Do you believe in Adam and Eve or Evolution?

  • Thread starter Thread starter followingtheway
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I believe that man evolved over millions of years and that there was a time when several human type species existed like the Neanderthal and before that Homo Erectus. It is a fact that the Neanderthal existed and not a theory.
I talked to my confession priest(who is about 75) about this subject and told him I find it difficult to fit in Adam and Eve into the story of evolution.
He told me that he believes in the big bang theory and that the Universe developed over billions of years too. He also believes in evolution and that man evolved over millions of years. We both agreed that it doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist. It actually means God MUST exist because he created the whole Universe and evolution. When you look at all creation, there must be a God.
I’m just not sure how to fit in Adam and Eve in all of this…scratch…🤷
 
Lui said:
I believe that man evolved over millions of years and that there was a time when several human type species existed like the Neanderthal and before that Homo Erectus. It is a fact that the Neanderthal existed and not a theory.
I talked to my confession priest(who is about 75) about this subject and told him I find it difficult to fit in Adam and Eve into the story of evolution.
He told me that he believes in the big bang theory and that the Universe developed over billions of years too. He also believes in evolution and that man evolved over millions of years. We both agreed that it doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist. It actually means God MUST exist because he created the whole Universe and evolution. When you look at all creation, there must be a God.
I’m just not sure how to fit in Adam and Eve in all of this…scratch…🤷
Click to expand...
I believe this as well. You might try the BioLogos.org site for a number of interesting views and ideas as to where and how Adam and Eve fit into the story the fossil record tells us. Some of the theories are more in line with current Church thinking on this issue, some less so. But the site has alot of heavy hitters in Genetics, Biology and the sciences to it’s credit.
 
edwest2 said:
The last few lines were not called for. The fact is, God was a causal agent in whatever process occurred. You don’t have to believe me.

I am also tired of evolution evangelism here.
I am tired of attacks on Biblical Literalists as well.

What would be the specific, tangible results of a person taking the Bible literally, especially Genesis? I’ve never gotten a good answer.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
I agree that the last lines of that post are a little overly aggressive, but I do think Beeline is correct here, sorry. And I don’t think that he has stated anywhere that God was not the first cause or ultimate causal agent.

Taking Genesis literalisticaly means throwing out most or all of the following, highly established and well tested areas of science and our basic understanding of the world: astrophysics, nuclear physics, atomic theory, geology, paleontology, developmental biology, physiology, genetics, pathology and virology, archeology, anthropology…I’m sure there are others too. This is because the literalist reading of Genesis requires a six thousand year old universe, yet the basics of atomic theory, astrology, cosmology, and geology all show a consistent fact of the universe being around 14.5 billion years old (I think) and the earth around 4.5 billion years old. The basics of Mathematics, red shift of stars in the light spectrum calculating distance, are irrefutable. The science technique of radio-carbon dating is incredibly accurate as well, and cannot reasonably be denied.

Those who know this will reject their childhood faith and leave the Church, or on the outside declare the faith to be ridiculous (something Aquinas said no christian should ever cause to happen by espousing patently absurd and false things) and never come in at all if we make this unofficial dogma of the Church. So plenty of bad things happen as a consequence of this.
 
Blacksword said:
I agree that the last lines of that post are a little overly aggressive, but I do think Beeline is correct here, sorry. And I don’t think that he has stated anywhere that God was not the first cause or ultimate causal agent.

Taking Genesis literalisticaly means throwing out most or all of the following, highly established and well tested areas of science and our basic understanding of the world: astrophysics, nuclear physics, atomic theory, geology, paleontology, developmental biology, physiology, genetics, pathology and virology, archeology, anthropology…I’m sure there are others too. This is because the literalist reading of Genesis requires a six thousand year old universe, yet the basics of atomic theory, astrology, cosmology, and geology all show a consistent fact of the universe being around 14.5 billion years old (I think) and the earth around 4.5 billion years old. The basics of Mathematics, red shift of stars in the light spectrum calculating distance, are irrefutable. The science technique of radio-carbon dating is incredibly accurate as well, and cannot reasonably be denied.

Those who know this will reject their childhood faith and leave the Church, or on the outside declare the faith to be ridiculous (something Aquinas said no christian should ever cause to happen by espousing patently absurd and false things) and never come in at all if we make this unofficial dogma of the Church. So plenty of bad things happen as a consequence of this.
Click to expand...
You believe in scientism then?
 
beeliner said:
Nonsense doesn’t merit any more than a ‘smart elic’ (I always thought it was “Aleck”) remark.

Anyone is free to reject knowledge in favor of superstition and ignorance.

I’ll go with scientific reality. His Holiness, actually, the last several of their Holinesses, have gone likewise, while of course stressing the religious implications of human life and its higher purpose, about which science is silent.

I’m still waiting for the name of that Catholic university.
Click to expand...
Mister, you treading on thin ice talking so disrespectful to everyone. Frankly, I’m fed up with it. The thread asks what people believe, not how you can offend the others expressing their own faith beliefs. You’re acting no better than an anti-Catholic Protestant by the tone you’re taking with us. You also seem to think you know more about science and math than us. I think I’ve already expressed my own abilities with math and science. You do know that engineers also study physics and chemistry. Some of us study geology, and even others biology. SO far all you’ve proven is just how mean you can treat people when they’re not in the same room as you. I wonder if you’d be so bold in the same room with us… Fathers, Husbands, ministers, police, doctors, attorneys, engineers, etc. We’re all God’s children. You choice to believe in evolution has seem to make you calloused. Did you choose this belief in order to dehumanize us, especially those that disagree with you?🤷

Besides, I’m the only one hear authorized to use force when necessary.
 
followingtheway said:
Some Catholics believe in a Literal Creation story, and that Adam and Eve really existed while other Catholics believe that the Genesis Creation story is not to be taken literal and that Evolution is true. Though some people (like me :D) are still trying to decide. What is your matter on the issue
Click to expand...
I bet you knew this would create havoc in my life.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME?

Click Here
 
beeliner said:
  1. “Macro evolution” is a catch-phrase of creationists.
  2. Science assures us that this is true. The evidence for it overwhelming, the evidence against it non-existant.
The Catholic educational system is arguably the best in the world. Please name ONE Catholic university that teaches what you assert rather than orthodox science.

3… Since God transcends time, and since quantum physics assures us that time and space are the same thing, it’s a meaningless statement.
Click to expand...
1&2. There is no evidence for Macro Evolution as one might think, the hypothesis certainly isn’t empirical, no one on Earth is old enough to ever witness macro evolution. It’s one thing to say fossils are evidence of a living creature but it’s another thing to say fossils are evidence of Evolution.
  1. Time and space are not the same thing. e.g. Does the your car go 60 miles per mile? :confused:
 
Hello everyone, my name is David Lamb and I am new to this board. I am a revert to the Catholic faith, you may read my profile. I would like to briefly comment on this issue of evolution verses creation.

I have a Bachelor and a Masters degree in Physics with minors in both Astronomy and mathematics. I went back to college to study science when I was 42 partly because I was a biblical creationist and wanted to study physics and chemistry so that I could speak competently about evolution verses science. I ended up becoming convinced that evolution was a fact. However, my faith was also deepened.

I believe that Adam and Even were real people. I see evolution as a brilliant divine design for the adaptation of life. It is a testimony to God’s infinite wisdom. Furthermore, the big bang is the strongest proof that the universe suddenly came into existence from nothing and therefore the implications are that the Universe was deliberately created. Other scientist argue that there is no phenomenon in the physical universe that is supernatural and that all things can be explained by natural causes.

As an educated Physicist this belief is simply false. The Big Bang is obviously a supernatural act. The universe quite simply suddenly came into existence from nothing. The universe has no single point of origin; it has infinite points of origin. This is because nothing existed outside the parameters of the early expanding universe, not even a vacuum. The Universe was simply reality as we know it coming into existence from nothing or and infinitesimally small singularity.

What happened or existed prior to the Big Bang can never be explained by science but only religion and philosophy. I am no longer a biblical creationist but I am a devout Catholic Christian and I believe that God spoke the Universe into existence and then he created life. All this took place over billions of years of time and not 6 literal days. So I believe that Genesis is an allegory to explain that God created the heavens and the earth but that Adam and Eve were special creations that fell.

It is probable that there were more than just one Adam and Eve. Perhaps there were hundreds or even thousands of Adam and Eve’s which all fell and Genesis simply lumps them into 2 persons.

So no one should feel conflicted about faith and science, they are perfectly compatible when understood correctly. My faith today is stronger than ever and I love God more than ever today and I thank him for sending back to college at middle age. By the way I graduated from Missouri State University Graduate College with a 3.7 GPA. I am currently an Engineer for the Department of the Navy.

Peace,

David Lamb (aka Super Saved Catholic Dave)
 
Welcome Home David. It’s nice to hear someone speak intelligently about science without the mockery. I love Physics and Astronomy as well as Mathematics. I’ve studied a bit of chemistry and biology as well. What fascinates me the most in all of the sciences is how intricately detailed God was in His creation. I never really get too in depth on this subject for personal reasons. I understand science, but I also see anomalies in the “scientific record” that give me pause to jump on the absolutist view of evolutionary theory. My understanding about the Big Bang theory is that scientist are saying different things about it now. I watched an interesting documentary about 6 months ago by Ben Stein, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed I believe that all those speaking with such intent anger watch this show. It is very encouraging.

I have another theory I believe is plausible. But, it just won’t gain any popularity on either side. And, NO. it doesn’t include aliens. :rolleyes: It’s not something I care to share for others to pick apart. I’ve given it much thought and is my faith journey, which is by far more important than whether one believes in Creation or Evolution.
 
Blacksword said:
I agree that the last lines of that post are a little overly aggressive, but I do think Beeline is correct here, sorry. And I don’t think that he has stated anywhere that God was not the first cause or ultimate causal agent.

Taking Genesis literalisticaly means throwing out most or all of the following, highly established and well tested areas of science and our basic understanding of the world: astrophysics, nuclear physics, atomic theory, geology, paleontology, developmental biology, physiology, genetics, pathology and virology, archeology, anthropology…I’m sure there are others too. This is because the literalist reading of Genesis requires a six thousand year old universe, yet the basics of atomic theory, astrology, cosmology, and geology all show a consistent fact of the universe being around 14.5 billion years old (I think) and the earth around 4.5 billion years old. The basics of Mathematics, red shift of stars in the light spectrum calculating distance, are irrefutable. The science technique of radio-carbon dating is incredibly accurate as well, and cannot reasonably be denied.

Those who know this will reject their childhood faith and leave the Church, or on the outside declare the faith to be ridiculous (something Aquinas said no christian should ever cause to happen by espousing patently absurd and false things) and never come in at all if we make this unofficial dogma of the Church. So plenty of bad things happen as a consequence of this.
Click to expand...
Thomas Aquinas

"On the contrary, It is written (Gn. 1:6): “God said: let there be a firmament,” and further on (verse 8); “And the evening and morning were the second day.”

“I answer that, In discussing questions of this kind two rules are to observed, as Augustine teaches (Gen. ad lit. i, 18). The first is, to hold the truth of Scripture without wavering. The second is that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should adhere to a particular explanation, only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it, if it be proved with certainty to be false; lest Holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing.”

The key words are “proved with certainty.”

Peace,
Ed
 
buffalo said:
You believe in scientism then?
Click to expand...
I don’t know what you mean by “scientism”, so I can’t say if I agree with it or not. I do not believe in atheistic evolution if that is what you mean, I’m Catholic!
 
Evolution as in humans came from a lower life from that resembled an APE: NO! NO! NO!

You can’t deny the Adam and Eve story because its important (at least for Christians who believe in Original Sin) to understand the** fallen nature of the human race.**

Do I believe the earth is only 6000 or so years old? NO.

I do believe that SOMETHING can’t just come from NOTHING. The Earth and the rest of the planets didn’t appear by chance. A Higher being that NO ONE can understand. not even scientists,. had a hand in our creation.

However, I do believe that some animals have ADAPTED to environments such as frogs that can climb trees with webbed feet or something similar. But those are ANIMALS, not HUMANS.

By the way, I do in a way believe in the Big Bang Theory:*** God said Bang and the Universe began***.
 
**Yesirree - abrupt appearance and then stasis. More support for IDvolution.👍
**

Eyes give insight into evolutionary arms race

…“If the development of complex life is viewed as 24 hours, everything of interest happened in the first hour,” he says. “Our fossils are from that first hour. Within the first blink of evolution, animals had evolved eyes that are very similar to what modern animals have today.”

…Although the find is important because it is the first of its kind to be found in such a preserved state, Lee says it is doubly significant because the eyes are “so unexpectedly advanced”.
 
edwest2 said:
Thomas Aquinas

"On the contrary, It is written (Gn. 1:6): “God said: let there be a firmament,” and further on (verse 8); “And the evening and morning were the second day.”

“I answer that, In discussing questions of this kind two rules are to observed, as Augustine teaches (Gen. ad lit. i, 18). The first is, to hold the truth of Scripture without wavering. The second is that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should adhere to a particular explanation, only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it, if it be proved with certainty to be false; lest Holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing.”

The key words are “proved with certainty.”

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Yes, and it is an absolute, irrefutable fact that the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, not 6 thousand, and that humans have existed on it in modern form for around 150,000 years, give or take, and that other animals lived and died millions of years before that.
 
If this is an urgent matter then I suggest you contact the Vatican. It is clear that some say that science is required in drawing people to the faith.

And, Scripture can only be reinterpreted by the Magisterium of the Church. That is what people want to do based on some comments here. No need to convince me. I used to enjoy science. Now, I’m wary.

Peace,
Ed
 
What I personally don’t get about the Adam and Eve story is:
if Adam and Eve are the parents of ALL human mankind, did their children marry each other and their grandchildren, great-grand children etc?
What race were they and how did all the different races that exist today develop?

That makes it difficult for me to believe in Adam and Eve. On the other hand you need to believe in Adam and Eve in order to believe in the original sin.

This is one thing I just can’t wrap my head around:(

Also, when it comes to Creationism: I thought that Catholic Church is against Creationism and actually supports evolution.
 
Lui said:
What I personally don’t get about the Adam and Eve story is:
if Adam and Eve are the parents of ALL human mankind, did their children marry each other and their grandchildren, great-grand children etc?
What race were they and how did all the different races that exist today develop?

That makes it difficult for me to believe in Adam and Eve. On the other hand you need to believe in Adam and Eve in order to believe in the original sin.

This is one thing I just can’t wrap my head around:(

Also, when it comes to Creationism: I thought that Catholic Church is against Creationism and actually supports evolution.
Click to expand...
I suggest you read the following:

timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article1645453.ece

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