Darwinism in schools?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tigress
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To Vera Dicere

"You’re operating under teh assumption there was an actual “Adam”. The creation stories in Genesis [there are two remember] are symbolic. Adam is simply the representation of the first human to have awareness of God."
to Vera Dicere

Then, by process of induction, Cain and Abel were representations of sons, then so on, then Jesus Christ was a representation of God, then so on, then we are only representations of people…??? Well how does this sound to you???
 
To Gblat

"It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. "

Actually some laugh about us because we belive the Holy water is really Holy; scientifically they can’t measure anything. I don’t care …
 
Ion said:
Darwinism is a bunch of idiotic assumtions, it is science by agreement and not by experiment;
Click to expand...
False. Evolution has been confirmed by both experiments and observation in the real world. Bacteria evolve resistance to antibiotics. Insects evolve resistance to insecticides (remember DDT?). Weeds evolve resistance to herbicides.

Evolution is constantly happening. THe theory of evolution is our best explanation of why it happens.

rossum
 
Ion said:
When God said somehing, and in Book of Genesis it is written exactly what He said, then that really happened…
Click to expand...
Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.
  • Genesis 1:6-8
Show us this literal firmament. Show us the literal waters above the firmament. Remember that we know that this firmament is at about the distance of the Sun or Moon (Genesis 1:17). We also know that it is solid, like brass (Job 37:18).

Any attempt to interpret Genesis literally is bound to be absurdly wrong, since Genesis assumes the ANE model of the universe, which does not correspond to the actual universe.

rossum
 
*Evolution has been confirmed by both experiments and observation in the real world. Bacteria evolve resistance to antibiotics. Insects evolve resistance to insecticides (remember DDT?). Weeds evolve resistance to herbicides.

Evolution is constantly happening. THe theory of evolution is our best explanation of why it happens.*
To rossum

Well that is as much as Darwin observed : bird beaks couple of mm longer, couple of them thicker, couple of them different color… but that is all that evolutionism produce; in your case was the same bacteria, the same insect etc.
Evolutionisms is what happened after the fall in sin, fight for survival, and evolutionism doesn’t produce anything new, only minor modifications… There are no transitional fossils. What about the cambrian explosion of life?
You might be indoctrinated by the scooling system, they present evolutionist theory and the mistake is that they do not say anything on opinion of other scientist which do not agree on the subject;
Non-believers hold on to this theory because they don’t have anything else; if they accept creation than they would have to change their lifestyle…
Don Patton has some fun free video on youtube on the subject creation versus evolution
 
*Show us this literal firmament. Show us the literal waters above the firmament. Remember that we know that this firmament is at about the distance of the Sun or Moon (Genesis 1:17). *

To rossum

Well, without that canopy of water falling the temperature of the earth would have grown too much during the Great Flood; how did they know to put it there against any evidence as you say?
 
Ion said:
When God said somehing, and in Book of Genesis it is written exactly what He said, then that really happened…
Click to expand...
You can believe that if you want to, but the Catholic Church does not teach that the book of Genesis is all meant to be all literal and scientific truth. That is not its purpose. Sola Scriptura is more of a Protestant thing.
 
Ion said:
There are no transitional fossils.
Click to expand...
False. Your creationist sources are lying to you. Why do you repeat their lies? I thought that bearing false witness was something Christians were meant to avoid. Transitional fossils exist. We have an excellent series of feathered dinosaurs leading to birds. We have an excellent series of mammal-like reptiles leading to mammals. We have an excellent series of fish to amphibian transitionals. We have a reasonably good series of transitionals leading from African apes to humans. You are being lied to by your creationist sources. Why do you believe liars?
What about the cambrian explosion of life?
Click to expand...
There are over thirty major groups of animals (phyla). There is evidence that nine of them originated during the Cambrian Explosion. Nine out of thirty is less than one third. Four of the phyla originated in the Vendian, before the Cambrian. If you include land plants, then there are over forty phyla altogether, and none of the plant phyla originated in the Cambrian. Not one. They all originated after the Cambrian. This does not account for all the single celled organisms, which originated millions of years before the Cambrian.

I am glad, however, to see that you accept the existence of the Cambrian Explosion. The explosion itself took between five and fifteen million years, depending on how its boundaries are defined. Given its duration, any acceptance of the existence of the Cambrian Explosion inevitably shows that the 6,000 year YEC timescale is completely wrong. At least you seem to have got that part of science correct.
Ion said:
Well, without that canopy of water falling the temperature of the earth would have grown too much during the Great Flood; how did they know to put it there against any evidence as you say?
Click to expand...
You have not answered my question. Where is this solid layer in the sky with water above it? Where is your evidence of the literal truth of that passage from Genesis?

I don’t want to know what it did, I want to know where it is. The Sun and the Moon are still there. Where is the literal firmament you seem to be insisting on. Answer my question please.

rossum
 
I don’t see anything wrong with teaching Darwinism in schools. There are much bigger “fish to fry” on the topic of school curriculum.
 
rossum said:
Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.
  • Genesis 1:6-8
Show us this literal firmament. Show us the literal waters above the firmament. Remember that we know that this firmament is at about the distance of the Sun or Moon (Genesis 1:17). We also know that it is solid, like brass (Job 37:18).

Any attempt to interpret Genesis literally is bound to be absurdly wrong, since Genesis assumes the ANE model of the universe, which does not correspond to the actual universe.

rossum
Click to expand...
Just look up, and you will see the literal firmament.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
You can believe that if you want to, but the Catholic Church does not teach that the book of Genesis is all meant to be all literal and scientific truth. That is not its purpose. Sola Scriptura is more of a Protestant thing.
Click to expand...
Does it teach that it can’t be literal?
 
johnnyjones said:
Just look up, and you will see the literal firmament.
Click to expand...
Not as described in the Bible I won’t.
Thou perhaps hast made the heavens with him, which are most strong, as if they were of molten brass.
  • Job 37:18
    I can see the sky, but I cannot see a solid layer, like molten brass, at around the distance of the Sun or Moon. Where is this waterproof (remember it separates the waters above) layer in the sky?
The literal interpretation of Genesis does not match with reality. That is why, wisely, the Catholic Church does not require a literal interpretation of Genesis. You would do well to follow the Church’s advice in this. A literal interpretation will only lead you into error.

rossum
 
Farsight001 said:
That’s the sky. It’s not a firmament. It’s not solid like brass or impassible as described.
Click to expand...
The firmament is not a great vaulted dome in the sky but is the atmospheric expanse between the waters above and below. The Hebrew word raqiya means expanse, or even better, “stretched out thinness”.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
You can believe that if you want to, but the Catholic Church does not teach that the book of Genesis is all meant to be all literal and scientific truth. That is not its purpose. Sola Scriptura is more of a Protestant thing.
Click to expand...
That is incorrect.

"Real History

"The argument is that all of this is real history, it is simply ordered topically rather than chronologically, and the ancient audience of Genesis, it is argued, would have understood it as such.

"Even if Genesis 1 records God’s work in a topical fashion, it still records God’s work—things God really did.

“The Catechism explains that “Scripture presents the work of the Creator symbolically as a succession of six days of divine ‘work,’ concluded by the ‘rest’ of the seventh day” (CCC 337), but “nothing exists that does not owe its existence to God the Creator. The world began when God’s word drew it out of nothingness; all existent beings, all of nature, and all human history is rooted in this primordial event, the very genesis by which the world was constituted and time begun” (CCC 338).”

"It is impossible to dismiss the events of Genesis 1 as a mere legend. They are accounts of real history, even if they are told in a style of historical writing that Westerners do not typically use.

"Adam and Eve: Real People

"It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).

"In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

"The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).

Source: Catholic Answers library

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