Adam and Eve Possible

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ignorance is bliss to some I suppose.

If your faith is so weak that you have to reject modern science to cling to antiquated notions about the age of the universe, then I suppose you do what you gotta do.

But please, don’t spew forth your excrement like it’s authoritative. It’s not.
 
oday the Catholic Church has well-developed theologies of redemption and sanctification but no well-developed theology of creation. That is because so many of her influential thinkers have abandoned the sound creation theology of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church and have embraced instead the false principles of evolutionism. The purpose of this book is to help restore traditional Catholic theology on origins to its rightful place in the belief of Catholics. The traditional teaching of the Church on Creation, the Fall, and the Great Flood and its aftermath is clearly presented in the form of sixteen doctrines abstracted from the text of Genesis 1-11. The doctrines are defended on theological, philosophical and scientific grounds from assaults made on them from the sectors of biblical criticism and scientism. The author attempts to present a story of origins that evokes true and vivid images of the creation of the world and the primal history of the human species. Accurate, thorough and readable answers are given to many questions about origins that perplex the modern Catholic. The exposition is kept as non-technical as possible so that the book will be accessible to everyone. Not everyone will be able to understand everything that is presented, but every reader will find enough to set his thinking straight and to nourish his Catholic faith.

Foreword by Most. Rev. Robert Francis Vasa, Bishop of Baker
 
Bravo, you’ve found one bishop out of 5,200 that believes YEC.
 
Spyridon said:
If your faith is so weak that you have to reject modern science to cling to antiquated notions about the age of the universe, then I suppose you do what you gotta do.

But please, don’t spew forth your excrement like it’s authoritative. It’s not.
Click to expand...
You are way out of line here. People who are comfortable in their beliefs don’t get this angry when they are challenged.
 
What Does The Catholic Church Teach about Origins?

God created everything “in its whole substance” from nothing (ex nihilo) in the beginning.
(Lateran IV; Vatican Council I)

Genesis does not contain purified myths. (Pontifical Biblical Commission 1909[1])

Genesis contains real history—it gives an account of things that really happened. (Pius XII)

Adam and Eve were real human beings—the first parents of all mankind. (Pius XII)

Polygenism (many “first parents”) contradicts Scripture and Tradition and is condemned. (Pius XII; 1994 Catechism, 360, footnote 226: Tobit 8:6—the “one ancestor” referred to in this Catechism could only be Adam.)

The “beginning” of the world included the creation of all things, the creation of Adam and Eve and the Fall (Jesus Christ [Mark 10:6]; Pope Innocent III; Blessed Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus).

The body of Eve was specially created from a portion of Adam’s body (Leo XIII). She could not have originated via evolution.

Various senses are employed in the Bible, but the literal obvious sense must be believed unless reason dictates or necessity requires (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus).

Adam and Eve were created upon an earthly paradise and would not have known death if they had remained obedient (Pius XII).

After their disobedience of God, Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden. But the Second Person of the Trinity would subsequently pay the ransom for fallen man (Nicene Creed).

Original Sin is a flawed condition inherited from Adam and Eve (Council of Trent).

The Universe suffers in travail ever since the sin of disobedience by Adam and Eve. (Romans 8, Vatican Council I).

We must believe any interpretation of Scripture that the Fathers taught unanimously on a matter of faith or morals (Council of Trent and Vatican Council I).

All the Fathers who wrote on the subject believed that the Creation days were no longer than 24-hour-days. (Consensus of the Fathers of the Church)

The work of Creation was finished by the close of Day Six, and nothing completely new has since been created—except for each human rational soul at conception (Vatican Council I)

St. Peter and Christ Himself in the New Testament confirmed the global Flood of Noah. It covered all the then high mountains and destroyed all land dwelling creatures except eight human beings andall kinds of non-human creatures aboard the Ark (Unam Sanctam, 1302)

The historical existence of Noah’s Ark is regarded as most important in typology, as central to Redemption. (1566 Catechism of the Council of Trent)

Evolution must not be taught as fact, but instead the pros and cons of evolution must be taught.
(Pius XII, Humani Generis)

Investigation into human “evolution” was allowed in 1950, but Pope Pius XII feared that an acceptance of evolutionism might adversely affect doctrinal beliefs
 
Where there is one there is more. lol

You asked for only one though.
 
Thomas Aquinas, c.a. 1225 - 1274, was very concerned with the ways that the expansion of human knowledge could challenge traditional patterns of belief and practice. Aquinas wrote in his Summa Theological (1273), “In discussing questions of this kind two rules are to be observed, as Augustine teaches. The first is, to hold to the truth of Scripture without wavering. The second is that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should adhere to a particular explanation only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it if it be proved with certainty to be false, lest Holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing.”

Good luck evangelizing the world when your first requirement is that one must check his brain at the door.

Unreal.
 
buffalo said:
When they cut open dino bones and did carbon dating on them they return dates around 28000 years ago.
Click to expand...
This is nonsense and is not supported by an reputable scientist anywhere. You should be ashamed of yourself. (I know, because geology is my degree, and this is -absolutely nonsense-).
 
You can’t carbon date dinosaur fossils. Carbon dating doesn’t work that way.
 
BTW - I am not a YEC. I have not drawn a conclusion on ages at this time.

But these new findings do give one pause and must be explained.
 
let me quote from the article and scientist that you maliciously mis-represent (this kind of posting is why the forum is so poison for so many). Did you not think people would read your link?
Schweitzer, one of the first scientists to use the tools of modern cell biology to study dinosaurs, has upended the conventional wisdom by showing that some rock-hard fossils tens of millions of years old may have remnants of soft tissues hidden away in their interiors. “The reason it hasn’t been discovered before is no right-thinking paleontologist would do what Mary did with her specimens. We don’t go to all this effort to dig this stuff out of the ground to then destroy it in acid,” says dinosaur paleontologist Thomas Holtz Jr., of the University of Maryland. “It’s great science.” The observations could shed new light on how dinosaurs evolved and how their muscles and blood vessels worked. And the new findings might help settle a long-running debate about whether dinosaurs were warmblooded, coldblooded—or both.

Meanwhile, Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth” creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer’s data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as “a complete and total Christian.”
Click to expand...
This article nor this science in any way support the young dinosaur young earth nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Let’s go easy on @buffalo @jcm2017

I think he’s young and he’s open to learning and admits hes not made up his mind either way.

@ChunkMonk is a different story.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
oday the Catholic Church has well-developed theologies of redemption and sanctification but no well-developed theology of creation. That is because so many of her influential thinkers have abandoned the sound creation theology of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church and have embraced instead the false principles of evolutionism. The purpose of this book is to help restore traditional Catholic theology on origins to its rightful place in the belief of Catholics. The traditional teaching of the Church on Creation, the Fall, and the Great Flood and its aftermath is clearly presented in the form of sixteen doctrines abstracted from the text of Genesis 1-11. The doctrines are defended on theological, philosophical and scientific grounds from assaults made on them from the sectors of biblical criticism and scientism. The author attempts to present a story of origins that evokes true and vivid images of the creation of the world and the primal history of the human species. Accurate, thorough and readable answers are given to many questions about origins that perplex the modern Catholic. The exposition is kept as non-technical as possible so that the book will be accessible to everyone. Not everyone will be able to understand everything that is presented, but every reader will find enough to set his thinking straight and to nourish his Catholic faith.

Foreword by Most. Rev. Robert Francis Vasa, Bishop of Baker
Click to expand...
This is scandalous to readers. To say the Catholic Church has no well developed theory of creation is just laughable. Please educate yourself.
 
A dinosaur’s fossilized bone doesn’t have much, if any, of the original material left that made up the bone when the animal was alive. It’s my understanding that you need the original bone material to properly carbon date an organism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top