Replies

The theory of evolution no more denies the existence of God than any other theory that conflicts with creationists delusion, that being just about all of them - astronomy, geology, paleontology, archeology, anthropology, and physics.

I agree with that, but the point I have been trying to make all along (I know that many cooks in this discussion may make for a diverse stew) is that BELIEF IN THE CHRISTIAN CONCEPT OF GOD AS REVEALED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT CONFLICTS WITH EVOLUTION.

Yes, it is true that evolution and an undefined god can both exist. That's true.

My point is that the God revealed in the Christian New Testament and the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) is incompatible with evolution.

Yes, you can logically believe in "a" God and also believe in evolution, or more pointedly believe that the two are very much related, that God used evolution knowingly and intentionally.

But my argument is that such a God could not be the God portrayed in the Christian tradition.

Is the Pope, in your formulation, a “HALF-believing Christian”?

Well, the Pope never said he personally believed in evolution. I think he was pretty clear that the Catholic Church simply wanted to welcome all comers, and not fight over evolution. I certainly agree that it makes sense to get people in the door, teach them about Jesus Christ, and worry about the details later.

So I think that the Pope is simply dodging the issue in order to maximize the popularity of the Catholic Church and get as big an audience as possible for the gospel of Jesus Christ. I wouldn't call that a profile in courage. But I don't believe the Pope or the Catholic Church on any level has ever proclaimed that evolution is actually TRUE, simply that they don't wish to fight about it.

It is those who accept “intelligent design” who think God needed to coddle his creation along through constant miraculous tinkering. God needed no “help” along the way, unless by “help” you mean the laws of reality that God put in place.

Yes, that is the very definition of "intelligent design." True, you could slice that up two different ways: Intelligent design at the beginning, with no further intervention versus on-going, continual supervision and intervention.

Contrary to what most people think they have heard, "Intelligent Design" is *NOT* a religious study, but is an exploration of the physical characteristics of the universe and of life on Earth, discovering the intricate level of DESIGN inherent in life and the universe.

Strictly, speaking, Intelligent Design NEVER identifies WHO or WHAT the intelligence is. It simply explores whether what we observe could exist without an intelligence shaping it.

Strictly speaking, you could accept the study of Intelligent Design and believe that aliens from another galaxy were the guiding intelligence.

The point I have been trying to make to you is that acceptance of any number of scientific theories conflict with a creationist concept of God - astronomy, geology, paleontology, archeology, anthropology, and physics.

The Pope said evolution was a “reality” that has “scientific proof” and it “enriches our understanding of life”. But go on pretending you didn’t read the quote I previously provided if your delusions are based upon the Pope not accepting evolution.

Considering that the Pope DOES accept evolution, using terms much stronger than I myself would use (I would never say “proof”) - does that make the Pope a “Half-believing Christian”?