who needs enemies? Rev. Henry is a featured opinion columnist in USAToday this morning, and he’s promoting his (tired) theologically-liberal take on how “science” and “religion” can co-exist peacefully:
How to Honor Religion and Science
As most of the comments below his piece make clear, his ideas don’t really honor “science” a whole lot, and though the word “religion” isn’t my choice of nomenclature, I’ll go with it and say that his compromise doesn’t honor religion much either. Basically, science tells us “how” things work, and “religion” tells us “why”. And he trots out the well-worn arguments that don’t hold up under very close scrutiny, but of course they sound impressive to folks from his camp who just don’t like all this fussin’. Of course, no discussion of such topics is complete without the obligatory reference to the “Biblical literalists” who insist on “6,000 year old” dinosaurs; in this case, it’s Ken Ham’s Creation Museum that reaps his scorn. Darwin, though, is someone this pastor is a self-admitted “fan” of.
Look, I candidly admit to being an agnostic on some of the details of the creation event; could the earth be 6000 years old? Sure…but I’m not at all sure that the Biblical text, faithfully interpreted, demands it by any means. And no, the Bible isn’t a “science textbook”, in the sense we think of science textbooks. That said, the theory of Darwinism is a system propped up Oz-like by some loud voices manning the controls from behind the curtain; the “evidence” isn’t nearly, nearly so convincing as the Darwinists would have us believe, and as Ben Stein makes clear in Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, the machinations that Darwinists undertake to suppress competing evidence and ideas is truly something with which the Soviet propaganda machine would be impressed.
Further, anything that runs counter to “in the beginning, God created”, and the special creation of man as distinct from animals in being created expressly in God’s image must be rejected as bad “religion”. Brinton, though, has undoubtedly jettisoned the authority of the Bible long-since, picking and choosing the parts he likes–as is so typical of liberal religionists–and thus he can pretend to make peace with the Darwinists–the most committed of which, in their best moments, condescendingly acquiesce to such pandering, but who must in their honest moments share in common with me one thing: a real contempt for the kind of reasoning that takes neither faith nor science seriously, as evidenced by one Rev. Henry Brinton.