“Man can never have enough knowledge to explain the universe, and all of those answers are not intended to be found in the Bible. Do we need the Bible to show us the beauty of a flower, the elaborate dance of bees, the phases of the moon? Of course not, these things are here in our world for our observation, for us to learn about on our own.
Belief in the infallibility of man’s language and in culture’s memory, diminishes the meaning of the book and its stories. Leaving nothing for discovery or for understanding puts mankind on a pedestal, as if we could have perfect understanding. That perfect understanding requires us to be perfect as well, and we are not. We are both less and more than that.”
(read the rest at my next move sideways blog)
"(There may) be occasions when Christians are mistaken on some point while nonbelievers get it right. Nevertheless, the overall systems of thought constructed by nonbelievers will be false—for if the system is not built on Biblical truth, then it will be built on some other ultimate principle."
Nancy Pearcey, “Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity”
This quote, found in Ryan Lizza’s fascinating and frightening New Yorker profile of Michele Bachmann, is one of the most succinct explanations I’ve ever seen of why, despite all evidence to the contrary, many fundamentalists refuse to believe in evolution: it is based upon the wrong principle.
Perhaps an explanation that Darwin was a devout Catholic could help? Somehow I doubt it; it’s hard to see how anyone could penetrate such circular logic.