I agree with Mark in that science should be taught in schools and
intelligent design should be taught in faith institutions.  If both were
taught in the same place, that would signal to our youth that the
theories are on equal footing intellectually, which they are not.

I point you to this column that appeared yesterday in our newspaper,
written by a local rabbi, that clearly delineates the difference:

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=10BC35
EF1496A528&p_docnum=1&p_theme=gannett&s_site=indystar&p_product=IN

Don't read Bible as science 
SANDY SASSO 

The first two chapters of the book of Genesis have always captivated me.
The poetry, the economy of words, the literary flow of the unfolding of
creation characterize, as generations of readers have attested, a
beautiful and compelling narrative. 
 
It is regretful that politicians, members of school boards and religious
conservatives are trying to take a theological account about the
goodness of life, the dignity of every human being, the sacredness of
rest and turn it into a scientific description of the origins of the
universe.

Proposals before legislators across the country question the science of
evolution and suggest that creationism or intelligent design be taught
in schools as an alternative to the evolutionary theory regarding the
origins of life. The Washington Post reported that the Discovery
Institute in Seattle is spending more than $1 million a year for
research, opinion polls and media promotions to promote intelligent
design as a credible scientific theory.

The issue has come to the surface most recently within the Catholic
Church. While the church has embraced evolutionary theory, Cardinal
Christoph Sch nborn, Archbishop of Vienna and confidant of the new Pope
Benedict XVI, suggested last month that "evolution in the neo-Darwinian
sense -- an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural
selection " is not compatible with Catholic faith. The vice president of
the Discovery Institute had urged the cardinal to clarify Catholic
doctrine on evolution.

There are a variety of ways in which one can reconcile the Genesis
narrative with evolution. But attempting to turn the Bible into a
science textbook misses the whole point of the creation story. There are
a number of differing creation accounts in the Bible, two in the first
chapter of Genesis, various references in Psalms, the prophetic and
wisdom books. They were not written by scientists but by individuals who
stood in awe of the universe and sought to discern the meaning of human
existence. What we should learn from these narratives is not primarily
how the world came into being or what is the origin of life, but rather
what is the value of life and what is the meaning of human existence?
Sometimes to read the Bible literally is not to take it seriously
enough.

People of faith need not be troubled by the science of natural selection
and the randomness of evolution. They should rather be concerned about
the moral selections we make and the compassionate order we bring to
life's tragic chance occurrences. Faith should care less about whether
we are descended from monkeys and more about whether we act like humans
in the image of God.

Science and religion need not be at odds with each other. Science can
expand what we know; religion can help us decide how to use what we know
for good and not for harm.

To read the Genesis account of creation through the lens of the
astronomer, physicist and biologist ruins a perfectly wonderful
narrative and uses it for purposes for which it was not intended. It
teaches bad science and bad religion.

To read the Genesis account, as it was meant to be read, through the
lens of faith and poetry, drama and metaphor, is to come to know the
value of human life, the goodness of the universe and to stand in awe of
the creative process that continues to renew itself.

Albert Einstein taught that "religion without science is blind; science
without religion is lame." Centuries before, Galileo, whom church
authorities sought to silence, provided wisdom for our contemporary
debate, when he said, "The Bible teaches how to go to heaven, not how
the heavens go."

Sasso is senior rabbi at Congregation Beth-El Zedeck in Indianapolis.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Copyright (c) The Indianapolis Star. All rights reserved. Reproduced
with the permission of Gannett Co., Inc. by NewsBank, inc.
 


Julia Muney Moore
Public Art Administrator
Blackburn Architects, Indianapolis, IN
(317) 875-5500 x230
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Rebecca Fitzgerald
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 1:55 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: A washingtonpost.com article from: [log in to unmask]

What is wrong with teaching both theories? Why not make a place in our
schools for students to be exposed to both? Virtually every adult over
the
age of 45 WAS exposed to both theories - and it doesn't seem that those
generations were terribly scarred by the experience. 

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).