"You can believe in the divine creation of the world and still be an ardent evolutionist."
If you have the time, would you please explain how? I guess it would come down to what you difine as an "ardent evolutionist." Does the belief in abiogenesis fall into your description of an ardent evolutionist? If it does, then your statement would not make sense to me. If under the right conditions "life" will "happen"(abiogenesis) then where is the need for a creator? Abiogenesis implies that "life" is an intrinsic property of matter and the "laws" of the universe. That is why NASA et. al. are so desparate to find water at an extraterrestrial location. Even though they don't directly say it, they obviously believe that if the right "mix" of things is in existence then "life" will happen. IF this is true, then why the need for a creator or intelligent designer?
Theistic evolutionists are "fence stradlers" that don't want to commit to either side, and are not respected by either side (Evolutionists or Creationists).
The origin of life has NOTHING TO DO WITH evolution either. You can believe God created life and still be an ardent evolutionist.
Darwin didn't title his book "Origin of Life," he titled it "Origin of Species."
Evolution refers to the evolution of one species from another species, not life from non-life.
A common tactic of creationists is to change the debate from a debate over evolution to a debate over abiogenesis, either willfully (to try to find a more winnable argument) or just pure stupidity (not understanding evolution at all.)
We know a lot less about how life originated than we do about how species have differentiated, obviously, as the latter was a lot longer ago.
If under the right conditions "life" will "happen"(abiogenesis) then where is the need for a creator?
what (who) set the conditions ands the laws then? this is how you can be a Creationist. you hold that "evolution" is a means that the Almighty uses. "evolution" doesnt *make* life. it *makes* life better.
its the same as saying "water rolls downhill when gravity is present"
"animals evolve when God is present"
the scientific community should be used to the fact that all laws have a constant, and if that constant is disrupted, the law is non-applicable.
for example, mass=weight, when in the same reference of gravity. or pure water freezes at 272.15, when the air pressure = 760atu.
Simple. Some of the diversity of life on this planet is a result of evolution, but not all.
While there may be reasonable debates about whether particular aspects of biodiversity were created or evolved, I see the issue as being far more quantitative than qualitative. Of course, there's still the big question about the origin of Man, but even that wouldn't pose a problem if one regards human beings as being more than their biological components: even if non-human anthropods evolved, it would still take an act of God to impart the human soul.
"If under the right conditions "life" will "happen"(abiogenesis) then where is the need for a creator?"
If God created life THROUGH abiogenesis, that would make your arguments moot. Indeed, the God I believe in can create life anyway he pleases, yours can only do it through some magic trick, which creationist methodology you REQUIRE to be anti-logical (else a logical mechanism like evolution would be possible).
But no matter whether life was created through abiogenesis, creation, or random bits of chewing gum, the same moral questions and quest for purpose and a connection with God remain.