Comments on: Who Accepts Evolution?

By: Do you believe in Evolution? « larrinski.wordpress.com

Do you believe in Evolution? « larrinski.wordpress.com — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:31:20 +0000

[...] religions believe in evolution as the best explaination of the origins of life. It turns out that Friendly Atheist found a nice poll on the religions in the USA that believe in evolution! Apparently some of those [...]

By: ConfusedChick

ConfusedChick — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:16:48 +0000

I’m an atheist and I don’t believe in evolution, I gave up Catholicism and Evolution quite a few years back.. so what does that make me?

By: Jared

Jared — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 01:57:32 +0000

In answer to Curtis: I have always wondered that myself about Mormons. I think its hidden somewhere, because I have never noticed it. Every Mormon I know(and living in Northern Utah its kinda hard to not know anyone who is Mormon) accept evolution. Of course they still try to fit creationism in there somehow.

By: Chandan

Chandan — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:23:26 +0000

Richard, If a religion is one specific set of spiritual ideas prescribed in one book, or by one person, then i think Buddhism could qualify (at least it could be called a religion with several branches, since it at least started with one person). Again, Jainism, though it is “as old as antiquity” could probably qualify since its followers do (as far as I understand) have certain specific commmon beliefs. However, Hinduism really does not exist as a religion. It is just a name given to all people in the Indian sub-continent who do not specifically subscribe to some other well known religion. It has several schools which vary from (get this!) those that believe in no God, through those that believe in a personal god, to those who believe in a non-dual divinity that represents the highest level of reality, at which nothing else really exists (this last variant, called Advaita Vedanta, btw, is quite amazing, in that it is probably the only religious philosophy which in its essence has absolutely no conflict with modern science!). So Hinduism (if we must) can probably be described as a platform which tolerates all forms of religious thought, and probably (forgive this digression) best answers the question why a country such as (apparently backward) India succeeds in continuing as a relatively peaceful democracy inspite of the greatest diversity in the World.

By: Richard Wade

Richard Wade — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:37:59 +0000

rimpal, you said:

Hinduism of course isn’t a religion, and neither is Buddhism or Jainism.

I thought they are religions. Please help me understand.

By: Curtis

Curtis — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:19:39 +0000

I did some quick web research and it appears as if the Mormon church does not have an official viewpoint on evolution. Does any one know why Mormon are so anti-evolution?

“February 15, 1957
David O. McKay, President, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

…On the subject of organic evolution the Church has officially taken no position”
http://cs.gmu.edu/~sean/stuff/Evolution.html

By: rimpal

rimpal — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:28:44 +0000

Acute case of presbyopia, astigmatism, or what?

80% Hindus accept evolution! I am surprised it is not 105% Hinduism of course isn’t a religion, and neither is Buddhism or Jainism. And it is possible to hold all three traditions together, as some do. All the devotional traditions of Buddhism, Lotus, Nichiren, etc., are adaptations of earlier Hindu traditions. And of course in Hindu/Buddhist/Jain tradition the line between animals/humans is hazy if it exists at all. So for many classical Hindus and Jains modern evolutionary theory comes as a scientific confirmation of what they have known all along.

By: Autumnal Harvest

Autumnal Harvest — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 07:27:33 +0000

As a side note, Theravada Buddhism is arguably deity-free (or “should” be), although it contains other supernatural features. But Nichiren Buddhism is part of the Mahayana branch, not Theravada.

By: Autumnal Harvest

Autumnal Harvest — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 07:23:46 +0000

Chelsea, Nichiren Buddhism is focused on devotion to the Lotus Sutra, a holy scripture that teaches that the Buddha was around for millions of eons before before his apparent life circa 500 B.C., in countless other forms, and that despite his apparent death, he is still with us to this day. The Lotus Sutra describes the countless miracles performed by the Buddha, and stresses that those who show devotion to the Lotus Sutra, the Buddha, and his Bodhisattva, will find miraculous good fortune on earth, and can acheive nirvana, or even eventual status as a buddha themselves. Conversely, those who mock the Lotus Sutra will be born in purgatories, or bad reincarnations on earth. Under what conceivable definition are these beliefs “by definition atheist”?

Incidentally, traditional Tibetan Buddhism teaches that human beings were evolved from monkeys that, after successive generations of mating, gradually became humans. (And yes, I realize that humans did not evolve from monkeys, but from a common ancestor, but hey, that’s still pretty close.)

By: Konstantine Palanski

Konstantine Palanski — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 05:45:39 +0000

For those who missed it, the atheists are included in this survey, just clumped together awfully. Read up:

http://www.palanski.com/2009/02/evolution-acceptance-by-religion.html