Christian Darwinism Intelligent Design News

At Forbes: Dump the term “theistic evolution”

Spread the love

Ending our religion coverage for the week, from John Farrell at Forbes:

It’s Time To Retire ‘Theistic Evolution’

His basic point is that it is all just evolution, and any talk of “theistic” is superfluous.

And it’s well past its sell-by date. More.

Farrell makes quite clear that there is no essential difference between “theistic” evolution and metaphysical  naturalism (nature is all there is). Of course there isn’t ny difference, except for sponsorship. To say that God created absolutely everything equally and that no design is especially evident anywhere means that an elemental atom is just the same as a human life or a human mind, or for that matter a religious revelation.

Catholic chemist Stacy “Science in the Light of Faith” Trasancos is delighted with Farrell’s approach. Readers may remember her from Vincent Torley’s piece, A Response to Stacy Trasancos: Feet to the Fire and Stacy Trasancos Responds.

In fairness, it doesn’t sound like Trasancos understands the issues at all, and she was likely delighted to have been noticed by Farrell.

One owes a debt both to Farrell and to Trasancos for making absolutely clear that theistic evolution is the same thing as metaphysical naturalism, for all practical purposes. Many have been fudging the question for years.

See also: A man out of his depth: Has John Farrell read and understood John Henry Newman? (Vincent Torley)

At least Forbes.com’s John Farrell, while trashing Jonathan Wells’ “junk DNA” book, doesn’t threaten to actually read it.

and

BioLogos will now review Darwin’s Doubt, as if anyone cares at this point.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

7 Replies to “At Forbes: Dump the term “theistic evolution”

  1. 1
    Ian Thompson says:

    Their evolution was never ‘theistic’ in the first place. Only ‘deistic’ at best.
    Here they simply acknowledge what they assumed all along: that God is now never involved at all.

  2. 2
    Aleta says:

    No, it’s that God is always involved: everything that happens is the will of God. The theistic evolutionists that I know, and know of, are definitely not deists.

  3. 3
    Dick says:

    Theistic evolution is either naturalism with a theistic veneer or intelligent design with a naturalistic veneer. In either case it would seem to be superfluous.

  4. 4
    mw says:

    There is little point in dropping the term “theistic” or evolutionist Christianity, as it is firmly enthroned in the Vatican.
    http://www.unamsanctamcatholic.....ution.html

  5. 5
    Robert Byers says:

    Thats not true.
    A;ways there were people who wanted a God to be true or an option but was not involved with nature.
    It sounds crazy but they see it that way.

  6. 6
    mw says:

    “not true,” Robert Byers @ 5, says of my post?

    You mean, I said, and when I am writing as a catholic, the Vatican, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, the Vatican Observatory, etc., are all actually proclaiming a divine commandment given at Sinai; the very fabric behind the historic link to every sabbath: God created in six days and blessed the next day being the sabbath?

    You mean perhaps I am a liar? The Vatican or majority view of catholic is not theistic evolutionism, but that divine law is rigorously adhered too, especially to what Jesus said; He fulfilled the law to the letter (Matt. 5:17-19); meaning the law was unbendable and not elastic, as God changes not (Mal 3:6). Therefore, six days really does not mean 13.7 billions of years, and that initial perfect creation of kinds is true, as indicated in stone by Yahweh at Sinai, whom as the Holy Trinity, Jesus is part of that divine writing; the only scripture every written by God, therefore of utmost importance and significance: unalterable.

    Jesus said those who elasticated and tampered with a commandment were “hypocrites” (Matt 15:3-9), transgressors of the law? What then the impression given by at least the past three Popes on evolutionism, that such consensus science is compatible with Judaeo-Christian foundations?
    Just what are you saying, Robert?

    Well; for clarification to my original link, here are a few more catholic/other creationist’s links; the truth: no lie:

    http://scienceandcatholicism.myfreesites.net/
    http://unamsanctamcatholicam.b.....inger.html
    Theistic Evolution and the Mystery of FAITH. http://www.christianorder.com/.....sep98.html

    http://www.faithfulanswers.com.....entalists/

    Tales from the unexpected: almost extinct Catholic creationists. http://builtonrock.org.uk/cath.....nists.html

    Five Answers for Stacy Trasancos about Evolution. http://kolbecenter.org/five-an.....evolution/

    http://www.daylightorigins.com.....evolution/

    http://kolbecenter.org/if-you-.....elieve-me/

    Evading the Truth: Did Darwin Get It Right? Catholics and the Theory of Evolution. http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt99.html

    Is the Genesis Account of Creation Literally True? http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt120.html

    http://www.restoringtruthministries.org/

    http://kolbecenter.org/question-of-time/

    http://www.kolbecenter.org/dar.....ry-theory/

    http://creation.mobi/gk-cheste.....ght-itself

    A Catholic Statement on Human Origins.
    http://www.restoringtruthminis.....sment.html

    Roman Catholicism and Genesis. http://creation.com/review-doc.....-warkulwiz

  7. 7
    mw says:

    Sorry Robert, I may have gone a little overboard.

Leave a Reply