You wrote:
>Deistic Evolution. *Deism does not believe in any supernatural acts or
>miracles after the initial act of creating the material universe out of
nothing.
>As far as the evolutionary process and the production of life forms,
>including human beings, there is no real difference between deistic
>evolution and naturalistic evolution, which includes *atheism and
>*agnosticism."
I know of no other subject where differences of opinion are less tolerated
than evolution. Even people who admit no one knows the mechanism by which
macro evolution occurred seem inclined to attack those who disagree with
them on the slightest detail, calling them "stupid" "ignorant" or
"deceitful". As an agnostic, I do hate to be lumped in with the atheists,
for atheism seems to me the most intolerant of all world views. (I know
atheists go bananas when anyone calls atheism a religion.) I'm trying to
figure out how I fit your categories. How can I be a Deist, if I don't
necessarily believe in a Deity? -- None that I can define, anyway--unless
you are willing to qualify belief in the existence of design, purpose and
"free will" as a definition of a "deity". In any case, I find Neo
Darwinism, (random mutation and natural selection as an explanation of macro
evolution.) implausible. I would have thought no Christian would have been
able to accept Neo Darwinism, but apparently some manage to reconcile the two
beliefs. I do not regard such people as either stupid, ignorant or
deceitful. I suspect only those who are not secure in their beliefs resort
to such tactics.
Bertvan