Replies

There is no other interpretation of evolution except "anti-theistic"

Some smart Catholics on this very forum, have explained to me, that science can never capture the essence of God, and his plan, and his doings, no matter what science might find. The mystery is eternal, as is the mystery of what lifts the spirit. (I might have that wrong; that is this pagan's take on it.) Food for thought for this near atheist. What resonates for me in particular, is that one should be more aware of what one does not know, as opposed to making erroneous tacit assumptions about what one knows. Most of us think we know more than we really do. That is in our genes. It may be a good survival mechanism, but it may not be the road to truth.

... science can never capture the essence of God, and his plan, and his doings ...

That's not science's purpose - despite what some paranoid people say.

Science is the observation and understanding of the rules and principles operating in (dare I say it again) God's universe.

I take your counsel for lack of knowledge to be what it is.

It is because of the discoveries of 'science' DNA in particular that removed from me the cloud of teaching from most Christian churches that all humanity came from only two flesh beings.

Funny thing about it is the Bible does not say all people came from only two flesh beings, and further what do the church goers of the modern day do, try and dress up a theory called evolution as answer to what their claim is.

Oh and the Heavenly Father gives you that freedom to lean atheist.

"Most of us think we know more than we really do."

You are so right. That includes presumptions about the nature of the universe and the nature of God.
It is difficult to gain knowledge when one thinks he already has everything figured out.

There is a difference between "Evolution" and "Evolutionism." The former is no threat to religious belief whatsoever, unless one's model of divine causality is so restricted as to permit the intervention of God only as a primary cause of the material creation of the form of man, a viewpoint which simultaneously denies that God can act as the secondary cause, working through material processes he created which, by definition, means that these material causes are contingent upon his creative impulse. Denial of God's ability to act through contingent material processes or denial that their results are still from God and according to God's plan represents a limitation placed upon God's omniscience, which in the opinion of many who are both religiously inclined and see no conflict between evolution and religion, is a theological error.

The real conflict is between "Evolutionism" -- the argument made by some scientists that the evidence for evolution disproves the existence of God -- and religious belief. Those scientists who advance this supposition make the opposite epistemological error of Creationists and the same one as Intelligent Design advocates. Whereas Creationists begin with the primacy of the metaphysical arguments of translated scripture interpreted in its literal sense and cross into the scientific; ID supporters and "Evolutionists" begin with the physical evidence and cross into metaphysics. Since materialistic and metaphysical inquiry are both entirely distinct from each other in the rational methods they apply to reach logical conclusions, any such crossovers must be rejected as methodologically unsound.

And as a final comment, anyone who rejects the Theory of Evolution for religious reasons should understand that they are rejecting much more than a scientific explanation for the origins of the material form of man. The sciences of Geology, Biology, Nuclear Physics, Astrophysics (yes, Astrophysics), Paleontology, Botany, Taxonomy, Zoology, Physics, and their many subdisciplines have all produced findings which converge in the Theory of Evolution in its modern form. To reject the Theory of Evolution is to reject so much of science that the problems created in the process are insurmountable by any standard of rationality worth the name.

Science is a search for knowledge.

Religion is a search for truth.

Evolution happens.

Intelligent design happens.

The federal government should not be setting limits on either the search for knowledge or the search for truth.

Using scientific methods to set limits on the search for knowledge seems as unreasonable to me as clergy setting limits on the search for truth.

That's where this Catholic creationist stands having observed both science and religion for 55 years. I started early. (wink, wink)