Account: "How do Catholics understand the creation account of Genesis and evolution?"

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
StudentMI said:
Your answer here proves otherwise. You showed your cards too early.
Click to expand...
This is not a game to me. Maybe it is to you. My position on these forums is well known.

Did Eve come from Adam? Why won’t you answer.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
Did Eve come from Adam? Why won’t you answer.
Click to expand...
I was waiting for you to answer but I see you won’t. So I will.

I have no idea if Genesis is a literal account of creation. It would seem not to be due to the scientific evidence we have indicating a much older earth, and the evidence of evolution. If we take Genesis literally we get into very muddy waters with dogma like original sin. If we take the ancestry lists in the Bible literally we have the same problem. Were humans innocent until a specific historical event in the past? I have no idea. Someday I’d like to ask God.
 
StudentMI said:
I have no idea if Genesis is a literal account of creation. It would seem not to be due to the scientific evidence we have indicating a much older earth, and the evidence of evolution. If we take Genesis literally we get into very muddy waters with dogma like original sin. If we take the ancestry lists in the Bible literally we have the same problem. Were humans innocent until a specific historical event in the past? I have no idea. Someday I’d like to ask God.
Click to expand...
There you have it. Another victim of scientism

The Magician’s Twin: C.S. Lewis and the Case against Scientism

The Similarity Between Science and Magic
  1. Science as religion
  2. Science as credulity
  3. Science as power
Evolution is an alternative religion

 
Last edited:
Again, showing your cards way too early.

So are you saying I, StudentMI, a Roman Catholic, am in a state of heresy? Apostasy? Are you judging the state of my soul?
 
Ah but since you are informing me of the error of my ways re Catholic dogma I am in a state of heresy aren’t I?
 
StudentMI said:
Ah but since you are informing me of the error of my ways re Catholic dogma I am in a state of heresy aren’t I?
Click to expand...
No. There is vincible and invincible ignorance.

Look these over carefully. Which ones have you chosen to disregard?

Infallible dogmas of the Catholic Church
  • God keeps all created things in existence.
  • God through His providence protects and guides all that He has created.
  • The first man was created by God.
  • Man consists of two essential parts–a material body and a spiritual soul.
  • The rational soul is per se the essential form of the body.
  • Every human being possesses an individual soul.
  • God has conferred on man a supernatural Destiny.
  • Our first parents, before the Fall, were endowed with sanctifying grace.
  • They were also endowed with donum immortalitatis , i.e., the gift of bodily immortality.
  • Our first parents in paradise sinned grievously through transgression of the Divine probationary commandment.
  • Through the sin our first parents lost sanctifying grace and provoked the anger and the indignation of God.
  • Our first parents became subject to death and to the dominion of the Devil.
  • Adam’s sin is transmitted to his posterity, not by imitation, but by descent.
  • Original sin is transmitted by natural generation.
 
Last edited:
Thank you. I’ll have to save for that. I did a search and found a list of 255 infallible dogmas.
 
I wouldn’t know if it is or not. Never went to a Catholic school. I’m a convert.
 
StudentMI said:
40.png
patrick9999:
LOL. Give us a list.
Click to expand...
I’m not summarizing what every scientific journal of repute has been saying for decades and that is confirmed over and over again in research to answer a creationist pseudo scientific argument that for some reason has proliferated in a Church where a saint declared evolution was pretty much confirmed. If you can’t reconcile Darwin with your faith that’s on you.
Click to expand...
So none. The answer I expected.
 
Behe vindicated… May 2020

Behe’s first rule of adaptive evolution, break or blunt any functional gene whose loss would increase the number of a species’s offspring.

In laboratory-based experimental evolution of novel phenotypes and the human domestication of crops, the majority of the mutations that lead to adaptation are loss-of-function mutations that impair or eliminate the function of genes rather than gain-of-function mutations that increase or qualitatively alter the function of proteins. Here, I speculate that easier access to loss-of-function mutations has led them to play a major role in the adaptive radiations that occur when populations have access to many unoccupied ecological niches.

(Andrew W. Murray, “Can gene-inactivating mutations lead to evolutionary novelty?” Current Biology , 30(10); R465-R471

 
Last edited:
I’m done with this conversation. buffalo and I had a nice conversation and we ended on a positive note. Not interested in getting in a debate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top