Creationist conference

  • Thread starter Thread starter JoyToTheWhirled
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JoyToTheWhirled

Guest
I have some friends who are going to an Answers in Genesis conference. I used to very impressed by the ministry when I was a Sola Scriptura Christian as it played very nicely into my world view.

But in recent years I have changed my views on so much, and no longer see the first few chapters of the OT in literalistic terms. This doesn’t mean I don’t believe that God created the universe, simply that the Bible isn’t a science textbook as shouldn’t be read as one.

I know this will have been covered before, but as I am dealing with being told I can’t really be a real Christian without being a creationist ( let alone Catholic!!) I am curious what the Catholic position is on all this? Specifically in regards to AiG’s arguments?

Opens can of worms
 
I’m not sure what AiG’s arguments are, but your position is in line with Catholic teaching. However, there are some literal elements we can’t disregard. In addition to God creating all things, there really was a first true man and a first true woman from which all true men and women are descended. They really did commit an original sin, losing the original holiness and justice that God gave them, and that sin has really been transmitted to their descendants (including us). That is, these are real, historical truths, that have been perhaps communicated to us using mythological story-telling techniques.

There are a number of further opinions, of course. The Catholic Church has not said you must oppose evolution or the Big Bang, but it has stated you must accept the truth about original sin as outlined above. I have my own further opinions (for full disclosure, I accept both the idea of evolution and the Big Bang), but I won’t go into the details. I’m sure you’ll hear from others.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, pretty much can of worms. Not too familiar with that conference but a couple of cautions.

I did go visit the creation museum and the Ark, both in Kentucky, last summer. I believe it’s pretty much the same crowd. Now, I have to admit, I enjoyed both very much, but be advised; there is some questionable Theology being promulgated. The most interesting example (in the Chinese Curse sense of the phrase), was the idea that if you didn’t believe the first 11 chapters of Genesis were literal, then all Christianity collapses.

Well, no, it doesnt. If you are well versed in the faith, it’s interesting to listen how and where they go off the rail, otherwise, probably good to avoid.

My 2 centavos, anyway.

Blessings,
Stephie
 
Last edited:
We are free to believe in the literal creation account, or to believe that the Earth developed over billions of years. The important thing is that we recognize that either way, God is the sole cause of it.

Wesrock is correct though, that we must acknowledged certain truths revealed by the Genesis accounts. Specifically, that there were two “First Humans”, whom we call Adam and Eve. These were the first truly Human individuals with rational souls. We must also recognize that these first parents sinned in some way, separating them from God.

Answers in Genesis is a fringe group that twists science in knots to try to support its positions. I’ve read some of their stuff before and did not find it compelling in the least. I’m sure Sola Scriptura types find it comforting to hear pseudo-intellectual arguments supporting their position; but the science really doesn’t bear their positions out.
 
The “Catholic position” on this is that currently it may be acceptable for Catholics to believe in evolution, allowing for certain revealed truths. I personally don’t believe in evolution nor do I think it is theologically compatible and I wish the clergy would at least attempt to give a rational, detailed explanation of how such an “evolutionary theology” could actually work, but until they do the vague allowance seems to give moral cover for those who want to believe in evolution.

To be fair, protestant creationism is usually fraught with it’s own theological errors.
 
One more thought regarding the term “literal”. It is a term commonly used among the Fathers to refer to what the author truly meant, so if the author used a metaphor (such as “when pigs fly”), the literal sense isn’t that pigs must fly, but what the author of scripture meant when he wrote that phrase. It’s just interesting how we use words differently, and when looking to the Fathers for support how we need to be familiar with how they meant the word.
 
Oh yes, quite, which is why I used the word ‘literalistic’ rather than literal.

Fwiw, I do accept the first human pair who committed the first sin which necessitated our redemption. I don’t know that I believe in evolution, it doesn’t really make much sense to me, and honestly I think there is much that we simply have no way of knowing. Which is half the joy of exploring the world, of course.

AiG definitely do focus on literalistic interpretation of Genesis 1-11 as utterly necessary to be a Christian, this is very much what is practically taught, however much they talk about salvation by Grace through faith. It’s like it is salvation by faith in a literalistic Genesis, not Christ.

I am heartened to know this is not a requirement in the Catholic church, notwithstanding the things that must be believed as we have already mentioned. Thank you.
 
Hi, Joy!

What I find interesting about such understandings is that it speaks for God without factoring in all the pertinent matters…

Revelation is not about the confinements of God; rather, Revelation is about God making Himself Known to man through means that man can assimilate.

7/24

Nope; not really.

Genesis description of Creation is set in periods not in 7/24; consider that the first time that one could argue that is after the 4th day of Creation since the very first day God Created Light, but not the sun and the moon, which would come into effect on the 4th day of Creation.

Then we have windows into God’s timescale:
  • I AM (the Eternal I Am)
  • Before Creation we Receive in Heaven all the Graces for Salvation, in Christ’s Blood so that He would Be the One which humanity would emulate as we become children of God
  • To God a day is like a thousand years; a thousand years as yesterday
  • Yahweh God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob–God is a God of the Living
…so when we view Genesis through all of these windows into God, we must understand that the narrative of Creation is made to place in us a rudimentary understanding of Creation not to depict a facsimile of Creation; as such look how close it is to what science has discovered: water teaming with life, land teaming with life, air teaming with life, eco systems set up, man brought as the last element in Creation.

A hard-literal view of Genesis would place the world and Creation within a few thousand years; reality tells us… well more like a few millions of years.

And God said let there Be Light: Bang!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Hi, Stephie!

Thanks for the info–I have not come across anyone with such vision… literal or die?

Wow, talk about cultist mentality!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Twas on an audio-visual screen explaining one of the exhibits. Sure surprised me. I loved the dinosaurs right along side people. Interesting slant.

Blessings,
Stephie
 
Hi!

Have you considered that there are elements that seem to point to a progressive development (of course I don’t embrace the missing links and millions of species evolving without much more than ‘it’s been studied that living creatures adapt’); but we find that the tenets do converge at certain levels (the planet prepared for life, animal and plant life arriving prior to man, man being the last step in Creation).

Unlike science the Church must stay true to the Course (Jesus); everything else is speculation until facts and technology converge.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Hi, Wesrock!

Excellent point!

Arguing from today’s understanding and seeking the Church’s Fathers’ writings to back us up without taking into account their actual understanding/positions is flawed.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Yeah, it’s that magical hindsight thing… we can insert whatever we want into things… and it is real to us if we just close our eyes and click our heels.

…then there’s reality… 🙂 🙂 🙂

Maran atha!

Angel
 
When I visit, I shall be sure to dress in a steampunk outfit, seems like I would fit right in with the anachronisms!
 
…just make sure that you wear the right slippers; I understand that some are not chained to the rhythm!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Always wanted a pair of ruby slippers. 😉

@JoyToTheWhirled
Both places, in my opinion are worth visiting. Watch out for the anti-Catholic bias. Be sure to find the Unicorn on the Ark, the Irish Rovers song not withstanding.

Blessings,
Stephie
 
What does it mean under The Catholic Position, where it says “Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under Gods guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul?”

I know what it means for there to be a special creation of the soul, but what about the part about previous biological forms?
 
Last edited:
no one , not one person on the face of this earth, on this forum, be it a holy church militant on the street or here, your friends, parents, or whom ever has the right, or privelage , or a theological degree to prove that they know are worthy or not to be a Christian let alone a " real catholic ". If anyone you know has the nerve to tell you that you " can’t really be a real Christian or Catholic " you have in turn run into a complete fool.

Plenty of people have and i have fallen prey to debating what it means to be a good or bad Christian or Catholic, and I was wrong to do so at the time, people may have opinions, but that is all they are opinions.

You do not need approval of anyone here for your life or your decisions. Stand strong, and when you make a mistake, learn from it and keep on truckn.
  • disclaimer, this is a response to the original poster, not to anyone nor is this an attack on anyone, this is an open forum, you are free to disagree if you like and respond to what i have to say if you choose, I won’t respond nor engage in any baiting or to those who feel they need to one up me or what ever, i just dont care, i will though respond to original posters, for the most part, *
 
For example, that humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor species millions of years ago, that all life on earth at some point shared a common ancestor hundreds of millions of years ago. Over time, different populations split apart and developed differently into new and different species.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top