Answers in Genesis on Ayala’s Templeton Prize

WE already gave you the Discoveroids’ reaction. See Discovery Institute: Francisco Ayala’s Templeton Prize. Now we have another negative reaction, this time from Answers in Genesis (AIG), one of the major sources of creationist wisdom: Evolution Professor Receives Spirituality Award.

There’s not much to this, but it’s amusing to see how creationists react to events in the real world. Essentially, AIG claims that Francisco Ayala, the former Dominican priest who is now a biology professor, knows neither science nor religion.

Yes, that’s bizarre, but what else would we expect from the outfit that runs the profoundly preposterous Creation Museum? Here are some excerpts, with bold added by us:

This year’s $1.5 million Templeton Prize has gone to Francisco Ayala, an ordained Catholic priest and professor of evolutionary biology.

Ayala, 76, is widely known for defending the compatibility of Christianity and evolution. Originally ordained as a Catholic priest, Ayala left his native Spain in the early 1960s to study biology at New York’s Columbia University. He currently serves, among other roles, as professor of biological sciences, ecology, and evolutionary biology at the University of California–Irvine.

This is a shock to AIG. How could such a thing happen? Creationists “know” that evolution is utterly incompatible with all that is good and holy. What could possibly explain this news? The end of AIG’s article tells the tale:

Sadly, even with his theological training, it seems Ayala is apparently not familiar with the Bible’s teaching about creation and the Fall. God did indeed create a “very good” world (Genesis 1:31), but with Adam and Eve’s sin in the Garden of Eden came death and suffering (Genesis 3; Romans 5:12). The creation worldview explains the “deformities of the world” as the result of human sin and points out ways in which natural selection and chance mutations cannot account for the design we see all around us (albeit designs that groan under the effects of the curse).

And although the Bible is not a science textbook, it is a book of history — true history. Where it speaks of historical matters, whether the creation of the universe or the Resurrection of Jesus Christ we celebrate in a few days, it can be trusted completely.

That’s all there is to it. According to AIG, Ayala is a total failure. Isn’t creationism grand?

Copyright © 2010. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

7 responses to “Answers in Genesis on Ayala’s Templeton Prize

  1. Ayala has authored numerous books on genetics and evolution and is one of the leading professors of evolutionary biology of the last 50 years. This just shows how intellectually bankrupt the AIG and the Discovery Institute are. I guess the fact that two Popes have upheld the validity of evolution doesn’t count. In fact they must think that Catholics are not really Christians.

  2. Curmudgeon: “That’s all there is to it. According to AIG, Ayala is a total failure.”

    But the DI ignores “the Bible’s teaching about creation and the Fall” just like Ayala does. So I look forward to AIG’s equally negative comments about the DI.

  3. Creationism tends to be a Protestant outfit, though recently we’ve started seeing more Islamic creationists. Catholics don’t have to take the Bible literally. They have a sophisticated theological tradition, including Augustine and Aquinas and all the rest, about which parts to interpret symbolically, which parts are allegorical, etc. That’s the very tradition the Protestants rejected when they said “sola scriptura.” And modern creationism evolved out of that.

  4. And although the Bible is not a science textbook…

    *Screeeeeeeeeeeeech* Wow! This is a new development. I thought their angle was that the “best science” is in the Bible!

    …it is a book of history — true history.

    Good point to keep in mind: in addition to biologists, geologists, physicists, and so forth, no reputable historian, archeologist, or anthropologist takes it as literal history, either.

  5. James F says: “I thought their angle was that the “best science” is in the Bible!”

    According to AIG’s Statement of Faith, Section 2, paragraph 1: “[The bible's] authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.”

  6. Carl Sachs: “Catholics don’t have to take the Bible literally.”

    Sadly many of them find the new-agey ID approach attractive. They can doubt “Darwinism” without having to accept YEC or OEC. Or critically analyze either.

  7. Frank J,

    I’ve thought a lot about this – I could be wrong, but I think that Michael Behe is the only Catholic scientist who is a noted ID proponent (I refuse to classify Maciej Giertych as a scientist). That being said, there are indeed high profile Catholics who have fallen for ID or antievolution arguments – Rick Santorum, Sam Brownback (although he’s a recent convert), and, maybe most troublingly, Christoph Cardinal Schönborn.