C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Exactly, listen to the Pope. He knows that the earth is much older than 6,000.
- Status
E
edwest2
Guest
There is evidence that man and dinosaurs co-existed. Some of it has been shown here. One excuse for the rather accurate depiction on a piece of ancient pottery was that ancient man must have dug up a few bones. All I can say is that the outer features of the dinosaur required more than a skeleton.
The evidence is very good but then the fear card is played. The words fundamentalist or ultra-fundamentalist appear. The sacred ‘evolution’ must be protected from all attacks.
Sad.
Peace,
Ed
The evidence is very good but then the fear card is played. The words fundamentalist or ultra-fundamentalist appear. The sacred ‘evolution’ must be protected from all attacks.
Sad.
Peace,
Ed
M
matahari
Guest
If Only scientists are allowed to hold an opinion on tha age of the world , then most of us are excluded from the debate.
If the God we believe in is a miracle - working God then we would have to concede that He COULD hace created the world in 6 days as Genesis states.
If a Man could multiply loaves and fishes
Walk on water
Command the storm at sea
Cure the blind
Then , perhaps God despite the protestations of evolutionists ] COULD have Spoken the world into being in 6 LITERAL days .
_______________
A hundred thousand miracles are happening every day !
D
David_Zampino
Guest
And this is precisely part of the problem.
I’m not playing a “fear card”. I don’t even know how to play a “fear card” in this type of debate, or what that might mean.
My use of the word “fundamentalist” is no fear tactic – it is a statement of fact. A Young Earth Creationist, whether Catholic or Protestant is, at least on this one particular issue, adhering to “fundamentalist” theology.
Nor have I defended “evolution”. You are not stating my sentiments accurately. (For the record, I am a staunch supporter of Intelligent Design.) I firmly believe that “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” How did God do so? We don’t know.
It’s the tension between faith and reason. We have to use both, knowing that tension will remain, and realizing that, until eternity (if even then) there are questions to which we will not have complete answers. When we lose sight of that necessary tension between faith and reason, and tip too far to one side (either side) we begin to get into trouble.
S
Stillkickin
Guest
Here is how I explained this to my teenage children.
There is a lot of controversy among Christians on how we should interpret the story of creation. Many theologians would say that the story is written in “figurative language” that it is more like poetry than a scientific history.
CCC 390
“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.”
The Catholic Church does not say you have to read the story of Genesis literally, but it also does not say that you must read it in a figurative sense either. The Church leaves that up to the person. But it does require us to interpret it historically, as something that really happened. We must believe that;
The doctrine of creation and the theory evolution do not necessarily contradict each other. We do not know how God determined the precise details of the world that He would created and how everything in it would come into existence. God could have used evolution, and for us Catholics that would not pose a problem.
However, the soul is a different matter all together. Souls cannot evolve from matter; they must be directly created by God. Souls do not evolve!
The way evolution explains how humans and the world developed, does not contradict the doctrine of creation. However, when science tries to explain souls, then it crosses the line of science and tries to enter the realm of religion. When science denies a supernatural hand in all of this then it has gone too far and does contradict what we believe about creation.
Remember: there can be no real contradiction, ever, between true science and true religion, because truth can never contradict truth, there can only be one truth, not multiple truths. That is why the Catholic Church is not afraid of science, as long as science does not cross the boundaries of what it can actually study.
Stillkickin
There is a lot of controversy among Christians on how we should interpret the story of creation. Many theologians would say that the story is written in “figurative language” that it is more like poetry than a scientific history.
CCC 390
“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.”
The Catholic Church does not say you have to read the story of Genesis literally, but it also does not say that you must read it in a figurative sense either. The Church leaves that up to the person. But it does require us to interpret it historically, as something that really happened. We must believe that;
- God created the universe, but it lets us determine what we feel is the proper when,
- At some point in human history God placed a soul in two of our ancestors. Our Adam and our Eve, and
- That there was a fall that created in us original sin.
The doctrine of creation and the theory evolution do not necessarily contradict each other. We do not know how God determined the precise details of the world that He would created and how everything in it would come into existence. God could have used evolution, and for us Catholics that would not pose a problem.
However, the soul is a different matter all together. Souls cannot evolve from matter; they must be directly created by God. Souls do not evolve!
The way evolution explains how humans and the world developed, does not contradict the doctrine of creation. However, when science tries to explain souls, then it crosses the line of science and tries to enter the realm of religion. When science denies a supernatural hand in all of this then it has gone too far and does contradict what we believe about creation.
Remember: there can be no real contradiction, ever, between true science and true religion, because truth can never contradict truth, there can only be one truth, not multiple truths. That is why the Catholic Church is not afraid of science, as long as science does not cross the boundaries of what it can actually study.
Stillkickin
D
David_Zampino
Guest
I would agree.
Science should not cross boundaries of what it can actually study.
By the same token, so should theology.
Science should not cross boundaries of what it can actually study.
By the same token, so should theology.
M
Mike_Dye
Guest
I go back quite away and I cannot remember dinosaurs; but I do remember a movie when I was about 10 years old, where Guy Madison, aka “Wild Bill Hickok” on TV, was being chased by a T- Rex. It was very scary. So I guess if dinosaurs existed in cowboy times the must have co-existed with man.
Stillkickin
Thank you for your clear statement about evolution.
I believe Catholics are free to hold different views.
But I am saddened when those who are against evolution seem to reject reason and evidence.
It is asked why should only scientists have opinions about the origins of the world. This is becaues it is a scientific question. It is absurd to expect those who have not a clue to be believed.
Thank you for your clear statement about evolution.
I believe Catholics are free to hold different views.
But I am saddened when those who are against evolution seem to reject reason and evidence.
It is asked why should only scientists have opinions about the origins of the world. This is becaues it is a scientific question. It is absurd to expect those who have not a clue to be believed.
E
elts1956
Guest
So did God create humans, or animals first?
Z
Zamudio
Guest
Genesis indicates that animals were created first and then man. Not only because that is the order in which it is written but when God created man it says:
“Let us make man in our image and our likenessand let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground” (NIV)
If animals had not yet been created then how was man to rule over them?
M
matahari
Guest
The education systems of the world are not allowing debate to take place in the classroom or university. Many people believe that the notion of evolution [as in from single cell all the way to human being ] is a nonsense. There are reputable scientists out there who reject evolution and billions of years eg. in the USA there is an organisation of 800 plus scientists who are anti evolution , there is Answersingenesis which can answer any question an evolutionist would throw at them. There is Dr.GradyMcMurty and Creation Worldview Ministries. to name but a few. Speaking for those of us who don’t have a scientific background I would certainly be more inclined to listen to them than some of the other puffed up little oiks who think they know it all
P
Peter_Dawson
Guest
Saying that dinosaurs and man co-existed, in order to indirectly justify a literal interpretation of the myths in Scripture, is like telling people that you really did shake hands with Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd.
M
matahari
Guest
As only one side of the debate/argument has been presented it leads one to the conclusion that those who are Pushing evolution at us and our children who are a captive audience ] have an agenda ,
You can google Creation Worldview Ministries the website of Dr. Grady McMurty
also Answersingenesis
You can read The Death of Evolution by W.Johnson [Tan 2000]
one of the hundreds of highly qualified American scientists who reject evolution
There are others which have been mentioned on the thread the 6000 year earth
That should keep you busy for five or ten minutes.
Slainte Tonette
J
JW55
Guest
I am not sure if this thread is still proceeding in identifying if dinosaurs existed at the same time as people, or if it has branched off into a discussion on evolution.
Irregardless, the Bible is first of all a reflection of “spritual truth”. It does have historical information but the main thrust is to instruct man on how to have a closer relationship with God, and how to better live a moral life.
The Catholic Church position on the timetable of man’s arrival on this planet is unanswered and you are free to believe if you wish in a literal interpretation using the story provided in Genesis, or you may believe that there was a process over an extended period of time in which man’s body developed from lower physical forms. Why is it left open to either interpretation? Because the physical “how” is irrelevant. What we can’t leave out is God’s involvement in the process. How God created man may possibly be either of the two paths. What is important is that at some point man reached a point of understanding of right and wrong and he was given a spirit. God is spirit and we worship God in spirit. The “spirit” is what separates man from the animals, not his physical form. As one individual posted, “let’s not try to box God in a corner as to how he created everything.” He is much bigger than our understanding can possibly grasp. If man evolved physically from a single cell, though lower forms of live and reached a point where God blessed him with a spirit, why is that any less miraculous than a literal interpretation of creation from the Book of Genesis where he was essentially created from dust into his present form? If we did evolve from lower forms, this is an incredibly complex process that could have only been guided by God every step of the way.
Throughout the Bible analogies are used to teach people “spiritual truths”. This is done by giving examples that people of the time could relate to and understand. There is no was no need for God to have given a biology lesson on evolution. It just wasn’t important to the people of the time. If we examine the early books of the Bible there are instructions given as to the distance latrines are to be located from encampments. They are told not to eat pork, and male babies are to be circumcised on the eighth day. Did the people understand the science of why this was important, or did God attempt to explain this to them? No. The why at the time wasn’t important. They did not have the education or the need to know the why. What they were suppose to do was “Obey God”.
Latrines were no doubt located a given distance from encampments to prevent the spread of bacteria in the drinking water. Men were instructed to wash there hands up to the elbows. Why, no doubt to prevent the spread of bacteria. They were probably told not to eat pork because uncooked pork can spread trichonosis ( a parasitic infection of of the liver). It was later found that the eighth day after a baby was born is also the highest level of their resistence to infection. Of course, God knew this, but the Bible does not attempt to explain this. It was irrelevant for the people to know the science behind it at that time. But it was important that they follow these guidelines.
I can’t recall the passage in the Bible but it makes the comment something to the effect that “to God a day is as is a thousand years”( perhaps someone can remember the passage). To God, and in heaven there is no time. On earth we reference things by time. The message is conveyed is that it means, “it was a long time.” It is not important whether it was 1027 years or 5867 years. The point is it was a long time. These references are given so that we can understand that we are talking about a lengthy period. The important thing is the spritual truth that God is trying to convey to us.
Could dinosaurs have existed at the time of man. Possibly. The archaeological data that is available to us says the probability is very low. Genesis does give us a rough chronology as the the order in which things appear, the fish, the crawly things (insects, amphibians, reptiles, etc., the beasts (mammals) and lastly “man”. Man being the creature with a soul, blessed by God not to just function on instinct but to be able to distinguish between right and wrong, to love others and to worship and love God. That separated him from all the other creatures, not necessarily how he looked. The first man we know as Adam, and the Bible implies that all men descended from him.
God is a mystery and we can never completly understand him in our earthly form. I think we should appreciate that and not get caught up in trying to explan time frames by Biblical reference. The Bible and science do not need to be an either/or choice. God is the originator of both and he gave us minds to decipher the things he left on this earth.
Irregardless, the Bible is first of all a reflection of “spritual truth”. It does have historical information but the main thrust is to instruct man on how to have a closer relationship with God, and how to better live a moral life.
The Catholic Church position on the timetable of man’s arrival on this planet is unanswered and you are free to believe if you wish in a literal interpretation using the story provided in Genesis, or you may believe that there was a process over an extended period of time in which man’s body developed from lower physical forms. Why is it left open to either interpretation? Because the physical “how” is irrelevant. What we can’t leave out is God’s involvement in the process. How God created man may possibly be either of the two paths. What is important is that at some point man reached a point of understanding of right and wrong and he was given a spirit. God is spirit and we worship God in spirit. The “spirit” is what separates man from the animals, not his physical form. As one individual posted, “let’s not try to box God in a corner as to how he created everything.” He is much bigger than our understanding can possibly grasp. If man evolved physically from a single cell, though lower forms of live and reached a point where God blessed him with a spirit, why is that any less miraculous than a literal interpretation of creation from the Book of Genesis where he was essentially created from dust into his present form? If we did evolve from lower forms, this is an incredibly complex process that could have only been guided by God every step of the way.
Throughout the Bible analogies are used to teach people “spiritual truths”. This is done by giving examples that people of the time could relate to and understand. There is no was no need for God to have given a biology lesson on evolution. It just wasn’t important to the people of the time. If we examine the early books of the Bible there are instructions given as to the distance latrines are to be located from encampments. They are told not to eat pork, and male babies are to be circumcised on the eighth day. Did the people understand the science of why this was important, or did God attempt to explain this to them? No. The why at the time wasn’t important. They did not have the education or the need to know the why. What they were suppose to do was “Obey God”.
Latrines were no doubt located a given distance from encampments to prevent the spread of bacteria in the drinking water. Men were instructed to wash there hands up to the elbows. Why, no doubt to prevent the spread of bacteria. They were probably told not to eat pork because uncooked pork can spread trichonosis ( a parasitic infection of of the liver). It was later found that the eighth day after a baby was born is also the highest level of their resistence to infection. Of course, God knew this, but the Bible does not attempt to explain this. It was irrelevant for the people to know the science behind it at that time. But it was important that they follow these guidelines.
I can’t recall the passage in the Bible but it makes the comment something to the effect that “to God a day is as is a thousand years”( perhaps someone can remember the passage). To God, and in heaven there is no time. On earth we reference things by time. The message is conveyed is that it means, “it was a long time.” It is not important whether it was 1027 years or 5867 years. The point is it was a long time. These references are given so that we can understand that we are talking about a lengthy period. The important thing is the spritual truth that God is trying to convey to us.
Could dinosaurs have existed at the time of man. Possibly. The archaeological data that is available to us says the probability is very low. Genesis does give us a rough chronology as the the order in which things appear, the fish, the crawly things (insects, amphibians, reptiles, etc., the beasts (mammals) and lastly “man”. Man being the creature with a soul, blessed by God not to just function on instinct but to be able to distinguish between right and wrong, to love others and to worship and love God. That separated him from all the other creatures, not necessarily how he looked. The first man we know as Adam, and the Bible implies that all men descended from him.
God is a mystery and we can never completly understand him in our earthly form. I think we should appreciate that and not get caught up in trying to explan time frames by Biblical reference. The Bible and science do not need to be an either/or choice. God is the originator of both and he gave us minds to decipher the things he left on this earth.
O
Omyo12
Guest
It is people like “Dr” Kent Hovind that distort scientific facts to try and justify their own religious interpretations.
Unfortunately, the science behind evolution is too complex for the average dud to understand and it is easy for the facts to be misrepresented.
It would be no different than I telling you the Earth is flat and the Sun revolves around the Earth:
“The Fact the Earth is Flat is not my opinion, it is a Proved Fact! While all we need to know is that the Bible says the Earth is flat (Is.40:22, Ez.7:2, Dn.2:35; 4:10-11,20, Mt.4:8)… but for a second can you imagine what these so-called 'scientists would have us believe — If the earth really was round, that would mean there are people who are HANGING DOWN, HEAD DOWNWARDS while we are standing head up? But since the theory allows to travel to those parts of the earth where the people are said to hand head downward, and still to fancy ourselves to be heads upwards, and our friends whom we have left behind us to be heads downwards! LOL!.. The Planets are ‘tiny.’ Sun and Moon do Move, earth does NOT move, whirl, spin or gyrate (1 Sam.2:8, 1 Chr.16:30; Job 9:6, 38:4-6; Ps.96:10, 104:5, Is.13:10, Mic.6:2).”
Of course its stupid to believe this, but there are people who do and they quote Scripture. They also say that since the school textbooks pushing these theories of gravity and a spherical Earth have an “agenda”
I would say people who take reasonable evidence to formulate sound theories are trying to support the scientific endeavor while people who distort the facts because it disagrees with their interpretations of Scripture are the ones with the “agenda.”
There is a social and religious debate about evolution, not a scientific one.
Of course, people believe what they want to believe, no matter the lack of sound evidence.
I know this argument is not going to go away anytime soon, so
Creationists just have bad scientific arguments, just like alchemy, astrology and phrenology. They too are “opposing views” but most don’t takes them seriously. Since some people do take them seriously, does that mean there’s an “agenda” against them?
hint: NO!
E
elts1956
Guest
Okay, got that. Now I believe as you, that God created the animals first, then created humans. As to the time element of this, I believe God’s time is not the same as our time. In fact, the animals such as dinosaurs could have existed so far back in time that humans never saw them, nor did they co exist with them. Even if you don’t believe in evolution, you cannot deny the time lapse element.
Omyo12
You wrote:
I have been in Catholic discussion groups both in Ireland and the US for many years. They all seem to lack charity. I have been attacked and very hurt by what has been written about me.
Thus if one does not believe in evolution, believes the moon is made of cheese and that the earth is flat one’s views should not be ridiculed but replied to with charity, humility, respect and the best arguments that can be developed
You wrote:
I consider that a scientist could claim the sun revolves around the earth. It is just a question of picking the origin. This is completely arbitrary. This point has been made before.
I have been in Catholic discussion groups both in Ireland and the US for many years. They all seem to lack charity. I have been attacked and very hurt by what has been written about me.
Thus if one does not believe in evolution, believes the moon is made of cheese and that the earth is flat one’s views should not be ridiculed but replied to with charity, humility, respect and the best arguments that can be developed
A
a_priori
Guest
If a person arrived from a different dimension without any presuppositions and examined all human knowledge and experience objectively, he (she) would conclude that evolution is valid and that a Creator must have brought all things into existence. ***IMHO, evolutionists who reject God are wrong and Christians who reject evolution are wrong. *** They both seem to feel the need to destroy the other rather than seeking Truth in all areas of human existence and they are both poorer for it.
Genesis does indeed reveal Truth about God and man. But if one lives or dies on making every word in Genesis literal, they have put themselves in a box. Genesis is certainly Truth, but it is not literal. This doesn’t diminish its sacred status at all. Human language words are incapable of exactly describing God and His intentions anyway. Life is so much better outside the box. God is allowed to be God and we can exercise our humanness by worshiping Him and at the same time appreciate the wonder and majesty of His handiwork, even if it is very old in time.
BTW, the dinosaurs died out over 50 million years before even the first hominid appeared. So, no, dinosaurs did not co-exist with man. This is what the best evidence suggests at this point.
Genesis does indeed reveal Truth about God and man. But if one lives or dies on making every word in Genesis literal, they have put themselves in a box. Genesis is certainly Truth, but it is not literal. This doesn’t diminish its sacred status at all. Human language words are incapable of exactly describing God and His intentions anyway. Life is so much better outside the box. God is allowed to be God and we can exercise our humanness by worshiping Him and at the same time appreciate the wonder and majesty of His handiwork, even if it is very old in time.
BTW, the dinosaurs died out over 50 million years before even the first hominid appeared. So, no, dinosaurs did not co-exist with man. This is what the best evidence suggests at this point.
O
Omyo12
Guest
NoelFitz
Its not really that arbitrary. Reading only Scripture, one can see a flat Earth at the center of the Universe. However, since you have been taught that the Earth is round since the beginning of your education and people have been in space, photos have been taken-- it’s common knowledge, you accept it.
There is no Bible verse hinting the moon made of cheese…
There is no-- “and of the two great lights, the lesser was created by coagulation of the milk protein casein.”
Look at the “Flat Earth Society” and the “Christian Catholic Apostolic Church.” These are real religious organizations that, based on Scripture, believe that Earth is flat. No matter now much scientific evidence there is for a spherical Earth, they put (their interpretation of ) the Word of God first. And don’t get me wrong, they have “scientific” reasons for believing in a flat Earth; it’s just warped to fit their belief.
We saw how the Church persecuted Galileo for claiming the Earth was not the center of the Universe as it had be interpreted.
I think this is one reason the Church doesn’t have an official position on evolution and it promotes the scientific endeavor and tends to support theistic evolution. (Read “Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God” by the International Theological Commission July 2004 endorsed by Cardinal Ratzinger, then President of the Commission and Head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, now Pope Benedict XVI)
It’s unfortunate that there is no charity in conversing with creationists anymore, however this is mostly because no matter how much evidence a creationist is presented, they put (their interpretation of) the Word of God first. By the time they are convinced they’d be PhD’s in Evolutionary Biology. However, one can’t learn all there is to know in one debate. There is neither the time nor the patience from either party.
What exactly do you mean?
Its not really that arbitrary. Reading only Scripture, one can see a flat Earth at the center of the Universe. However, since you have been taught that the Earth is round since the beginning of your education and people have been in space, photos have been taken-- it’s common knowledge, you accept it.
There is no Bible verse hinting the moon made of cheese…
There is no-- “and of the two great lights, the lesser was created by coagulation of the milk protein casein.”
Look at the “Flat Earth Society” and the “Christian Catholic Apostolic Church.” These are real religious organizations that, based on Scripture, believe that Earth is flat. No matter now much scientific evidence there is for a spherical Earth, they put (their interpretation of ) the Word of God first. And don’t get me wrong, they have “scientific” reasons for believing in a flat Earth; it’s just warped to fit their belief.
We saw how the Church persecuted Galileo for claiming the Earth was not the center of the Universe as it had be interpreted.
I think this is one reason the Church doesn’t have an official position on evolution and it promotes the scientific endeavor and tends to support theistic evolution. (Read “Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God” by the International Theological Commission July 2004 endorsed by Cardinal Ratzinger, then President of the Commission and Head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, now Pope Benedict XVI)
It’s unfortunate that there is no charity in conversing with creationists anymore, however this is mostly because no matter how much evidence a creationist is presented, they put (their interpretation of) the Word of God first. By the time they are convinced they’d be PhD’s in Evolutionary Biology. However, one can’t learn all there is to know in one debate. There is neither the time nor the patience from either party.
- Status