“A finding of “heresey” requires a standard doctrine that is being deviated from. “
Spirited: To ancient nature-worshippers as represented by the Epicureans (physical materialists) and Stoics (spiritual materialists) the Christian teaching that a living, personal Creator upholds the souls of men and all of creation yet exists outside of nature (space time dimension) was not only offensive but blasphemous and heretical, as they believed that the substance and actions of God were fully dispersed within nature. Worse was the teaching that Jesus Christ is God Incarnate, which if true meant that God had incarnated within the evil matter in which the divine sparks of men were entombed and from which they sought escape.
Philosophically, Darwinism is physical materialism, an updated version of Epicureanism, while Teilhardism is spiritual materialism, an updated version of Stoicism and Westernized pantheist Hinduism. To religious believers of either or both, supernatural Christian theism is as offensive, heretical and blasphemous as it was to ancient Greeks. If this was not so then nature religion Mullahs would not be persecuting, hounding and censoring all public talk about Christian theism and demanding it be strictly forced out of the public arena. Nor would they be prohibiting prayer and demanding the removal of cemetery crosses, crèches, and even the public mention of Jesus Christ.
Why limit that argument to just the physical and spiritual materialists? According to the article, any belief other than a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis is equally heretical.
Many people (including many Freepers) belive in theological evolution. The author rejects that belief out of hand as being no different that philosophical naturalism - if you aren't a YEC Creationist then you don't have any business claiming to believe in God at all, because you aren't doing it right.
Is that an idea you think we need to adopt as a matter of political activism?