The underlined part is wrong. "Mainstream" protestantism has changed considerably from what this author thinks it is.
There are very few adherents in those old protestant denominations compared to huge numbers in the conservative, evangelical churches -- whether denominational or independent.
The single largest faith type in the US is baptistic.
Great catch, dear brother in Christ!
Hi, xzins! I readily accept that your characterization is true. But your reply doesn't tell me anything about what the mainstream protestant view of evolution is, assuming there is such a consensus view. Can you give me a quick "heads-up" on that?
I don't want to make any rash assumptions about protestant belief here, though I would really like to discuss evolution theory, especially with regard to whether evolution theory is "complete." I think it is not complete, for two reasons: (1) it gives no plausible account of the origin of life; and (2) it gives no explanation of man whatever. Still, it might have been a tool in God's toolkit for the development of the physical side of (lower-order?) creature -- if I might put it that way.
Please let me make it clear: I hold no brief whatever for macroevolution. I think it is a "myth" in the strict sense of that word. Microevolution, on the other hand, might have something going for it.
I suspect Pope Benedict rejects both the materialism and the insistence on randomness of the Darwinist account. As do I. But I didn't have to hear this from him first. It just seems evident to me that a reasonable person of faith would see on the evidence that these requirements of Darwinist orthodoxy do not comport with and cannot explain what we actually see in nature; i.e., the created world.
What do you think?