[Apologetics] Re: Evolution dispute now set to split Catholic hierarchy

[Dianne Dawson]

Nice explanation Stuart.  Personally,  I believe in "evolution" to a point.  As in your example of the elephants,  I believe that certain mutations came about due to environmental necessities and sometimes those mutations developed to the point of becoming its own creature - related but different.  
 
I don't believe that man was ever an ape, however, man has "evolved" depending on where he lived.  It's a scientific fact that is why we have different "colors" of skin (for example).  As man moved into areas of Earth that were farther from the equator the melanin changed and skin became lighter.
 
Dianne

"Stuart D. Gathman" <stuart at bmsi.com> wrote:
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Art Kelly wrote:

> I agree 100% with Cardinal Shönborn, who is the
> principal author of the Catechism of the Catholic
> Church, that evolution is just plain wrong!

You have to be careful to define what you mean when using the word "evolution",
since it is used to mean many things - sometimes deliberately in order
to deceive. 

For instance, "evolution" in the sense of "survival of the fittest",
also called "natural selection", is an observed fact that is part of our daily
life. Pathogens "evolve" resistance to drugs. Most elephants are now born
without tusks thanks to the inadvertant efforts of poachers.

Then there is "evolution" as the idea that chance plus natural selection
can create new species unguided by any intelligence, also called "macro
evolution" - something yet to be demonstrated. So called "genetic"
algorithms used with some success in computer science are guided by
intelligence and are properly "natural selection".

There is a slogan, "Evolution happens. Evolution happened." This
is a deliberate equivocation, equating "natural selection" with
"macro evolution".

Finally, there is the idea that "evolution" in the "chance plus
natural selection" sense somehow caused the origin of life, although no
specific mechanism has been proposed - just a lot of hand waving
over potions of amino and nucleic acids.

The Church needs to be careful before launching an attack against
"evolution". The only aspect that is clearly and specifically unbiblical
is the part about "unguided by intelligence". There are moral
arguments against the idea of God using the law of the jungle
(i.e. natural selection) as His primary creative method - but
these are not as certain. 

And in fact, the "unguided by intelligence" aspect is the only
doctrine of evolution that materialists are determined to hold
on to. They are perfectly willing to abandon any other aspects
to consider the "hopeful monster" theory, spontaneous generation,
xeno-genesis, and even more far fetched ideas - as long as they can maintain
their principle that ultimately, no intelligence formed the world or life
within it.

-- 
Stuart D. Gathman 
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flamis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

_______________________________________________
Apologetics mailing list
Apologetics at gathman.org
http://bmsi.com/mailman/listinfo/apologetics





Like a deer that longs for running waters so my soul longs for you, O God.

Ps 42:1
 
 



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gathman.org/pipermail/apologetics/attachments/20050818/700cce54/attachment.html>