B
buffalo
Guest
Excellent!
- Status
E
edwest211
Guest
Guided design is the only reasonable answer. And teenagers in school get only a partial glimpse of a picture where natural forces with natural origins did everything, including creating man as we see him today. This explanation is highly biased and incomplete. I am not arguing that the Biology textbook should include God but the rest of the story can only be found in the Church. Otherwise, people are just walking around with this ‘no one made us’ kind of thinking. Which carries a spectrum of possible problems. At best, people do good but recognize no God or religion. At worst, evolution is the club used by anti-theists to beat Christians over the head with. We are ignorant, hate science, ignore their interpretation of a small amount of evidence, and man just lives and dies like any other mammal. Then - nothing.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
As long as we agree that evolution in itself is permissible, then good.
The rest is commentary, at least insofar as my objective is in this thread.
The rest is commentary, at least insofar as my objective is in this thread.
B
buffalo
Guest
As I clearly show post after post educated Catholics have nothing to fear from the clear, consistent and firm teaching of the Church.
In fact, as Pope JPII stated:
In a truly revolutionary statement, John Paul II claims that both sides can benefit from such a dialogue! Listen to his remarkable words:
"Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish….[5]"
In fact, such a dialogue is basically inevitable. As the Pope points out, isolation between the Church and the scientific community is not a real option.
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
With distinction. It cannot be atheistic, materialistic or macro.
H
Hugh_Farey
Guest
Yes, he can. You haven’t really read this speech in full have you? As usual, Pope Benedict XVI specifically singles out Atheistic Evolution for condemnation, without, in this speech, taking about the evolution which he clearly agrees with elsewhere.
So you do agree with the teaching of conventional Evolution in schools? As long as God’s part in it is also taught elsewhere, such as in the Church? As it happens, I used to teach that in Science classes, but I understand that the US state education system is different from the UK independent system.
B
buffalo
Guest
I have read and argued this stuff for many years.
God cannot be the author of evolution. And the biological evidence is supporting my claim.
It makes no sense. Creation with design and programming is a much better explanation. Of course there will be a number of holdouts.
B
buffalo
Guest
No. Science class should teach empirical science only, that is what is observable, repeatable and predictable. Macro-Evolution does not rise to that level. It is philosophy. Teach it and ID in philosophy class.
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
Ummmm it most definitely can be macro evolution.
That’s what evolution is: the processes of micro and macro are essentially the same. If you can agree to micro, the inherent developmental and progressive potentials in organisms, why do you object to macro evolution in principle? They operate the same. Object to the science, fine. But it’s simply not ruled out by the church.
That’s what evolution is: the processes of micro and macro are essentially the same. If you can agree to micro, the inherent developmental and progressive potentials in organisms, why do you object to macro evolution in principle? They operate the same. Object to the science, fine. But it’s simply not ruled out by the church.
E
edwest211
Guest
Science can’t be religion is the thing I keep hearing. But, based on the loudest voices in the scientific community - nothing made us except for chemicals and physics. Will this dialogue occur? I’m hopeful as Pope John Paul II magnanimously extended his hand. But the secular non-saint, Galileo is brought up so often and even Richard Dawkins puts up a Christmas tree without its original meaning - it’s just an old tradition that appeals to him.
E
edwest211
Guest
You can believe that but when bringing up the Church, Divine Revelation cannot be ignored. For what reason was Christ born?
B
buffalo
Guest
The Pope is saying the doctrine of original sin is why Christ came even though we have some here trying to downplay it. It is not negotiable.
When they doubt Adam and Eve as historical persons they do violence to Scripture and the Church.
Reading the Popes they are saying don’t back down to science. Stand firm.
When they doubt Adam and Eve as historical persons they do violence to Scripture and the Church.
Reading the Popes they are saying don’t back down to science. Stand firm.
B
buffalo
Guest
That is what they sell. No one argues micro-evolution so macro is just an extension. The problem is it does not happen.
Because we now know the limits of evolution even though hugh_farey denied ther were any.
I have shown scientific support for this for many years and many many references.
T
Techno2000
Guest
My evolution thread died out, and then mutated into three new evolution threads. 
B
buffalo
Guest
Should not have depended on the likes and just created a 4.2.My evolution thread died out, and then mutated into three new evolution threads.
Common descent you know…
Last edited:
T
Techno2000
Guest
Then I’d have to hear… after all these threads you still don’t understand how evolution works.Techno2000:
Should not have depended on the likes and just created a 4.2.My evolution thread died out, and then mutated into three new evolution threads.
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
This book that I have, a Catholic textbook of sorts (though it can be read in other contexts as well), is yet another resource that plainly expresses Catholics can accept macro-evolution, as well as the evolution of the human body — all the while still accepting monogenism, Adam and Eve, and Original Sin.
Nearly everything I can get my hands on, both on the popular-theological and magisterial level, either assumes or states that (macro) evolution, even of the human body, is compatible with Catholicism.
This book that I have, a Catholic textbook of sorts (though it can be read in other contexts as well), is yet another resource that plainly expresses Catholics can accept macro-evolution, as well as the evolution of the human body — all the while still accepting monogenism, Adam and Eve, and Original Sin.
Nearly everything I can get my hands on, both on the popular-theological and magisterial level, either assumes or states that (macro) evolution, even of the human body, is compatible with Catholicism.
Last edited:
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
As I said earlier:
And it has been shown again and again and again that Catholics can. I cannot think of ONE modern and prominent Catholic theologian, churchman, or speaker or apologist who does not at least RECOGNIZE that Catholics can accept evolution. Can you point me to one?
Take Catholic Answers, for instance: From my experience with Catholic Answers over the years (listening to radio and reading their articles), it is clear that Trent Horn, Tim Staples, Jimmy Akin, Karlo Broussard, and practically all of their speakers, guests, and writers accept evolution — or at least that Catholics can accept evolution.
I think of the great modern evangelist Bishop Robert Barron. I think of the great scientist Fr. Robert Spitzer. Again and again, I cannot think of any prominent Catholic who rejects evolution.
I think of Ed Feser and Christopher T. Baglow.
I think of Scott Hahn.
I think of John Paul II who called evolution “more than a hypothesis.”
I’m going with the International Theological Commission, led by then Cardinal Ratzinger, which acknowledged that “physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage.”
And, again, I’m going with Pope Benedict XVI, who, despite whatever reservations and critiques he may have said about various aspects of evolution – especially the materialistic philosophy infused into it, plainly allowed for it
And it has been shown again and again and again that Catholics can. I cannot think of ONE modern and prominent Catholic theologian, churchman, or speaker or apologist who does not at least RECOGNIZE that Catholics can accept evolution. Can you point me to one?
Take Catholic Answers, for instance: From my experience with Catholic Answers over the years (listening to radio and reading their articles), it is clear that Trent Horn, Tim Staples, Jimmy Akin, Karlo Broussard, and practically all of their speakers, guests, and writers accept evolution — or at least that Catholics can accept evolution.
I think of the great modern evangelist Bishop Robert Barron. I think of the great scientist Fr. Robert Spitzer. Again and again, I cannot think of any prominent Catholic who rejects evolution.
I think of Ed Feser and Christopher T. Baglow.
I think of Scott Hahn.
I think of John Paul II who called evolution “more than a hypothesis.”
I’m going with the International Theological Commission, led by then Cardinal Ratzinger, which acknowledged that “physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage.”
And, again, I’m going with Pope Benedict XVI, who, despite whatever reservations and critiques he may have said about various aspects of evolution – especially the materialistic philosophy infused into it, plainly allowed for it
T
Techno2000
Guest
Is there a chapter on mental gymnastics ?
C
catholic1seeks
Guest
https://www.theologicalforum.org/BookPreview/pdf/406
^table of contents
Also some pertinent sections:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
and later on…
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
TBH, I wish we could all read those sections before we begin to talk hahaha.
^table of contents
Also some pertinent sections:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
and later on…
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
TBH, I wish we could all read those sections before we begin to talk hahaha.
Last edited:
- Status