebirth. He works hard to understand the world in its changing form. He believes in evolution (thank goodness, or I don't think he and I would get along too well). One of the great things about the UCC is one of their recent slogans (for lack of a better word): "Don't place a period where God has placed a comma. God is still speaking."

Thanks for being open-minded and fair with people who will treat you in the same manner.

#42452: PZ Myers — 10/02  at  11:46 AM
I think my father was Church of Christ -- I never saw him actually attend, but he did point out the church building that was a few blocks from home and mention that he'd gone there as a kid.

#42478: — 10/02  at  07:35 PM
Alon: Yes, liberal Christians should familiarize themselves with the dirty tricks YEC's employ and make their less vulnerable to clever manipulation. I've debated a few creationists in chatrooms for its educational value, and noticed that any observation or logic can be subtly manipulated to fit the opposite POV.

#42485: — 10/02  at  08:52 PM
Bishop Spong begins his article by saying, "On one level it really doesn't matter what the Kansas Board of Education thinks, evolution is real and is not subject to majority vote any more than whether epilepsy is caused by demon possession."

There is no proof whatsoever that Demons don't cause epilepsy and it is blasphemy to believe otherwise. It is also possible to remain a believer in the Demon Theory of Disease in the modern world. So-called "liberal" interpretors of the Demon Theory have decided that it is "big enough" to "embrace" the contemporary scientific explanations of illnesses such as epilepsy. These are, however, only "proximate" causes, and just the way the demons do it. Demons are the "ultimate" cause. Science may have no need for the Demon hypothesis, but that merely demonstrates the philosophical naturalism and materialistic metaphysics of science. Demons are beyond scientific investigation, and speak to a non-overlapping magisteria.

#42501: — 10/03  at  08:10 AM
PZ writes:

I think my father was Church of Christ -- I never saw him actually attend, but he did point out the church building that was a few blocks from home and mention that he'd gone there as a kid.

Church of Christ or United Church of Christ? They're at opposite ends of the theological spectrum. I was in the former for a while in my foolish youth, and much later wound up in the Canadian equivalent of the latter.

I read a bit of Spong a few years back (part of a last attempt to see if there was anything left in this tradition that could still hold my interest or assent, I guess). In fact, the church I belonged to at the time hosted a talk by Spong, and ran a study series on his book _Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism_.

My take on Spong is that he does a really good job of explaining to the laity, all the stuff that's been going on in mainline seminaries and scholarly circles for the past three generations (and about high time, eh?). Where he falls down IMHO is when he goes off on his own speculations (the Resurrection actually happened at Sukkoth, not Pesach? Say what?)

#42506: PZ Myers — 10/03  at  08:42 AM
"Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?"

I don't know. He never went during my lifetime, and my father's whole family was extremely casual about religion...I'd be surprised if their church had been the slightest bit fundy.

#42511: — 10/03  at  09:05 AM
'maybe liberal Christians should write about how evolution is solidly factual and how Christianity needs to be reality-based. '


Then you have a real problem. You can't be reality based and believe in fantasy worlds, people rising from the dead, etc.

Then I read the quote about the UCC. And realized you could. But this belief system would be unacceptable to many due to it's lack of the supernatural.

#42537: — 10/03  at  11:09 AM

Too bad it now seems that the catholic church is trying to back-track on these previous endorsements of evolution.

Though a staunch athiest now, I was raised a catholic, and I DISTINCTLY remember discussions in religion class at school about the old testament being a whole lot of metaphors. I always thought that was one of the few enlightened things about the catholic church, and creationist claptrap was not the reason I left the church. Well, so much for that.

I do applaud the sensible Christians willing to speak up - I'm glad there are still some out there.