Dinosaurs and Genesis

[triumphguy]

True , false and true. False because you must believe in theistic evolution as a Catholic not just “evolution”.

Now address my questions the same way with true or false which there was a skipping over of.

Many of the OT stories are as impossible as the Genesis account to believe and can not be excepted as fact. True or false.

When Jesus, St. Paul and other NT writers reference Genesis and the people in the account it is entirely symbolic. True or false.

I am allowed by the church to believe that Genesis is a literal account. True or false.

Again, I assume you except every miracle of the NT by God that flies in the face of the laws of nature. Stepping back to the OT you become skeptical. Is not the same Jesus present in spirit as God in the OT?

Could you ever be shown evidence that disproves the miracles of Jesus?You may ponder some new revelation and contemplate it but your faith would keep you strong in Christ. I look at the “evidence” for evolution. I ponder it. Some of it is conjecture. Some of it is the fear of ostracism by peers in academia. The parts that have sensible leanings are adaptations and the basic studies of physics and biology.

Why it makes sense to you that Jesus would tell us the hardest and most complex sayings but leave out our “true” origins I will never know. Only you can answer that.

Of course I beleive in theistic evolution - I was pretty clear about that. Christ is the Alpha and the Omega - in between we have evolution.

The miracles that Jesus performed were in the service of his mission. He healed the sick, he fed the hungry, he gave sight to the blind, he raised the dead. He asked us to repent and turn again

"For in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and in him. 17 And he is before all, and by him all things consist. " Col 1:16

As the logos, Christ was re-ordering fallen creation when he performed miracles. That’s why he said “your sins are forgiven” first to some of those he healed.

However, like his mission, his miracles were often ignored, misinterpreted or used as fuel to get rid of him. He didn’t use miracles to convince people against their free will, otherwise the whole of Judea would have believed in him. His miracles didn’t wow - He didn’t spin the sun, or overturn nature, or cause floods. He didn’t impose upon nature - he righted fallen nature.

His miracles were entirely in line with His mission as the Word - the Word through who all things were made, and through Whom all things were remade by his death and resurrection.

The fact that the universe is 4.5 billion years old just highlights rather than diminishes the Godhead of Christ.

Christ came to take away our sins, not our intellect.

As to Scripture: it is the Inspired Word of God and reveals the Truth about God’s will for the world.

When I want to read Science I read science. When I want to read the Word of God I read Scripture. And since science is the observation of a creation created by God it can never deny God (scientists can, but that’s a totally different issue)

St. Thomas Aquinas (1225 - 1274)

Two Sacred Texts

Sacred writings are bound into two volumes: that of creation and that of Holy Scripture.

         *Quoted in Rev. Carla Berkdahl, Earth Letter, 
         "Dreaming of Green Parishes," Sept., 1998, p. 1*

Scripture reveals the Truth about creation: created Good by a Good God.
Science reveals the truths about creation.

 

[Della]

From what I’ve read I think the dispute is based on the false assumption that Catholics who don’t hold to a 6 day/24 hour creation deny the miraculous nature of creation–that it is God made not merely an “accident” of evolution. That’s not the case. Of course God created the universe and he was able to do so however he pleased.

Genesis tells us nothing about the amount of time in which the universe formed as we see it today and is therefore habitable by man. The reference to “morning and evening” are not one revolution of the earth. It doesn’t say that. Rather as pointed out in this post: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9541178&postcount=19. It refers to a long period of time.

Poetic/mythological expressions are not falsehoods nor are they literal, but rather they tell us truths that are indescribable, especially to those who had no knowledge that the earth revolves, that we move through space in an orbit around our sun, that the sun moves through space on the arm of our galaxy, etc. I can see Moses having a vision of the creation of the universe and then trying to explain it in words. What else would he say than it happened in stages, which it did, and that it was a tremendous work of God, which is was, and that it is beyond human comprehension to understand it all except to say that God made it, which is certainly true.

I see no conflict in a billions of year old universe and the creation story in Genesis, as the Church teaches it. I see it as astonishing and miraculous because here we are just at the right time and right place to even exist. That is God’s hand at work, clear for anyone with eyes to see. God ordered nature to run according to the laws of physics which he put into place. Being the author of the laws he can use them or ignore them as he pleases, not saying how he does miracles only saying that with God all things are possible. Coud he have created the universe in 6/24 days? Sure. Did he need to in order for it to have been his creation and his timeline for mankind? No.

 

[feed_me]

 

[winc]

Ron L Conte is into predictions which don’t and will never come true.

Is Pope Benedict black? Did Hilary Clinton become president and change her stance on abortion?

We have enough to think about as Christians living day to day, rather than worrying about apparitions, and tribulations, and secret prophesies.

for reason or reasons unknown you have it exactly base over apex - [response to Ron.L.Conte] via google on internet is opposed to his predictions etc - do give it a go and see for yourself - winc

 

[Della]

If Catholics wouldn’t put faith in interpretations which the Church does not promote then there would be no need for such debate. Catholics who don’t hold to the 6/24 hr. day creation aren’t “off the track” or less Catholics than those who believe it. I think we simply know a bit about how the universe functions and can see the hand of God in it–science doesn’t frighten us or daunt us because our faith is not built on anyone’s interpretation of Genesis except what the Church teaches.

 

[winc]

True , false and true. False because you must believe in theistic evolution as a Catholic not just “evolution”.

Now address my questions the same way with true or false which there was a skipping over of.

Many of the OT stories are as impossible as the Genesis account to believe and can not be excepted as fact. True or false.

When Jesus, St. Paul and other NT writers reference Genesis and the people in the account it is entirely symbolic. True or false.

I am allowed by the church to believe that Genesis is a literal account. True or false.

Again, I assume you except every miracle of the NT by God that flies in the face of the laws of nature. Stepping back to the OT you become skeptical. Is not the same Jesus present in spirit as God in the OT?

Could you ever be shown evidence that disproves the miracles of Jesus?You may ponder some new revelation and contemplate it but your faith would keep you strong in Christ. I look at the “evidence” for evolution. I ponder it. Some of it is conjecture. Some of it is the fear of ostracism by peers in academia. The parts that have sensible leanings are adaptations and the basic studies of physics and biology.

Why it makes sense to you that Jesus would tell us the hardest and most complex sayings but leave out our “true” origins I will never know. Only you can answer that.

since there never was no can be origins or macro evolution to implicate God via theistic evolution is to make God an idiot - winc

 

[winc]

If Catholics wouldn’t put faith in interpretations which the Church does not promote then there would be no need for such debate. Catholics who don’t hold to the 6/24 hr. day creation aren’t “off the track” or less Catholics than those who believe it. I think we simply know a bit about how the universe functions and can see the hand of God in it–science doesn’t frighten us or daunt us because our faith is not built on anyone’s interpretation of Genesis except what the Church teaches.

butbutbutbutbut the Church teaches 6 x24hr days creation - winc

 

[triumphguy]

for reason or reasons unknown you have it exactly base over apex - [response to Ron.L.Conte] via google on internet is opposed to his predictions etc - do give it a go and see for yourself - winc

Winc: Could you re-write that in English please? I have no idea whether you are saying Conte is for or against such predictions (searching google it seems he is most definitely for).

 

[triumphguy]

butbutbutbutbut the Church teaches 6 x24hr days creation - winc

This is the Church teaching as expressed by Blessed John Paul II

Man Is a Spiritual and Corporeal Being

John Paul II General Audience April 16, 1986

In modern times the theory of evolution has raised a special difficulty against the revealed doctrine about the creation of man as a being composed of soul and body. With their own methods, many natural scientists study the problem of the origin of human life on earth. Some maintain, contrary to other colleagues of theirs, not only the existence of a link between man and the ensemble of nature, but also his derivation from the higher animal species. This problem has occupied scientists since the last century and involves vast layers of public opinion.

The reply of the Magisterium was offered in the encyclical Humani Generis of Pius XII in 1950. In it we read: “The magisterium of the Church is not opposed to the theory of evolution being the object of investigation and discussion among experts. Here the theory of evolution is understood as an investigation of the origin of the human body from pre-existing living matter, for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold firmly that souls are created immediately by God…” (DS 3896).

It can therefore be said that, from the viewpoint of the doctrine of the faith, there are no difficulties in explaining the origin of man in regard to the body, by means of the theory of evolution. But it must be added that this hypothesis proposes only a probability, not a scientific certainty. However, the doctrine of faith invariably affirms that man’s spiritual soul is created directly by God. According to the hypothesis mentioned, it is possible that the human body, following the order impressed by the Creator on the energies of life, could have been gradually prepared in the forms of antecedent living beings. However, the human soul, on which man’s humanity definitively depends, cannot emerge from matter, since the soul is of a spiritual nature.

He goes on to say:

A fine synthesis of creation as set out above is found in the Second Vatican Council: “Though made of body and soul, man is one. Through his bodily composition he gathers to himself the elements of the material world; thus they reach their crown through him.…” (GS 14). And further on: “Man is not wrong when he regards himself as superior to bodily concerns, and as more than a speck of nature or a nameless constituent of the city of man. For by his interior qualities he outstrips the whole sum of mere things” (GS 14).

 

[winc]

Winc: Could you re-write that in English please? I have no idea whether you are saying Conte is for or against such predictions (searching google it seems he is most definitely for).

it seems you are doing your own research on Conte - this was not suggested so please do as requested and in google search box type in [response to Ron.L.Conte Jr] - winc

 

[buffalo]

This is the Church teaching as expressed by Blessed John Paul II

Man Is a Spiritual and Corporeal Being

John Paul II General Audience April 16, 1986

He goes on to say:

and here is Pope Benedict:

"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is a thought of God."

“Science presupposes the trustworthy, intelligent structure of matter, the ‘design’ of creation.”

 

[Buck_Crosswhite]

Because dinosaurs aren’t in the Bible doesn’t mean they didn’t exist. haha, tell him it’s the bible not an Encyclopedia Britannica!!

Not so fast there. Read Job.

 

[triumphguy]

and here is Pope Benedict:

"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is a thought of God."

“Science presupposes the trustworthy, intelligent structure of matter, the ‘design’ of creation.”

Absolutely he said that, in MASS FOR THE INAUGURATION OF THE PONTIFICATE OF POPE BENEDICT XVI (vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20050424_inizio-pontificato_en.html)

Pope Benedict also said this:

Currently, I** see in Germany, but also in the United States, a somewhat fierce debate raging between so-called “creationism” and evolutionism, presented as though they were mutually exclusive alternatives: those who believe in the Creator would not be able to conceive of evolution, and those who instead support evolution would have to exclude God. This antithesis is absurd because**, on the one hand, there are so many scientific proofs in favour of evolution which appears to be a reality we can see and which enriches our knowledge of life and being as such. But on the other, the doctrine of evolution does not answer every query, especially the great philosophical question: where does everything come from? And how did everything start which ultimately led to man? I believe this is of the utmost importance. vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdscien/2008/BOOKLET_10.pdf

The two are not mutually exclusive.

He is saying that humans are created in God’s image and likeness, that each individual is created good by a good God, and that Evolution is a possible hypothesis.

We are Catholics, not fundamentalists! We believe in the Magisterium of the Church, not just the Bible.

The Catholic Church is the historical fountain of scientific thought, because the Church believes that creation speaks OF God.

We aren’t dualists or gnostics who think that matter is evil and spirit good. We believe that the person is made up of both matter and spirit, and both are in the image of God.

We have a religious duty to use our brains.

 

[johnnyjones]

Of course I beleive in theistic evolution - I was pretty clear about that. Christ is the Alpha and the Omega - in between we have evolution.

The miracles that Jesus performed were in the service of his mission. He healed the sick, he fed the hungry, he gave sight to the blind, he raised the dead. He asked us to repent and turn again

"For in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and in him. 17 And he is before all, and by him all things consist. " Col 1:16

As the logos, Christ was re-ordering fallen creation when he performed miracles. That’s why he said “your sins are forgiven” first to some of those he healed.

However, like his mission, his miracles were often ignored, misinterpreted or used as fuel to get rid of him. He didn’t use miracles to convince people against their free will, otherwise the whole of Judea would have believed in him. His miracles didn’t wow - He didn’t spin the sun, or overturn nature, or cause floods. He didn’t impose upon nature - he righted fallen nature.

His miracles were entirely in line with His mission as the Word - the Word through who all things were made, and through Whom all things were remade by his death and resurrection.

The fact that the universe is 4.5 billion years old just highlights rather than diminishes the Godhead of Christ.

Christ came to take away our sins, not our intellect.

As to Scripture: it is the Inspired Word of God and reveals the Truth about God’s will for the world.

When I want to read Science I read science. When I want to read the Word of God I read Scripture. And since science is the observation of a creation created by God it can never deny God (scientists can, but that’s a totally different issue)

Scripture reveals the Truth about creation: created Good by a Good God.
Science reveals the truths about creation.

I answered your true or false questions, what happened to answering mine? Your struggling by adding a strange slant to the ministry of Jesus.

“Didn’t impose upon nature?” Your kidding right? Calming storms , walking on water, reanimating dead matter, earthquakes. This is the God that made the universe showing command of it.
Thats catchy about “taking away our sins but not our intellect” but Christ requires we use the intellect he gave us even going so far as to explain his trinitarian nature to us. A man is God. No complexity to that? Yet who we really are according to you was NOT capable of being revealed?

Jesus defied science in scripture. Genesis is his power . Answer the true or false questions out of courtesy at least.

 

[buffalo]

Absolutely he said that, in MASS FOR THE INAUGURATION OF THE PONTIFICATE OF POPE BENEDICT XVI (vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20050424_inizio-pontificato_en.html)

Pope Benedict also said this:

The two are not mutually exclusive.

He is saying that humans are created in God’s image and likeness, that each individual is created good by a good God, and that Evolution is a possible hypothesis.

We are Catholics, not fundamentalists! We believe in the Magisterium of the Church, not just the Bible.

The Catholic Church is the historical fountain of scientific thought, because the Church believes that creation speaks OF God.

We aren’t dualists or gnostics who think that matter is evil and spirit good. We believe that the person is made up of both matter and spirit, and both are in the image of God.

We have a religious duty to use our brains.

Yeah, I know about this and have trouble with it. I am not sure how he is using the word evolution. If he means change and adaptation, no one disagrees. If he is supporting polygenism and denying Eve coming from Adam I think He should update himself with the latest research.

No problem with most of the other things in your post.

Pope Benedict’s Easter Homily - Creative Reason

“It is not the case that in the expanding universe, at a late stage, in some tiny corner of the cosmos, there evolved randomly some species of living being capable of reasoning and of trying to find rationality within creation, or to bring rationality into it. If man were merely a random product of evolution in some place on the margins of the universe, then his life would make no sense or might even be a chance of nature. But no, Reason is there at the beginning: creative, divine Reason.”

 

[triumphguy]

I answered your true or false questions, what happened to answering mine? Your struggling by adding a strange slant to the ministry of Jesus.

“Didn’t impose upon nature?” Your kidding right? Calming storms , walking on water, reanimating dead matter, earthquakes. This is the God that made the universe showing command of it.
Thats catchy about “taking away our sins but not our intellect” but Christ requires we use the intellect he gave us even going so far as to explain his trinitarian nature to us. A man is God. No complexity to that? Yet who we really are according to you was NOT capable of being revealed?

Jesus defied science in scripture. Genesis is his power . Answer the true or false questions out of courtesy at least.

You seem to think in either/or terms.

Either this is right and so that is wrong, or that is wrong and so this is right.

Each book of the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit. Each Book in the bible reveals the Truth that God wants to reveal.

I don’t think Jesus defied science - rather he completed nature as it should be - sinless, and without sickness or death. That is because God came into History. His miracles weren’t like Harry Potter magic - transforming a teacup into a cat, they were renewal of the sinless natural order.

But in his miracles Jesus didn’t nullify science or nature. The miracles are a glimpse into what nature is truly like when there is no sin and death.

I believe in Abraham. I believe in Adam and Eve: I also believe in Evolution. Instead of focusing on “How can this be?” I just accept that my Pope thinks it is OK, so I focus on trying to be a good Christian instead. And when reading scripture I try and see what God is saying to me, rather than trying to prove God right or wrong.

 

[triumphguy]

Yeah, I know about this and have trouble with it. I am not sure how he is using the word evolution. If he means change and adaptation, no one disagrees. If he is supporting polygenism and denying Eve coming from Adam I think He should update himself with the latest research.

No problem with most of the other things in your post.

Pope Benedict’s Easter Homily - Creative Reason

“It is not the case that in the expanding universe, at a late stage, in some tiny corner of the cosmos, there evolved randomly some species of living being capable of reasoning and of trying to find rationality within creation, or to bring rationality into it. If man were merely a random product of evolution in some place on the margins of the universe, then his life would make no sense or might even be a chance of nature. But no, Reason is there at the beginning: creative, divine Reason.”

Yes: he’s great isn’t he!

The more I read of Pope Benedict’s writing the more I am in awe of him.

 

[Della]

butbutbutbutbut the Church teaches 6 x24hr days creation - winc

nonononononono, it doesn’t. There. That settles it.

 

[mommamaree]

IMHO, the miscommunication here is a result of a confusion over the definition of terms. Also, many people are not aware of later valid criticisms that gained support after the college textbooks were put away. As a former science teacher and biochem grad student, and now Catholic convert homeschooling mother, I also have to confront this issue repeatedly.
“science” means “to know”.
There are many sciences, including theology.
The scientific method is definitely a powerful too for coming to know about the universe, but it is not the only one, nor is it fail proof. There are many things that are real that cannot be known through study using the scientific method.

“evolution” as the term is used in common parlance can have varied meanings, depending on the speaker. Do they mean intelligent design, where God led the evolutionary process according to His will and wisdom? Usually not, unfortunately, because the origin of the term came from a group of natural scientists seeking to explain how everything came to be in a random way, merely a result of environmental factors. Many Christians are not aware that it would be cognitive dissonance to believe in evolutionary theory as described in high school and college courses while also still believing in the existence of God.
Thankfully, more thoughtful study by people of faith has continued and “Darwinism” is losing ground, even among a lot of academics. And our changing understanding of time itself is helping us to expand our minds to find models that fit our observations and are still true to the faith.
Some things that atheistic evolutionists have failed to support in their hypothesis is the possibility for macroevolution. Sure, microevolution has been more than sufficiently proven, but macro? No. This means that evolution of new species slowly over time is unlikely to be what happened. What seems more likely is closer to punctuated equilibria. No major intraspecies change until one day some external force causes a massive change and a new species is created. Another thing that gradual evolution cannot explain, theoretically or empirically is the development of complex structures, such as the eye. There is no explanation for how the eyeball could have developed via natural selection.
Anyway, this list could continue ad nauseum, so I will stop here and just invite everyone to do a little exploring on your own, too. We, as Catholics, need to be even more aware that “evolution” simply has too many vague meanings and that the science we learned in school has been superseded by a lot of new researched and condemned by a lot of valid criticisms. It would be easier if we were able to level the playing field by learning the new terminology. But that is easy and fun. Go to lots of different museums with lots of different viewpoints and read lots of cool books!

 

[winc]

I answered your true or false questions, what happened to answering mine? Your struggling by adding a strange slant to the ministry of Jesus.

“Didn’t impose upon nature?” Your kidding right? Calming storms , walking on water, reanimating dead matter, earthquakes. This is the God that made the universe showing command of it.
Thats catchy about “taking away our sins but not our intellect” but Christ requires we use the intellect he gave us even going so far as to explain his trinitarian nature to us. A man is God. No complexity to that? Yet who we really are according to you was NOT capable of being revealed?

Jesus defied science in scripture. Genesis is his power . Answer the true or false questions out of courtesy at least.

There is not,was not and cannot be any theistic evolution and Jesus Christ as God showed and shows us exactly how God creates in an instant turning water into wine,creating loaves and fishes,giving sight to a blind man,raising the dead etc - winc