How is Intelligent Design distinct from both Creationism and Darwinism?–Stephen C. Meyer

St. John One: One

Stephen C. Meyer Stephen C. Meyer

JM: How is Intelligent Design distinct from both Creationism and Darwinism?

SM: Contrary to media reports, Intelligent Design is not a religious-based idea, but instead an evidence-based scientific theory about life’s origins—one that challenges strictly materialistic views of evolution.

According to Darwinian biologists such as Oxford’s Richard Dawkins, living systems “give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.” But for modern Darwinists, that appearance of design is entirely illusory. Why? Because they think the undirected processes of natural selection acting on random mutations can produce the intricate structures found in living organisms. In contrast, the theory of Intelligent Design holds that there are tell-tale features of living systems and the universe that are best explained by a designing intelligence. The theory does not challenge the idea of evolution (defined as change over time), or even common ancestry, but it does dispute Darwin’s idea that the…

View original post 37 more words

The Resurrection of Christ the Lord from the dead–Thomas Merton

St. John One: One

merton

The most paradoxical and at the same time the most unique and characteristic claim made by Christianity is that in the Resurrection of Christ the Lord from the dead, man has completely conquered death, and that “in Christ” the dead will rise again to enjoy eternal life, in spiritualized and transfigured bodies and in a totally new creation. This new life in the Kingdom of God is to be not merely a passively received inheritance but in some sense the fruit of our agony and labor, love and prayers in union with the Holy Spirit. Such a fantastic and humanly impossible belief has generally been left in the background by the liberal Christianity of the 19th and early 20th centuries, but anyone who reads the New Testament objectively must admit that this is the Doctrine of the first Christians. Indeed, Christianity without this fabulous eschatological claim is only a moral…

View original post 94 more words

On conteplative prayer–from Everything Belongs: by Richard Rohr

Richard Rohr

This process can be brutal, but it is absolutely necessary. Otherwise the “I” that I am cannot separate from its identification with its own thoughts and feelings. Most people become their thoughts. They do not have thoughts and feelings; the thoughts and feelings have them. It is what the ancients called “being possessed” by a demon. So we start with wiping the mirror until we can see what is objectively there. But let’s go further than that: wiping the mirror until even the eye that is watching the mirror is not taken too seriously. The watcher can become self-preoccupied, which only distorts things further. So we have to observe, but also not let the observer become an accusing tyrant. If we get past that temptation, we no longer ask questions about whether we’re doing it right. We stop pestering our soul with questions like “Am I pure?” “Am I holy?” “Am I good?” “Is my technique proper?” They all fall away. It starts with mirror-wiping. It starts with doing the discipline faithfully. When the veil parts and we see love, the self-conscious watcher, preoccupied with doing it right, just forgets the self (Mark 10:18). After worrying that I don’t know about myself, a lovely question then arises. Who cares? My watching and judging don’t change what is, but often become a concern with watching and judging itself. Prayer, however, is not finally self-observation but rather to “fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:31).

Richard Rohr  Everthing Belongs