Reuters are reporting that neither creationism, which we didn't expect, nor ID, which we did, was the topic of the recent papal study group. Instead, it was the (legitimate, in my opinion) theological implications of evolution. In other words, since evolution is a fact, what does that mean for theology?
They say they use philosophical reasoning to conclude that God created the world, not arguments which intelligent design supporters claim can be proven scientifically.
So I take it back. Despite Schönborn's involvement, there are no firm signs as yet that the Catholic Church is bending to the ID agenda.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Digging for something else, I encounter Kathryn Jean Lopez arguing with an emailer about curriculum. The emailer objects to an earlier comment, where Ms. Lopez allowed that she's "the Discovery Institute's patsy" at NRO, but "I don't want public schools reading Cardinal Shönborn's tract on…
Reposted from the old TfK.
I say no, Bill Dembski says yes:
Despite intelligent design's clear linkage, both methodologically and in content, with existing sciences that sift the effects of intelligence from undirected natural forces, critics of intelligent design often label it a form of…
Sometimes life hands you nice ironies and wry humour. The same week that the Pope, Ratzinger-Benedict XVI (don't you hate hyphenated names?) announces that he almost accepts evolution as science, Michael Ghiselin, a rather famous evolutionary biologist and author of the 1969 book The Triumph of…
Following Pope Benedict's late August seminar on evolution, the consensus view from Science magazine and intelligent design watchdogs appeared to be that the Vatican was not yet ready to endorse ID, but rather was likely to come out in support of a theological view of evolution.
Yet, the Pope,…
I wonder how Dembski will spin this...
.....I wonder how Dembski will spin this...
Oh, I'm sure Bill has no comment on the theological musings of the Vatican, seeing as ID is purely a scientific matter.
And by scientific, I mean, "just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory."
But first he will delete several posts on UD painting the meeting as a victory for ID...
Theology is nonsense. Who cares about some superstitious belief except maybe to study an archaic form of social organization?
I don't give a damn about what a pope, priest, imam, rabbi, etc. have to say.