Convince Me The Biblical Version is Fact

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hope1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
goout said:
40.png
rcwitness:
That’s pretty arrogant. Why be here?
Click to expand...
So people reading can see that the drumbeat of anti science anti reason folks are not in step with mainstream Catholic thought.
That’s not arrogant, that’s just giving a rebuttal to skewed presentations of the faith that mislead people.
Click to expand...
There is nothing anti-science about being open to the possibility that the theory of evolution could be disproven. In fact, that is what true science would endorse in order to make the theory more certain.

It would be anti-science to insist the theory of evolution in some current iteration must be correct.

Physics is a far more secure area of science than biology or biochemistry and yet theories of physics are constantly being challenged and updated.

Care to make a case that biologists are on firmer scientific ground than physicists or chemists?
 
mVitus said:
list of scientists that support evolution that rivals the list you posted, except whereas the other list takes any scientist, being named Steve is a prerequisite to make it on to this list
Click to expand...
:rofl:hahaha that’s cute, love that one!
 
You built one giant straw man there.
You may as well pretend I answered you.
 
goout said:
You built one giant straw man there.
You may as well pretend I answered you.
Click to expand...
Okay, so is it a “leap of faith” all three ways – science, reason (aka metaphysics) and theology –or just the two?
goout said:
It’s a leap of faith, both ways.
Click to expand...
Or are you arguing that science just is metaphysics or that there is no such credible thing as metaphysics (it is merely pretend), or what exactly?

You claimed…
goout said:
God is not provable by science
Click to expand...
So is there a way of proving God, or just “faith both ways?”
 
Last edited:
goout said:
No scientific theories recognize the creator, because God is not provable by science.
Click to expand...
Could you reconcile the above claim with what the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches?
[35] Man’s faculties make him capable of coming to a knowledge of the existence of a personal God. But for man to be able to enter into real intimacy with him, God willed both to reveal himself to man and to give him the grace of being able to welcome this revelation in faith. The proofs of God’s existence, however, can predispose one to faith and help one to see that faith is not opposed to reason.

III. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD ACCORDING TO THE CHURCH

[36] “Our holy mother, the Church, holds and teaches that God, the first principle and last end of all things, can be known with certainty from the created world by the natural light of human reason.” Without this capacity, man would not be able to welcome God’s revelation. Man has this capacity because he is created “in the image of God”.

[37] In the historical conditions in which he finds himself, however, man experiences many difficulties in coming to know God by the light of reason alone:

Though human reason is, strictly speaking, truly capable by its own natural power and light of attaining to a true and certain knowledge of the one personal God, who watches over and controls the world by his providence, and of the natural law written in our hearts by the Creator; yet there are many obstacles which prevent reason from the effective and fruitful use of this inborn faculty. For the truths that concern the relations between God and man wholly transcend the visible order of things, and, if they are translated into human action and influence it, they call for self-surrender and abnegation. The human mind, in its turn, is hampered in the attaining of such truths, not only by the impact of the senses and the imagination, but also by disordered appetites which are the consequences of original sin. So it happens that men in such matters easily persuade themselves that what they would not like to be true is false or at least doubtful.

[38] This is why man stands in need of being enlightened by God’s revelation, not only about those things that exceed his understanding, but also “about those religious and moral truths which of themselves are not beyond the grasp of human reason, so that even in the present condition of the human race, they can be known by all men with ease, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error”.

IV. HOW CAN WE SPEAK ABOUT GOD?

[39] In defending the ability of human reason to know God, the Church is expressing her confidence in the possibility of speaking about him to all men and with all men, and therefore of dialogue with other religions, with philosophy and science, as well as with unbelievers and atheists.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Evolution disproves a “first” of any species since we are all evolving at different rates. Once a species can no longer procreate to have successful offspring, then you have a “new” species. You can be spiritual and/or religious and still be a scientist, just you can’t bring the supernatural into the lab. All scientists in the lab are philosophical naturalist to be a proper scientist. Philosophical naturalism is not saying that the supernatural does not exists, just that it has not been demonstrated to exist yet. As such, it is not allowed to be a solution to the questions the scientists are researching in the lab. They are restricted to known demonstrated truths of reality or “we don’t know”. They are not allowed to invoke the supernatural as a cause for anything in the lab. But once you leave the lab, you can be as superstitious as you want.
Evolution is as false as gravity is false according to what we can justify about the understanding of reality.
 
Hope1960 said:
So, for religions that believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis, how do they reconcile that with science and how do they get so many members?
Besides the non-denominational church I’ve been thinking about, we have probably 5 other churches in my area that believe the same, including a large Lutheran church.
Click to expand...
Can somebody answer my questions?
 
Might be that nobody can answer them because nobody has an answer to give, because nobody subscribes to what you describe?

Other threads have individuals who deny science as “not trustworthy” and politically inclined, thus false, so there’s that? But that’s obviously a little problematic, but then again, so is biblical literalism, sooo
 
The Catholic Church allows you to believe in either a literal interpretation of Genesis, or that God gave two “pre-humans” souls. So just pick the one you believe at this point. Everyone is getting fatigued trying to answer you. I have tried helping you in the past with other things and no matter how much help or evidence you get, you seem to continue questioning and doubting.

As long as the Church has been around and until the end of time, there have been and always will be scholars and scientists who cast doubt upon the faith. They’ll bring up studies and evidence to refute Church teachings, the existence of God, the divinity of Jesus, the accuracy of Scripture, etc. These attacks and doubts cast upon the faith will never stop.
 
bobperk said:
Everyone is getting fatigued trying to answer you. I have tried helping you in the past with other things and no matter how much help or evidence you get, you seem to continue questioning and doubting.
Click to expand...
Do you speak for everyone?
 
Prove to us why it’s not. At the end of the day, both come down to faith.
 
ConcernedConvert said:
Prove to us why it’s not. At the end of the day, both come down to faith.
Click to expand...
Genetics show that there was never a bottleneck of two people, so I’d like some evidence that a literal interpretation is correct or how people who believe in Genesis literally reconcile their belief with science.
 
Last edited:
No they don’t. Some scientists theorize that but not all of them ascribe to that theory. Also, a theory is just that, a theory. It is an idea based off of some research, but is not proven as a matter of fact. A simple google search finds conflicting theories of all kinds on the matter.
 
ConcernedConvert said:
No they don’t. Some scientists theorize that but not all of them ascribe to that theory. Also, a theory is just that, a theory. It is an idea based off of some research, but is not proven as a matter of fact. A simple google search finds conflicting theories of all kinds on the matter.
Click to expand...
According to the list mVitus posted, the number of scientists who believe in evolution dwarf those who don’t.
 
Hey that’s fine. That still doesn’t prove anything. That’s also one list, with the key word being “believe”.
 
At the end of the day you have to believe something is true because there is no physical way of proving it.
 
ConcernedConvert said:
At the end of the day you have to believe something is true because there is no physical way of proving it.
Click to expand...
Well, right now I still believe in evolution but, like I said upthread, I’d like to check out this non-denom church but they don’t believe in evolution and wanted someone to provide information to prove the other side.
 
Do you know catholic teachings on evolution? If you don’t you should look into those.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top