Conference on Evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dixieagle said:
Actually having a Ph.D. has NOTHING to do with being Catholic. It is a blessing, however, to have someone who is a strong witness to his faith in this field. What he discovers (phylogenetics being his specialty) can never contradict dogmas of our (his) faith.
Click to expand...
Exalting the mind of man is repeated constantly here. The fear is that somehow, faith or belief will replace science, and those who love science over the clear, established truths held by the Church in the deposit of faith, want their religion, scientism, to replace the faith our God tells us we must have. You seem to be missing the posts where that fear is clearly articulated. The horrible vision of their’s goes like this: Creationism or the more dreaded Intelligent Design will be infiltrated into public schools, meaning God gets back into public schools. So they come here, man the barricades, and ask every passerby if they believe in evolution.

And they will not be stopping their Evolution Evangelism for the foreseeable future.

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
The horrible vision of theirs goes like this: Creationism or the more dreaded Intelligent Design will be infiltrated into public schools, meaning God gets back into public schools.
Click to expand...
Not God. Ignorance.

–Mike
 
mpartyka said:
Not God. Ignorance.

–Mike
Click to expand...
The words “ignorance” and “reason” have been appropriated by the atheist. And yes, God is feared, but not as God but as the great oppressor.

I assure you, science is bent to serve the temporal needs of men. If an Atheist Technocracy is set up, I can also assure you, based on history, that only by belonging to an elite group will you be saved from the fate of the masses.

hup.harvard.edu/catalog/MCGBEN.html

Profits above people, the common people.

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
You seem to be missing the posts where that fear is clearly articulated. The horrible vision of their’s goes like this: Creationism or the more dreaded Intelligent Design will be infiltrated into public schools, meaning God gets back into public schools. So they come here, man the barricades, and ask every passerby if they believe in evolution. And they will not be stopping their Evolution Evangelism for the foreseeable future.
Peace,Ed
Click to expand...
Ed, you seem to find atheists in every closet, under every bed, in the trunk of every car. I know of only one or two firm atheists who post here. The rest of us who discuss evolution are devout Catholics, believers in God.
 
StAnastasia said:
Ed, you seem to find atheists in every closet, under every bed, in the trunk of every car. I know of only one or two firm atheists who post here. The rest of us who discuss evolution are devout Catholics, believers in God.
Click to expand...
I’m not Catholic. I still consider myself Christian, though I’m not sure how many persons of this or that denomination would agree with my self-assessment. Just sayin’.

–Mike
 
StAnastasia said:
I’m glad you are not dismissing science, although engineering does not always involve science. What you said was: “It’s been said that the prayers of young children are the most powerful (sorry, can’t remember the reference). Why would that be true? Children are the least educated amongst us. The ones with the least knowledge.”

It seems you cheerfully dismiss knowledge as being somehow evil, a spiritual impediment; that children are spiritually purer because they are innocent of knowledge. I hope that’s not what you are saying, because is simply is not true.

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
  1. You said “engineering does not always involve science.” That’s true, but has nothing to do with what we’re talking about. Evasive maneuvers! Shields up!
  2. Knowledge can sometimes be evil, if it is not the whole story (we never have the whole story). And some “knowledge” is not even a part of the true story. One must remember that knowledge changes - everything is composed of air, earth, fire, and water right? That model worked for a while. How long will our current scientific models last until they are laughed at like we do the 4 element model? We should be more humble about these things.
  3. Children are spiritually more pure because they obey even when they don’t understand things - and they recognize their dependence on other persons. Adults tend more to obey or not based on how much knowledge they think they have (which of course, is never 100%, but let’s not admit that). Cafeteria Catholics for example.
Is ignorance bliss? That was the question that started this sub-thread. God put the church in place for us to obey. Like children. If “knowledge” (as in scientific knowledge) seems to lead us away from God (if for no other reason that it increases our pride), then truly, ignorance is bliss and the result of it is eternal joy. Whereas the accumulation of “knowledge” (which may or may not even be correct, and is in any case not 100% there) often leads to pride. And pride leads to “not eternal bliss.”

I’ll place a bet right now, that there are more Mother Teresa’s in Heaven than Albert Einstein’s.

LATE EDIT: The preceding message is not intended in any way to malign Albert Einstein. I hope he is in Heaven. I’m also assuming that Mother Teresa was - relative to Albert Einstein - somewhat ignorant of scientific matters. Any other resemblances to persons living or dead is strictly coincidental.
 
StAnastasia said:
Ed, you seem to find atheists in every closet, under every bed, in the trunk of every car. I know of only one or two firm atheists who post here. The rest of us who discuss evolution are devout Catholics, believers in God.
Click to expand...
When one no longer has an argument attack the person. For once see if you can edit your posts to eliminate personal attacks.
 
StAnastasia said:
Ed, you seem to find atheists in every closet, under every bed, in the trunk of every car. I know of only one or two firm atheists who post here. The rest of us who discuss evolution are devout Catholics, believers in God.
Click to expand...
Well, let’s see. The media is putting out the science is god idea constantly. In a recent interview with a politician, the first words out of the mouth of the interviewer are: Do you believe in evolution?

And what do you believe God can do? Can He perform miracles? Does the Church have the authority to interpret Scripture? Are we not bound as Catholics to believe what the Church tells us is true?

Christopher Hitchens was quoted in the National Catholic Register: “If we knew then what know now, would we ever have become religious?” Yet he goes on to say that if he saw a miracle he would doubt the evidence of his own eyes. Where is the intellectual, reality based honesty?

So if Mr. Hitchens had the Blessed Mother appear to him, he would what? Run away? Attribute it all to a hallucination? If you are a devout Catholic then you know the tilma, or cloak, of Our Lady of Guadalupe was declared by the Church as not painted by human hands. The Secretary of State saw it recently. Any scientist can run down and examine it.

Peace,
Ed
 
ricmat said:
Knowledge can sometimes be evil, if it is not the whole story (we never have the whole story).
Click to expand...
I’ve considered things from that angle. What if Genesis isn’t the whole story? Indeed, from an ancient-earth perspective, it can’t be. There’s way more than seven days covered in those seven days. And the order of those days doesn’t square with current scientific theories, either. But that’s all rather irrelevant. Standards of history were much lower back then. Biographies were often told topically rather than chronologically. (This is why Matthew, Mark, and Luke record the same events in different order.) And if biographies of people could be told topically, why not the “biography” of the earth itself? So, if it were to turn out that Genesis 1-11 were a “condensed, topical biography” of humanity in its beginning stages, I don’t think I’d have a problem with that. If we could stop referring to Genesis as “what really happened” and start referring to it as “what essentially happened,” that would satisfy many persons like myself, I think. If we could say, “Genesis 1-11 isn’t the way things actually happened, but the stories are so in tune with the way things actually are for us human beings that they may as well have been true stories,” I think a lot of conflicts would resolve right there.
One must remember that knowledge changes - everything is composed of air, earth, fire, and water right? That model worked for a while. How long will our current scientific models last until they are laughed at like we do the 4 element model? We should be more humble about these things.
Click to expand...
Right! Like, what about the “three levels of creation” model? You know, the one in which the world was flat, Sheol was a physical place under the earth, and Heaven was located above the physical firmament which separated the “waters above” (e.g., rain, snow, hail) from the waters below (e.g., rivers, lakes, oceans)? The model under which a worldwide flood was feasible and logical? In short, the model of the world upon which Genesis 1-11 is based? I agree with you – we should be more humble about the sources from which we get our data. Maybe the things we take for granted as being 100% true are only such “in a sense.”
Is ignorance bliss?..If “knowledge” (as in scientific knowledge) seems to lead us away from God…then truly, ignorance is bliss and the result of it is eternal joy.
Click to expand...
An “ends justifies the means” argument if I ever heard one.

–Mike
 
In the world of Christopher Hitchens, he goes back in time to just before Christ and teaches all the sheperds and other people about modern Biology, then Christ appears. What does Mr. Hitchens do then? This is the core of the issue: what Christ reveals to us and what He tells us to do.

Peace,
Ed
 
buffalo said:
When one no longer has an argument attack the person. For once see if you can edit your posts to eliminate personal attacks.
Click to expand...
I hope Ed will; there’s no need to keep on attacking scientifically educated Catholics on Catholic Answers!
 
edwest2 said:
Christopher Hitchens was quoted in the National Catholic Register: “If we knew then what know now, would we ever have become religious?” Yet he goes on to say that if he saw a miracle he would doubt the evidence of his own eyes. Where is the intellectual, reality based honesty?
Click to expand...
Since Christopher Hitchens does not post on CAF, why attack the theistic evolutionists among us as if we speak for him?
 
Instead of taking my comment as reflecting on you, why don’t you just comment on its contents?

I am upholding the reality of the Living God in a media environment that is constantly promoting atheism and secular humanism. I hope you understand that. I also hope you understand my comments about devout Catholics who somehow believe in God but seem to not be able to see how this issue infringes on the Church’s teachings regarding man’s origin. To restate: Adam and Eve, two individuals. Did you not state that 50 years from now this would not be an issue? The Church does not teach polygenism.

Peace,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top