Francis Collins as head of NIH

G

GT WT

1,000+ Posts
Dr. Francis Collins has been mentioned several times on Quacks as an example of a devout evangelical Christian who accepts evolution and believes that science is one way to understand creation.

FierceBiotechResearch has a short article about Collins in his new appointment as head of NIH.

You can find the article at -

FierceBiotech Research [[email protected]]

You may have to register so for those who don't want to take that trouble here are a few quotes

In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
Francis Collins has the background, experience and confidence to relate his faith without fear of repraisal. He is a motivating force in my life. Thank you, Mr Collins
 
A few years back I picked up The Language of God in an airport. One of the most compelling, fascinating and rewarding books I've ever read.
 
GT,
Francis Collins doesn't believe in the Theory of Evolution as posited by secular modernists. He believes in God as the power behind any evolution, micro and macro. This is in strict violation of the Theory of Evolution which precludes any external forces operating within a closed system.
 
GT, like you said the Theory of Evolution excludes supernatural forces. God is supernatural. There God has no part to play in Evolution. That is my point.
 
and thus GT falls into the modernist trap that the is now so often rejected.

How GT can Truth be compartmentalised?

Also, of course God can NEVER be tested as a scientific hypothosis. That would be pure folly to try to reduce God to such. But to say that science is the ONLY realm in which we encounter Truth ie Modernist Theory of Evolution is what I reject.
I don't necessarily reject evolution, macro or mirco, but it is on the religious/philosophical level that modernity fails us so.
 
Just curious to know why I should care about his political or theistic views. As long as he is able to obtain government funding and then allocate those resources properly, it is all good.
 
I guess I don't get why you let either of those 2 groups bother you. It doesn't affect my life and the ying and yang help counter each other and make science progress in a more controlled manner. You might disagree with the religious about stem cell research but you should see the benefit of the check on science. As Creighton said, "just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should do it". Things like cloning humans and pets may be problematic. I am not convinced that without religion, science would restrain itself.
 
GT,
I think you misread me a bit. I come at these topics from just about the opposite angle that you do. You seem to be truly gifted in and knowledgable of science. I do not mean to try to speak into that arena directly, because I would be talking from a point of ignorance.
I am not necessarily opposed to evolution, and tried to state that above. I am very opposed to a very narrow reading of Truth that is defined in and only in scientific terms and reasonings. I believe that science does speak to Truth, and while science contains truths, it does not hold the entirety of Truth.
I also agree with the comments about what modernity and in particular modern science has done to contribute to life. I just see a younger generation (I am on the cusp of Gen. X to Gen. Y) who sees that for all the truths in science, greater Truths seem to still elude us.
Why are we here? Sure we live longer, but what have we to live for? What is right? What is wrong? Who am I? What is love? Does family really exist?
Surely you have heard Generation Y refered to as Generation Why? We might be able to go to the moon, but why would we want to? might be a question of my generation.

GT, please don't read me as someone who believes in God so science should be dismissed or discredited. I just want to get beyond the philosophical divide of the two, and I believe that integration, not compartmentalisation is how we will do that.
 
Theu,

I think you and Francis Collins would find much in common. Like you, Dr. Collins believes that the beauty and wonder of our universe is best explained by a loving, beneficient God. I suspect that you both would agree that the truth of religion and the truth of science are reconciliable, ultimately, as different perspectives on the mind of God.

Where you might differ is in Collin's need to leave God behind when he enters the laboratory. Science requires natural explanations. That's what I meant when I said that Collins and other theistic evolutionists compartmentalize. An old colleague of mine used to say that he prayed in church, saw God as the creator of his child's soul, and hoped fervently for Heaven, but when he sat down at his lab bench he was an atheist. I don't know if you could ever agree to the necessity for that kind of mind-set but I think you would like him as a person and as a Christian. He was a good man and a good scientist. The two are not incompatible. That's why I started this thread. Francis Collins is a high-profile exaple of a devout Christian who rejects creationism/intelligent design. Too often the antiscience folks want to conflate science with atheism. You've never been guilty of that but some on Quacks are.

texasflag.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top