I have cobbled-together an essay of some twelve thousand words by bringing together some of my blog postings on the theme of Christianity and Evolution by natural selection; and made it into a blog called The Christian Evolutionist.
I intend to edit this essay over time, removing repetitions and and adding to it if I have anything further to say - so it is a work-in-progress - but in the mean time it gathers into one place my notions up to this date.
I'll dig in later today. . .
With all due suspect, I assert that the "Christian evolutionist" is a radical autonomist seeking to maximize his autonomy through the crafting of a very elaborate cloak.
A "Christian evolutionist" is akin to a pro-choice "Christian." One seeks all the benefits of Christianity while masking all the refutation of his radical liberalism.
There is Genesis and then there is "descent" from a common "ancestor."
There is Adam and Eve and there is a primordial soup from whence the "origin of life" was animated and spread over the globe.
There are unique individual souls and there is Gaia.
Evolution is the claim of descent from primordial nothingness. It is not "natural selection." That's just what we see.
Without "descent," what is "evolution?"
@T - If you actually read it (!) I think you may find that the usual objections don't apply to what I am saying.
Why do I suspect that most objections to your self-identification as "Christian Evolutionist" come from Christians and not evolutionists who can clearly surmise that you have subordinated "evolution" to Christianity?
Why is this?
A "Christian Evolutionist" clearly puts Christianity above "evolution," but no serious evolutionist would concede that your Christianity was anything other than a result of evolution such that one could, at best, be an "Evolutionary Christian."
Yet, the evolutionists do not quibble with the "Christian evolutionist."
Only Christians quibble with you?
This seems odd, no?
There are three "pieces" of evidence for "evolution."
2. Speciation (macro-evolution)
3. Adaptation (micro-evolution)
You have taken the stance that you shall be a "Christian evolutionist" due to your firm belief in number three. And you take this position contrary to the ruling Leftism who then do not explicitly reject "adaptation," but do explicitly reject "adaptation" in humans leading to differences in intelligence.
But this is all beside the point.
The only TRUE evidence for "evolution" is "descent" and there is nothing inherent to "descent" that necessitates either speciation or adaptation.
"Descent" is the claim that within Dr. Charlton (and every other "living thing") is a remnant of the "origin of life." An actual remnant billions of years old. This "material chain" is required to prove "evolution" in the truest sense of the science. This claim requires neither speciation or adaptation to be true.
So I suggest that the reason that the evolutionists do not quibble with your subordination of "evolution" to Christianity is that you are consciously or subconsciously taking "mere Christians" "eye off the ball."
A "Christian Evolutionist" is a Christian who asserts the truth of "descent"'and one could not expect "mere Christians" to see it any other way. A Christian who claims the truth of "descent" asserts that Dr. Charlton arose from primordial nothingness.
Your nuanced approach, although well thought out, fails to note that "adaptation" in areas of intelligence is actually evidence of "spirit" and NO EVIDENCE AT ALL for "descent," i.e., Evolution.
Post a Comment