American Buddhist priests have joined their Judeo-Christian counterparts and called for the teaching of evolution in public schools.
The only surprising part of this announcement is the sad fact that due to the incessant drumbeat of religious fundamentalism there has to be an announcement at all. But across America today, and in a growing portion of the rest of the world, modern science is under attack by those who would prefer that we return to a pre-scientific society, a society in which wishes trump evidence and in which ignorance attempts to dominate knowledge.
American Buddhist religious leaders have crafted a Buddhist Clergy Letter to parallel The Clergy Letters signed by more than 12,800 American Christian clerics, more than 450 American rabbis and more than 250 Unitarian Universalist ministers throughout the United States. Like the other Letters, this newest addition to the family of Clergy Letters makes it absolutely clear that deeply held religious belief can be fully compatible with the latest advances in science.
Indeed, the preamble to The Buddhist Clergy Letter consists of a quotation from the Dalai Lama: "If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims or adopt them as metaphor." From this perspective, the teachings of Buddhism, like the teachings of science, are provisional and must be considered open to change as new knowledge accumulates.
The concept of metaphor is a critical one since so many religious leaders, like so many good writers, recognize the power metaphor has to drive home complex points. To read religious texts literally, to ignore the obvious metaphors present in each and every one, is equivalent to striping the power from those texts. Why any religious person would want to do that is completely beyond my understanding.
Religious fundamentalists, with their adamancy about literalism (or at least their hypocritical and highly selective literalism), demand that their adherents choose between their narrow sectarian vision and the findings of modern science. Fundamentalist leaders require that science be rejected in favor of religious literalism. This is the crux of the culture war over the teaching of evolution. Evolution is dismissed because it conflicts with the metaphors used by pre-scientific societies -- and demands are made to redefine science to exclude evolution and include religion. The world is turned up-side down as some attempt to drive us back to the Dark Ages.
But as The Clergy Letters so dramatically demonstrate, religious individuals do not need to choose between scientific enlightenment and their religious faith. Both are possible. And for more than 13,500 religious leaders in America, the healthiest solution is to embrace both science and religion.
The full text of The Buddhist Clergy Letter makes this point exceedingly well:
The Buddhist tradition is primarily a rational religion. The earliest Buddhist teachings are intended to help all sentient beings to live a life of integrity in harmony with reality. While the specific science of evolution is not explicitly taught in our faith, it is implicit in the core teaching of interdependent origination, which demonstrates that all things are interconnected and contingent upon one another for their form and development. Likewise, a creator deity is not relied upon for a creation story. The ancient Indian fables of the Buddha's various incarnations from animal to human are readily understood not as a literal history but as metaphor describing the evolving nature of life. In fact, the concept of Buddha itself is best understood as a symbol for humanity's evolutionary potential. For all of these reasons, we admonish public school boards to affirm their commitment to teaching the science of evolution. We understand the role of public schools is to educate students in the established principles of science and in other subjects of general knowledge.
Members of The Clergy Letter Project welcome American Buddhists to our movement and hope that their presence helps make it clear just how broad based religious support for the teaching of evolution really is.
Follow Michael Zimmerman, Ph.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mzclergyletter
Why is this? Why do we have to treat neo Darwinism as if it should be regarded higher than any other theory, or even a higher than any spiritual truth conveyed in the Bible? Were any of these clergy told about the challenges to the modern synthesis as cited in current peer review science literature, as documented even by some mainstream secular scientist? (which I can cite upon request) The fact that someone would even word it this way attest to the fact that the theory has taken on the mantel of a religious doctrine itself. In this statement...... "Religious truth is of a different order from scientific truth" the word "different" is the way we used to use the words separate but equal during segregation, i.e. the word "different" is code word for inferior.
The letter goes on to say.... "We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth"
Yet they are guilty of their own admonishment. They, as in the two names I mentioned earlier. Again what a pile.
Earth to Kimberly...
Evolution has man evolving from apes well after most other species appeared on Earth.
Hence, the Bible does support Evolution.
Now, my minister felt that God was behind Evolution. Rather than made a radical change in a species, God would "evolve" an animal, until He got it right.
The minister also cautioned us not to say that God was behind Evolution in a science class, especially in a public school, since neither God's existance nor God being behind Evolution was capable of being proven scientifically. That was only acceptable for discussion in a religion or philosophy class.
Well I'm elated that your minister has enough integrity to advise you to keep religion out of the "Science" classroom (or any other classroom, public or otherwise, I would hope)...
However, you need to bone up on your high school biology :
Quote :
"Evolution has man evolving from apes..."
No. Modern "apes" and homo sapiens have both evolved from a "lower" order of primates, sharing common ancestry.
It's much more complicated than that, but as am not a biologist, I can take liberties and choose to remain ignorant, so long as I don't pretend to be otherwise...
One thing I am certain about, despite what your minister instructed you, is that you can't deduce modern principles of biology from Genesis, because both Genesis and the rest of the Bible are not the equivalent of contemporary observations in science...
It's...uh...safe for you to assume that much, without fear of recrimination from your minister...You can tell him I said so...
He won't argue with me...
Trust me.
J.B.
With God's sense of humor, anything's possible.
I find your response petty and insulting.A western cultural bias is a fine thing to express.I find it to be progressive,unhindered by too much tradition,balanced,and fair,
My "western cultural bias" has served me quite well.I have been able to avoid many of the pitfalls that my eastern counter parts fall prey to.One of those pitfalls is religion.I,ve studied comparative religion,science,philosophy,art ,physics,music and literature.I,ve talked to priests,shamen,rinpoche's,and rabbis.I,ve done extensive studies in sensory deprivation,but I have never answered a question with- god did it.
Is your argument with my definition of religion or did you want to add something useful to the conversation but missed the mark?
while this was the only paper i could find, i have a feeling it has more to do with me not having much of the vocabulary necessary for the search.
in any case, presenting one specific situation that may not be fully understoood from an evolutionary standpoint does not indicate evolution is wrong. that would require a dissenting theory be proven - which by the tone of your voice would be god. has any god believer ever explained how it is rational to believe in a being for which there is no evidence of its existence? simply because you are ignorant as to the explanation of a phenomena does not entitle you to insert any evidence free explanation you desire.
If, by 'believer in evolution' you mean 'biologist', yes, completely. It's not mysterious at all. What on earth do you find puzzling about articulated joints? You can't imagine the value of a flexible limb without the complicated articulation of an elbow or knee?
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/09/south-korea-evolution/
The evolution of consciousness process and the mystery of awareness is the stuff of life.
Seek and study both religion and materialism, but also seek beyond religion and materialism as both have an agenda and it is not pure science and discovery, it is 99.99% dogma and ideologies and protection of their cherished beliefs and paradigms.
Dear Clergyperson X,
Shape up, and get with at least the twentieth century,
Best wishes,
Humanity.