Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [RELIGION] Evolution and religion

[Stephen Montgomery-Smith <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Mike Miller wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
>
> > Mike Miller wrote:
> >
> > > I've already read more about Collins' ideas than he deserves.
> > >
> > > I think that what I wrote was excellent -- it is a consistent 
> > > position. People play self-prormoting manipulative games with 
> > > religion.  It's disgusting.
> >
> >
> > Are you saying that Collins is engaging in playing self promoting 
> > games with religion?  In your previous post you say that Collins 
> > claims to be a born again christian.  While this statement is 
> > completely true, it has the added implication that you do not believe 
> > his claim.
> >
> > My strong sense from reading Collins' book is that he is the real deal.
>
>
>
> All we ever know is what a person does and says.  Collins said that he 
> became a Christian after he didn't know what to say to a dying patient 
> who asked him if he believed in Jesus -- he was an atheist at the time.  
> I think a good answer would be "no," or "I think religion is a private 
> matter" or "I can tell that your religion gives you a lot of hope and 
> strength," or whatever, but you don't have to change your religion to 
> fit in with the people around you (unless you are Francis Collins).
>
> He likes to talk a lot about how he is a religious guy and supposedly 
> the people around him aren't religious.  How does he know that?  I don't 
> know the religions of the people I work with except in the rare cases 
> where they talk about it.  Of course, like most religious people who 
> talk about their religion, he tells us that his views are superior.  He 
> also gets a lot out of blabbing about how great his religion is -- he 
> holds a political appointment in a country where Christianity is highly 
> regarded, so much so that to become President of the US seems to require 
> regular church attendance and frequent "God bless" closings to 
> speeches.  When I hear someone end a speech with a "God bless," he could 
> as easily have said "I know how to manipulate your feelings" instead -- 
> it would have the same effect on me.
>
> My point is this:  I don't care if someone appears to be a "true 
> believer" because I have no way of testing and verifying someone's inner 
> life.  If I see someone using his religion to get ahead, it bugs me a lot.

OK, let me focus on your last statement "If I see someone using his 
religion to get ahead, it bugs me a lot."  Let's suppose that I made 
some huge significant science discovery that got me into worldwide news. 
 Now it would quickly come out that I am a very religious person, and 
so as well as getting interviews on NPR, I would get calls from Pat 
Robertson.  Since I am somewhat unashamed of my religious views, and 
don't see any ethical problem with gentle persuasion (i.e. just because 
my personal views of religion are a private matter doesn't mean that I 
should be barred from sharing my views), I will gladly accept these 
interviews.  Would I be engaged in self promotion at this point?

Or to put it another way, if I lived in a largely secular country (like 
many European nations), and became famous, and then used my fame to 
promote my secular views (e.g. like many mid twentieth century 
intellectuals), would you describe that as disgusting self promotion?

Regarding your first paragraph.  Collins was clearly answering the dying 
patient from his heart.  He wasn't producing the standard "correct" 
answer, rather he was touched by what the patient said, and could see 
that this patient had a lot to offer him.  What Collins experienced 
really is a very standard conversion story - not that all conversion 
stories follow this example, but certainly a lot of them do.

Regarding your second paragraph - firstly, why is it wrong for him to 
talk to his coworkers about religion?  I certainly do.  Obviously when I 
sense they don't want to talk about it, I cease the conversation, but 
that is the exception rather than the rule.  As long as you don't try to 
ram your views down people's throats, most people LOVE to discuss 
religion.  Secondly, when he says that his religion is superior, he is 
merely expressing an opinion.  If someone disagrees with him, they are 
free to engage him in a rational debate on the issue.  Now if at that 
point Collins were to blow his top and say "how dare you blaspheme, etc" 
then you would be right to call him an intolerant bigot.  But if he 
answers back in a rational and reasonable manner, then he is merely 
engaging in the kind of back and forth debate that is an important part 
of living in a democracy - and indeed the kind of debate that we on MLUG 
often engage in.

Finally, about the "God Bless" remark.  I think some people say it with 
genuine feeling, and others use it as a tool of manipulation.  But what 
does this have to do with Collins?

--

Stephen Montgomery-Smith
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://www.math.missouri.edu/~stephen

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion