Perception of brazilian citizens about Darwinism and the (Non) Influence of God in the evolutionary process

The current context is unique in relation to the teaching of evolution in Brazil and the population's perception of evolution. On the one hand, it is said often about Darwinism in various media, especially due to the relatively recent commemoration of the two hundred years of the birth of Charles Darwin and one hundred and fifty years of the launch of the book The Origin of Species. On the other hand, it is clear, in recent years, a timid movement, more worryingly, in favor of equitable approach of creationist and evolutionist theories in the classroom. This article is a part of a research whose goal is to raise the design that Brazilian respondents have about the Darwinian view (which disregards the divine influence in the evolution of the species). The instrument used for data collection is a questionnaire, type Likert scale, which consists of a series of statements in which respondents must express their degree of agreement or disagreement with each statement. In this study, we present the results of the statement. "The thought of Darwin, which does not consider God as a participant in the process of evolution, is...". Analysis correlated with data on religion and education of the respondents are also held. The results point to a tendency of respondents not to accept the Darwinian view that disregards God's interference in the evolutionary process. The data also show that respondents' choices are influenced by religion and education. The frequency of responses that tend to accept the Darwinian view (which disregards the divine participation in the evolution of the species) is higher among respondents with higher levels of education. Adherents to religions "evangelical" tend to deny this view more often than followers of other religions. Given the potential risks of inserting creationist approaches in school education, it is necessary a discussion of the possible impacts of this rejection of Darwin's thinking (which does not consider God as a participant in the evolutionary process), indicated here, in the teaching of evolution. This work was supported by FAPEMIG.

The People's Hour and the Social Gospel: George Howard Gibson's Gilded Age Search for an Organization of the Kingdom of God

Previous studies of the Social Gospel movement have acknowledged the fact that Social Gospelers were involved in multiple social reform movements during the Gilded Age and into the Progressive Era. However, most of these studies have failed to explain how the reform experiences of the Social Gospelers contributed to the development of the Social Gospel. The Social Gospelers’ ideas regarding the need to transform society and their strategies for doing so were largely a result of their personal experiences as reformers and their collaboration with other reformers. The knowledge and insight gained from interaction with a variety of reform methods played a vital role in the development of the ideology and theology of the Social Gospel. George Howard Gibson is exemplary of the connections between the Social Gospel movement and several other social reform movements of the time. He was involved in the Temperance movement, was a member of both the Prohibition Party and the People’s Party, and co-founded a Christian socialist cooperative colony. His writings illustrate the formation of his identity as a Social Gospeler as well as his attempts to find an organization through which to realize the kingdom of God on earth. Failure to achieve the changes he desired via prohibition encouraged him to broaden his reform goals. Like many Midwestern Social Gospelers Gibson believed he had found “God���s Party” in the People’s Party, but he rejected reform via the political system once the Populists restricted their attention to the silver issue and fused with the Democratic Party. Yet his involvement with the People’s Party demonstrates the attraction many Social Gospelers had to the reforms proposed in the Omaha Platform of 1892 as well as to the party’s use of revivalistic language and emphasis on producerism and brotherhood. Gibson’s experimentation with a variety of ways to achieve the kingdom of God on earth provides new insight into the experiences and contributions of lay Social Gospelers. Adviser: Kenneth J. Winkle

The women of Israel or: characters and sketches from the holy scriptures and Jewish history : illustrative of the past history, present duties, and future destiny of the Hebrew females, as based on the words of god

by Grace Aguilar

Ideas of God in Israel : their content and development

Edward Pace

What Is behind God���s Name? Martin Buber’s and Franz Rosenzweig’s Reflections on the Name of God

What meaning does God���s name convey? This was a question Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig had to answer when working on their translation of the Bible. They noticed that, as certain crucial biblical verses suggest, there is indeed a meaning behind God���s name in the Bible. Thus, an important moment in their joint translation was their account of the self-revelation of God in Exod. III, together with the question of how best to translate the tetragrammaton YHWH— the name of God. This article will explore their decisions, based both on their dialogue concerning the translation of the Bible, and on their papers, especially Rosenzweig’s well-known article ‘Der Ewige’ (‘The Eternal’) and Buber’s response to it. Less well known is the fact that there exist two unpublished typescripts by Martin Buber reflecting on the name of God, which will also be taken into consideration. Contrary to the received view that the choice of the personal pronoun to transliterate the name of God in the Bible translation was mainly Rosenzweig’s, I will show that it was actually a joint decision in which both thinkers’ philosophies,1 and a question that had haunted Buber since his youth, played an important part. The choice of the personal pronoun is an answer to this question, addressing the omnipresent God, the eternal Thou, in a kind of cultic acclamation.