I find it curious that Martin Wishnatsky claims, "that the theory of evolution is a mechanism to conform science to atheism." (Forum, June 12) He goes on to explain, "Evolution is as much a religious theory as intelligent design."
His use of religious theory puzzles me. Scientific theory is a set of concepts that explain the mechanics of a natural phenomenon. Religious theory seems to be altering your observations of the real world to conform to an idea in the Bible.
My research indicates not all Christians doubt the theory of evolution. John Paul II stated there was no contradiction between science and religion. If the pope doesn't have a problem with evolution, but Wishnatsky does, it would lead to the idea that a religious theory would have differing meanings to different Christians. My question to Wishnatsky: Is evolution the only theory of science that is also religious theory?
What about the theory of gravity? Did Newton's first explanation, along with Einstein's tweaks in the 20th century, counter biblical thinking about falling objects? With religious theories differing in differing beliefs: Do objects fall faster for Catholics, than evangelical Christians? Should Wishnatsky develop independent gravity to explain Einstein's lack of consideration of this effect?
Is Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism also a religious theory that is counter to the uses of electricity in the Bible? God uses lighting primarily as tokens of wrath. Do we need an independent electromagnetism program in our schools? Is electricity something we should be messing with at all?
ADVERTISEMENT
To single out the theory of evolution from all the rest of the "theories" that have brought light to our nights, relieved the suffering of our days, and hold us on the ground, as a religious theory simply dreamed up by atheists isn't just wrong, it's silly.
Joe Hyde
Fargo
