Darwinian Meltdown Over Intelligent Design

Darwinian Meltdown Over Intelligent Design
The Pearcey Report ^ | 1 Mar 06 | J. Richard Peacey
Posted on 03/01/2006 9:05:53 AM EST by
<http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1587673//~xzins/>xzins
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1587673/posts [refresh
browser after clicking these links]

[snip]

My post is # 8 copied here:

To: xzins

I have warned serious Christians in the science disciplines many
times already that they are making a big mistake by allowing
atheists/secular humanists/ - and - Left-wing liberal "Christians" in
science - to be their most out-spoken advocates - ie: the "face" of
science to the public.

Semantics is involved, so people must clearly define their terms.
There is more than one "theory of evolution", and in spite of the
denials by some intellectually dishonest scientists, each of the
theories has a philosophical underpinning.

The majority of Americans will _rightly_ reject all of the
"..theories of evolution which, in accordance with the philosophies
inspiring them, consider the spirit as emerging from the forces of
living matter or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter [because
they] are incompatible with the truth about man. Nor are they able to
ground the dignity of the person. .. It is by virtue of his spiritual
soul that the whole person possesses such a dignity even in his body.
.." ~ John Paul II - 1996

Note especially the key phrase, "..in accordance with the
philosophies inspiring them..".

In this, Protestant and RCC alike, agree with what the previous pope
said on the matter. [See more below]

Theories of Evolution
John Paul II Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, October 22, 1996

Excerpts:

"...And, to tell the truth, rather than the theory of evolution, we
should speak of several theories of evolution.

On the one hand, this plurality has to do with the different
explanations advanced for the mechanism of evolution, and on the
other, with the various philosophies on which it is based. Hence the
existence of materialist, reductionist, and spiritualist
interpretations. What is to be decided here is the true role of
philosophy and, beyond it, of theology.

5. The Church's magisterium is directly concerned with the question
of evolution for it involves the conception of man: Revelation
teaches us that he was created in the image and likeness of God. The
conciliar constitution Gaudium et Spes has magnificently explained
this doctrine, which is pivotal to Christian thought. It recalled
that man is "the only creature on earth that God willed for itself."

In other terms, the human individual cannot be subordinated as a pure
means or a pure instrument either to the species or to society; he
has value per se. He is a person. With his intellect and his will, he
is capable of forming a relationship of communion, solidarity, and
self- giving with his peers.

St. Thomas observes that man's likeness to God resides especially in
his speculative intellect, for his relationship with the object of
his knowledge resembles God's relationship with what he has created.
But even more, man is called to enter into a relationship of
knowledge and love with God himself, a relationship which will find
its complete fulfillment beyond time, in eternity.

All the depth and grandeur of this vocation are revealed to us in the
mystery of the risen Christ. It is by virtue of his spiritual soul
that the whole person possesses such a dignity even in his body. Pius
XII stressed this essential point: If the human body takes its origin
from pre-existent living matter, the spiritual soul is immediately
created by God.

Consequently, theories of evolution which, in accordance with the
philosophies inspiring them, consider the spirit as emerging from the
forces of living matter or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter are
incompatible with the truth about man. Nor are they able to ground
the dignity of the person.

6. With man, then, we find ourselves in the presence of an
ontological difference, an ontological leap, one could say. However,
does not the posing of such ontological discontinuity run counter to
that physical continuity which seems to be the main thread of
research into evolution in the field of physics and chemistry?
Consideration of the method used in the various branches of knowledge
makes it possible to reconcile two points of view which would seem
irreconcilable.

The sciences of observation describe and measure the multiple
manifestations of life with increasing precision and correlate them
with the time line. The moment of transition to the spiritual is not
the object of this kind of observation, which nevertheless can
discover at the experimental level a series of very valuable signs
indicating what is specific to the human being. But the experience of
metaphysical knowledge, of self-awareness and self-reflection, of
moral conscience, freedom, or again, of aesthetic and religious
experience, falls within the competence of philosophical analysis and
reflection, while theology brings out its ultimate meaning according
to the Creator's plans. ...." [end excerpts] bttt

<http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1587673/posts?page=8#8>8
posted on 03/01/2006 11:19:41 AM EST by
<http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1587673//~matchettpi/>Matchett-PI
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1587673/posts?page=8#8
Received on Wed Mar 1 11:31:05 2006