You know that people have been saying this for ~150 years already, right?
Did you ever consider that they might have valid concerns? Did you ever ask yourself why no one disputes nearly as much the views of Newton, Einstein, Pasteur, Mendel, etc?
You continue to argue that Christians at PeacefulScience.Org are defending darwinism. Every time you argue this you assert a lie.
The views of Newton, Einstein, etc aren’t perceived to conflict with any major religious doctrines.
Their concerns were considered and they were found to be without merit.
That’s why evolutionary theory is held to a MUCH higher standard than other scientific theories by its opponents.
Einstein proved Newton wrong, quantum mechanics proves Einstein wrong, Pasteur and Mendel are wrong too. BUT they degree to which they are/were wrong is less than the theories they replaced, and they each introduced key concepts which are essentially correct, and advanced our knowledge.
May I recommend:
Ask the pope(s) - they’re all on board. It seems neither does Darwin’s.
Not at all.
Anyway, this isn’t going anywhere. Let’s just agree to disagree.
Sure, and you’ll notice that Catholics aren’t particularly well-represented in evolution deniers. American protestants on the other hand…
Not accurate. I won’t name names but a high proportion are Catholic.
If the proportion is high how could you even begin to name names? I know of some, but in my experience Catholics are defintely in the minority when it comes to denying evolution. I’ve been visiting a Catholic Church here in ALABAMA, the state with stickers in science books cautioning against evolution, and most all I talked to accepted evolution.
A high proportion given the percentage of people that are Catholic? Really?
For example, the overwhelming majority of catholics on this site are anti-evolution. Several key leaders in ID are catholic too. Moreover, many/most/some (@dga471?) Thomists are anti-evolution, and Thomists are strongly skewed Catholic
I would just remind everyone that sociology is just as non-intuitive as science. Society is far more complex than a simple binary. At the very least, try and present some data to make sense of things if at all possible.
I know some of the leaders in ID are Catholic, but then even ID folks are a minority compared to YECs in the “evolution denier” category, so I’d still say they’re underrepresented.
Put it this way, if we did a poll (which probably has been done somewhere) of Catholics and Protestants and asked them a few questions about their acceptance of either purely natural evolution or common ancestry over evolutionary timescales in some way guided by God, I think it’s fair to say that a higher percentage of Catholics would accept one of those options than the Protestants.
It is also true that a higher percentage of Catholics would have a view of God indistinguishable from @Patrick. They would be CINO, and would totally skew the results.
Did you know that geocentrism is alive and well in Catholicism?
You can say that about any of the handful of individuals who promote geocentrism:
Alive and well in Judaism, in Sikhism, in buddhism, etc etc…
I think even if you controlled for just “true Catholics” you’d find the same results.
How prevalent is geocentrism? I know of a few like Robert Sungenis and his lot, but is there many more?
Not very. That wasn’t a cheap shot. There are suprisninlgy a lot of atheist and protestant geocentrists too. It is atttracts conspiracy theorists.
Now I’m curious. Can you name an atheist geocentrist?
In my experience Thomists are not anti-evolution. In fact this place is the first where I have encountered so many anti-evolution/pro-ID Catholics/Thomists. Edward Feser, the most well-known popularizer of Thomism, has written several posts critiquing ID. Almost none of the Thomists I met at the Dominican House of Studies seemed to be anti-evolution. A common Thomistic critique of ID is that it takes a mechanistic view of nature and thinks of God as acting as a secondary instead of primary cause in nature. (Of course I’m far from being an expert on Thomism and might not be phrasing this precisely.)
My limited perception is also that Catholics tend to be more open to allegorical methods of interpreting Scripture (which has a long tradition) compared to Protestants, so they are more “flexible”. And AFAIK nothing in the official teachings of the RCC requires you to deny all aspects of evolution.