There are (at least) two things that are commonly "known" about religion. First, adherents of very different religions can't get along. Second, there is an ancient struggle between religion and science. As with much common lore, however, these two points are not necessarily true.
In fact, The Clergy Letter Project's new initiative makes it clear that both of these ideas are mistaken. A bit of background about The Clergy Letter Project will help set the stage.
The Clergy Letter Project is an international organization of more than 14,000 clergy and scientists who promote the teaching of evolutionary theory in schools. The Clergy Letter Project's religious leaders, more than 12,700 Christian clergy members, 470 Jewish rabbis and 230 Unitarian Universalist clergy members, have absolutely no problem living and teaching their faith while recognizing the importance, power and scientific accuracy of evolutionary theory.
For these religious leaders, there is simply no conflict between religion and science because they understand that the two fields deal with different facets of the human condition. Furthermore, these religious leaders recognize that their faith does not require them to close their minds to empirical patterns found in the world. Finally, these religious leaders embrace the process of scientific discovery and are confident that such discoveries in no way diminishes their faith.
The Clergy Letter Project's latest initiative is a Letter from Imams demonstrating that Islamic religious leaders share all of these beliefs. The Imam Letter parallels the Christian Clergy Letter, the Rabbi Letter and the UU Clergy Letter in urging that evolution be taught in public schools and recognizing that promoting any particular religious belief in those schools is a violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The second paragraph of the two paragraph Imam Letter could not be any clearer -- nor could it offer any stronger support for the teaching of evolution:
We, the undersigned Imams of the mosques, assert that the Qur'an is the primary source of spiritual inspiration and of values for us, though not for everyone, in our country. We believe that the timeless truths of the Qur'an may comfortably coexist with the discoveries of modern science. As Imams we urge public school boards to affirm their commitment to the teaching of the science of evolution. We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth.
How wonderful, while at the same time how deliciously ironic, that the theory of evolution can be used as a means to bring together religions that might otherwise be at odds with one another.
One of the overarching goals of The Clergy Letter Project is to demonstrate that the battle that so many want to portray as being between religion and science is actually something very different. In fact, there are religious individuals whose beliefs are at odds with science, and those people, typically fundamentalists regardless of their religion, are convinced that their perspective is the only "correct" one; that all other religious views are wrong. But, regardless of how much attention these people receive, they are in the minority and their views are every bit as much in conflict with the broader religious world as they are with the perspectives of the scientific community. These fundamentalists are attempting to claim all of religion for themselves by casting it in their own image while working feverishly to redefine science in a way that privileges their idiosyncratic readings of ancient texts.
The Imam Letter demonstrates that while fundamentalists come from all religions, Islam, like Christianity and Judaism, as well as other religions, is well populated by thoughtful people who are perfectly able to balance their faith and the findings of science. The Imam Letter demonstrates that Muslim leaders in the United States respect the constitutional separation of church and state every bit as much as leaders of other religious orders. And the Imam Letter demonstrates that religious leaders of all persuasions can be united in wanting our children to receive the best science education possible.
Unfortunately, the Imam Letter also demonstrates that there are those among us who are both ignorant and filled with hatred. In response to a call for signatures on the Imam Letter I've received prank e-mail from people who have nothing better to do than lash out at others. For some reason they think it humorous to try and sign the Imam Letter with vile names I'm unwilling to reproduce here. Somehow cursing at Islam makes these people feel good.
Evolutionary biology teaches us just how closely related all people are and how insignificant racial and religious differences are. The Imam Letter teaches us that people of different faiths have much in common to celebrate.
And the negative responses to this initiative demonstrate just how much ignorance we have to overcome.
If you want to be a part of this process, please visit the Imam Letter on the Web.
Follow Michael Zimmerman, Ph.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mzclergyletter
Michael Ruse: Is Darwinism a Religion?
Matt J. Rossano: Should Evolutionists Be More Self-Critical About Social Darwinism?
Ramnath Subramanian: Distinguishing Between Shallow and Deep Religion
Although scientists sometimes have a way of tweaking out an "answer" where there is none, like the against-all-odds inflation theory that is conjured up to explain inexplicable developments following the big bang, which is a whole other topic, there really is no answer to how the finite time since the big bang could have created such huge voids.
Well, if the voids aren't going away, is it possible the big bang may have to?
My new book, "The V-Bang," resolves many of the greatest cosmological mysteries, including the great voids. It is an entirely new theory of how the universe began, and is supported by far more current and past observations than the big bang. The big bang has over the years presented us with more questions than answers. V-Bang.org presents the answers -- and leaves very few questions.
by Josh Greenberger
V-Bang.org
In commenting on relevancy regarding the command "Read;" firstly, reflecting on the treasures of knowledge recorded in history as the accomplishments of civilizations, these treasures were found in some form already existing whether in the earth or in the study of the skies (stars). Allah Says to His servant and Messenger Muhammed (a.s.), "Read in the Name of your Lord Who Created..." Obviously our Prophet Muhammed understood the connection for human hearts and intelligence when God introduced Himself as The Creator in God's first communication to Muhammed.
Human society whether as a small number of neighbors or landowners coming together upon common interest, or town folks, or city dwellers, the most important of the bonds holding individuals together is the common bond of shared space, the land. The land is the Creation of God and the people is the Creation of God. God made land for people and made people for the land. The more the people engage the land to better their conditions, the more developed will be the land. Moreover, the land will be providing its fruits or its products serving man's needs often for more than one generation. What a beautiful parable given in Scripture comparing the relationship of husband to wife to the relationship of developer and the earth.
-------------------
-------------------
Man and The Universe As Mates Created for Each Other Its Timeless Relevancy
The study of man's development as a thinker or a philosopher, and scientist on the one hand, and as a human community on the other hand, presents an interaction showing the two concerns working together as mates. To address relevancy of a timeless nature in the history of community development for civil societies, Allah Most High Says that He Created for men mates of the same nature, in one reference. Allah Highly Glorified, Says also that man's female counterpart is man's tilth. A tilth is a cultivated area. In another Qur'an reference, Allah The Creator Says the size of the garden Created for man to engage with his heart and with his intelligence is in size as the expanse of the skies and the earth.
Â
The relevancy for man in time past, present, and future is understood by recalling how progress for the nations are recorded in history and is explained as result of the resourceful earth and universe engaged by human hearts and the human brain.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Language-Commentaries-of-WDeenMohammed/message/384
Time to face the cold-hard truth that science has won. You lost.
Evolution is a theory that is backed by 150 years of scientific evidence. Theories carry far more weight than mere facts.
--------------
--------------
We are hearing on the news and in educational publications and in regular magazines that come out like TIME and other magazines, we are hearing about the coming together of religion and science. Religion and science are being recognized now as not being against each other but belonging to each other.
With this occurrence, myths are being dispelled. That which we could not understand before in the culture as myth or tied directly to myth is now being uncovered and now being under stood, gradually.
But most of us are not even familiar with what is going on, because we are not situated in society to be in touch with such occurrences or such happenings. These things pass by the great majority of the people, and even the great majority of the educated people.
That is exactly what is happening - the meeting of science and religion, where religion is beginning to express its scientific composition and scientific design. Certainly, it is spiritual, but the spiritual has to be established. And the spiritual can not be established, unless it is through the material. By Imam W D Mohammed
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Language-Commentaries-of-WDeenMohammed/message/458
The crux of the conflict is based on a single sentence from the Bible. "And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness..."
The bible or koran believing person who believes god is "eternal" and "unchanging" would have to believe that in order for man to be created in the image of god, humans must also be the "end result" of creation, and therefore the image of a human must also be "eternal" and "unchanging".
The wrench that science has thrown into the works is that evolution does not simply start and stop on a whim. Evolution has no "end result" or goal in creation. Humans, like all animals, are not finished products. Humans today appear significantly different than our counterparts 30-40,000 years ago. Parents do not produce exact genetic copies in their offspring. And no two humans have the exact same set of DNA markers. Every generation has a few random gene mutations from their predecessors. So humans 30-40,000 years from now will appear significantly different than we do today. Which begs the question: What IS the "image" of god? What does god look like?
If humans change over time, and god made us in our image, does that mean that god has also changed over time? If "biblical" creation is true, then evolution cannot possibly be the vehicle that produced the results. If evolution is the best answer to describe how humans came to be, then the Bible and Koran are just mythology.
However, all religions have esoteric traditions where religious sounding statements (i.e. "God said") are understood to reference operations in consciousness.
The spiritual symbols in all scriptures are basically symbolic languages, and can be as valid for what they posit as any other language / symbol-set.
The key to understanding scriptures is they describe creation from the perspective of the subject - i.e. "God" is wholeness - awareness, which then creates duality (1s and 0s, so to speak), which then makes apparent limitation of consciousness and relative distinction possible, etc.
Wholeness, by definition, transcends change - but includes change within it, and so, the conflict you suggest doesn't exist from the view of esoteric systems.
And, please note: I'm not trying to argue the validity of all this -- my point is simply that scriptures have a more scientific, or at least rational, framework than comparing literal interpretations of scripture with modern science might lead us to believe.
As far as evolution is concern, many, yes even Muslim are surprised that the Quran mention evolution. Quran Chapter 24:45.
"And it is God who has created all living things out of water; and [He has willed that] among them are such as crawl on their bellies, and such as walk on two legs, and such as walk on four. God creates what He will: for, verily, God has the power to will anything."
"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Quran 21:30)
There are also other verse that specifically state that live was first created and evolve from water, something we could further later discuss.
"Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam. He created Him from dust; then He said to him, "Be," and he was." (Qu'ran 3:59)
The idea that man was created from dust (or clay) is actually mentioned several times after this, too. (Qu'ran 23:12, 38:71, 55:14,...)
Just like the Bible, the Qu'ran does NOT portray humans as an evolved being.
Scientists share a certain attitude or morality which is characterized by a combination of curiosity, open-mindedness, imagination, inventiveness, doubt, honesty, patience, and a willingness to give and take reasons (justification). This scientific attitude is certainly not incompatible with the religious notion of "Revelation", and it suits believers well.
Science reveals the truth directly from nature itself, and science has an inherent methodology of skepticism and self-correction sorely lacking in religious circles.
The only way to free oneself from the tyranny of dogmatism is to elevate from the literary limitations of Man.
Furthermore, as far as the religion scripture is concern, the Quran is perhaps the only religious book that not only mention evolution, but clearly stated how the universe began.
While all religions are not equal, their inherent methodology is the same: that is, faith reigns supreme while requirement for evidence is secondary if not unimportant.
Clearly stated how the Universe began? Really? Which part talks about quantum irregularity and the merger of the four fundamental forces?
Science listens to what nature tells us; all religions broadcast a point of view upon the Universe.
Also, as with the case of climate change, pollution and mass extinction of our species, science could back fire on us and sometimes become our mortal enemy. To deny this, in my humble view, is the same as one who blindly accept religion on irrational faith only.
As far as the scientific advancement in the Islamic history is concern, let me just remind you that in the case with the Arabs they were consider to be one of the most uncivilized people before they became Muslims. The Quran then implored on them to ponder and travel to investigate God's creation. One famous saying of the prophet Muhammad to his followers, "one must seek knowledge even one must travel to China." Also, the phrase "The pen is mightier that the sword", was coined by him. Ultimately, this inspiration led to the first university be establish by them in modern history.
The Quran and the Prophet teachings implore on man to seek knowledge and as with the case with the bible, the Quran most certainly does not contradict with science. (though that may not be the case with the translation version of the Arabic language.).
That isn't changing the goal posts. That is changing paradigms based on new evidence which could almost be the definition of science.
Religion makes scientific claims all the time !
Look at theistic beliefs , so what if they accept evolution ? by they also claim there is a supernatural Agency responsible for evolution which is also a claim not supported by any evidence
we always wanna hear words like Unity ! there is no unity between Science and religion
Science is about evidence and Questioning
Religion is about NON evidence and NON questioning
Gyana/Gnosis is a type of knowledge which is the aim of Hinduism and Buddhism (along with the more practical, never ending Vigyana/Diagnosis). These paths are well understood in the Dharmas, and it is especially the latter which is now coming to the fore as Positivism stands on its last legs, its pretensions to be a complete approach to knowledge tattering along with its sister metaphysics known as "Materialism/Physicalism".
"the battle ...between religion and science is actually something very different. In fact, there are religious individuals whose beliefs are at odds with science, and those people... are convinced that their perspective is the only "correct" one; that all other religious views are wrong. "
Dr. Zimmerman has taken on the Herculean labor of debunking the stereotypes that religion conflicts with science and even itself, so you have to admire him for making the job harder by admitting both stereotypes are sometimes *true*. I respect a man who likes a challenge!
"But, regardless of how much attention these people receive, they are in the minority and their views are every bit as much in conflict with the broader religious world as they are with the perspectives of the scientific community."
Aha! Fundamentalists aren't actually *religious*. What a relief! If they *were* a religion, Dr. Zimmerman would have to get along with them, lest he be numbered among those who can't get along with other sects. He wouldn't be able to say:
"These fundamentalists are attempting to claim all of religion for themselves by casting it in their own image while working feverishly to redefine science in a way that privileges their idiosyncratic readings of ancient texts."
And if fundamentalists were a religion, then his claim that religion doesn't conflict with science would be an attempt to claim all religion for himself by casting it in his own image.
They don't conflict because 12,700 Christian, 470 Jewish, 230 Unitarian, and an undisclosed number of Imams (I'm estimating about 100) say their faith is totally compatible with science.
(I observe that there are probably some imams who would like to sign this letter, but can't because they live in places where Internet access was cut off because it's blasphemous. But I digress.)
A quick Googling says that in the United States there are about 300,000 Christian churches, 4000 synagogues, and 1200 mosques.
With all respect for Dr. Zimmerman's effort here (and I do applaud it!), how can you claim that science and religion don't conflict when fewer than 5% of American clerics have signed a statement to that effect?
Consider two consecutive sentences:
"adherents of very different religions can't get along."
"there is an ancient struggle between religion and science."
In the first sentence religion means "sects". In the second, it does not.
There are undeniably ancient struggles between the Roman Catholic Church and science (geocentric universe, Galileo, cloning), and between Biblical literalists/fundamentalists and science (cosmology, evolution). The only way to claim there is no conflict between religion and science is by re-defining "religion" to "the behavior common to ALL religious people." If there's one religious person who doesn't oppose science, "religion" doesn't oppose science.
By this logic, inebriation don't cause traffic deaths. Not all drunk drivers kill someone; most of them get home without incident.
But even using this definition of religion, religion is provably in conflict with science.
Science relies on evidence and logic to establish facts, and demands repeatability of findings. Over time, myriad scientific views converge on the only theory that nobody can disprove. Religion accepts faith as truth, and faith isn't repeatable; it's unique to each person. Religious views don't converge on the one truth, they *diverge*, And if you maintain faith even when every bit of evidence says you're wrong, that's *praiseworthy*. Religion is literally unreasonable; no evidence can force you to admit you're wrong.
Religion conflicts with science (and itself) because it cannot compel agreement about what's true.
It should also be noted that accepting science is not an end in itself. Nor is science (mankind's attempt to understand and explain things) in direct opposition to religion. Science is simply a manifestation of a free, critical, skeptical, and honest thought process that bases its beliefs on reason and evidence. It is this process that is opposed by those who still worship iron aged tribal campfire legends like Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.
You really should work on your reading comprehension, Dan. Not to mention you writing skills ("With due all respect"???).
I happen to be an atheist who thinks that religious people are ridiculous and that they deserve neither respect for their belief in ancient fairy tales nor congratulations for finally accepting what any logical person, not to mention a 12 year old child, understands.