Why comment on this article from Scientific American? Because I agree with the Darwinists quoted in the article.
A geneticist ordained as a Dominican priest, Francisco J. Ayala sees no conflict between Darwinism and faith.
His opinion,
Ayala thinks that scientists who attack religion and ridicule the faithful—most notably, Richard Dawkins of the University of Oxford—are making a mistake. It is destructive and gives fodder to the preachers who insist followers must choose either Darwin or God.
Because for a Christian who believes the Bible is God’s Word, there are only two choices, God created the earth exactly as it says, or they have to fit everything into that phrase in Genesis chapter one verse two,
And the earth <i>became without form</i> and void.
This brings it’s own problems such as, for one, that death and dying existed before it’s said to begin in chapter three.
Nevertheless, Ayala
refers to science-savvy Christian theologians who present a God that is continuously engaged in the creative process through undirected natural selection. [Emphasis mine]
He’s “engaged” but the process is “undirected.” What kind of gobbledygook is this? Some scientists disagree.
[S]ome philosophers of science, such as Philip Kitcher of Columbia University, have come to believe that evolution and belief in a providential creator cannot coincide. Kitcher admires Ayala but complains that “he has residual supernaturalist tendencies.”
And Ayala himself
is unwilling to affirm or deny a personal belief in God.
Which may say everything we need to know.
Musings of a Thoughtful Conservative 