Does Darwin's theory of evolution contradict Catholicsm?

[Glark]

You will have to supply the reference from Dobzhansky to substantiate that claim.

No problem. Meanwhile you can provide proof that my Patterson quote is what you say it is - “out of context” (post 1438).

“Probably everybody knows the sedentary barnacles which seem to have no similarity to free-swimming crustaceans, such as the copepods. How remarkable that barnacles pass through a free-swimming larval stage, the nauplius! At that stage of its development a barnacle and a Cyclops look unmistakably similar. They are evidently relatives. The presence of gill slits in human embryos and in embryos of other terrestrial vertebrates is another famous example. Of course, at no stage of its development is a human embryo a fish, nor does it ever have functioning gills. But why should it have unmistakable gill slits unless its remote ancestors did respire with the aid of gills? It is the Creator again playing practical jokes?”

Theodosius Dobzhansky, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” The American Biology Teacher, March 1973

 

[Glark]

Happily, the Catholic Church has no objection to the bulk of Darwin’s theory.

Demonstrably, the Pope is not infallible when it comes to science.

 

[Techno2000]

rossum:

You will have to supply the reference from Dobzhansky to substantiate that claim.

No problem. Meanwhile you can provide proof that my Patterson quote is what you say it is - “out of context” (post 1438).

“Probably everybody knows the sedentary barnacles which seem to have no similarity to free-swimming crustaceans, such as the copepods. How remarkable that barnacles pass through a free-swimming larval stage, the nauplius! At that stage of its development a barnacle and a Cyclops look unmistakably similar. They are evidently relatives. The presence of gill slits in human embryos and in embryos of other terrestrial vertebrates is another famous example. Of course, at no stage of its development is a human embryo a fish, nor does it ever have functioning gills. But why should it have unmistakable gill slits unless its remote ancestors did respire with the aid of gills? It is the Creator again playing practical jokes?”

Theodosius Dobzhansky, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” The American Biology Teacher, March 1973

 

[IWantGod]

Hey! that’s me! Where did you find that picture? I’m calling the police.

 

[Glark]

I’m Catholic and I don’t buy into the Darwin thing. Does that mean I have a “lack of knowledge”, that I am not smart, that I am just one of those “Deplorables” that Hillary talks about? I get a little tired of intellectually smug arguments that go something like–“if you were smarter you wold agree with me”. I believe in God and the Catholic Church and if that means to some that I am intellectually deficient–well, so be it.

Good on you, Cath! Apparently, evo-infidels are deplorably ignorant, if not deplorably stupid. But the truth is, you can’t fool all of the people all of the time … not while the Holy Spirit is around, anyhow.

 

[fisherman_carl]

What difference does it make though if our bodies evolved? You accept that when people are conceived they go through an evolutionary process in the womb. God doesn’t just manufacture a human, but uses natural processes or secondary causes to create each person who is born. So evolution too is just another natural process that God could have used to create us. The more we learn about it the more we understand this process.

 

[Glark]

I’m sorry. Why does the utility of a theory matter?

Have you noticed how false theories are useless?

But as a matter of fact, understanding human evolution is critical to medicine.

So how is the theory that humans evolved from monkey-men useful in medicine?

And once again, we have you just using phrases like “mud skipper”. I don’t know whether you’re proud of your apparent ignorance, but ignorance is nothing

Sorry, I meant grubs.

 

[fisherman_carl]

So how is insulting others and causing strife being led by the Holy Spirit?

 

[Glark]

Well may you ask. The theory of evolution insults human intelligence and leads to theological strife, so how can it be the work of the Holy Spirit?

 

[HarryStotle]

The common genetic information is explained by a Creator who sensibly decided to use the same genetic “building blocks” to build very different organisms.

Well the question still remains open regarding the means by which the Creator developed the “building blocks” that he put into those very different organisms. Are you claiming direct miraculous intervention? Or can natural processes (aka secondary causation) explain the method(s) he used.

Miracles should not be our first option. Even the Church exhausts all natural possibilities before opting to play the miracle card.

We aren’t even close to knowing if all natural methods can or cannot explain the genetic building blocks, so it seems premature to jump to any conclusion.

Sure, we know where you stand, but the question is whether you have sufficient warrant to draw that conclusion. I don’t thin so, Baba Looey.

 

[Glark]

Are you claiming direct miraculous intervention? Or can natural processes (aka secondary causation) explain the method(s) he used.

I opt for “direct miraculous intervention”; you know, as in, say, Transubstantiation or the Resurrection.

Are you suggesting human beings are the result of “natural processes”?

 

[Glark]

The presence of gill slits in human embryos and in embryos of other terrestrial vertebrates is another famous example. Of course, at no stage of its development is a human embryo a fish, nor does it ever have functioning gills. But why should it have unmistakable gill slits unless its remote ancestors did respire with the aid of gills? It is the Creator again playing practical jokes?”

Theodosius Dobzhansky, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” The American Biology Teacher, March 1973

Mermaids are people too. What … you think mermaids can breath under water without gills?

 

[Rau]

There was no sun? So the planet was exceedingly cold? Far, far too cold for liquid water.

Are you ok with the earth having existed (ie, having some kind of form) from circa 4.6bill years ago?

 

[fisherman_carl]

Unproven assertions can easily be dismissed without proof. And no one is claiming a scientific theory is the work of the Holy Spirit. No one is forcing you to argue about it. Scripture says not to argue. I have Christian family members who do not believe in Evolution and we get along just fine. No need to argue or call anyone names.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I knew I was right to get out of this.

I can’t even post publicly on this site what happened the last time I got into an extensive debate over Evolution because the language the other party used was not appropriate.

 

[Techno2000]

Unproven assertions can easily be dismissed without proof. And no one is claiming a scientific theory is the work of the Holy Spirit. No one is forcing you to argue about it. Scripture says not to argue. I have Christian family members who do not believe in Evolution and we get along just fine. No need to argue or call anyone names.

For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

1 Corinthians 14:33

If I try to mesh Darwin’s theory and the word of God I get confused .

 

[Rau]

Demonstrably, the Pope is not infallible when it comes to science.

Nor you when it comes to interpreting scripture. The Pope does not propose Genesis be read in the literal way you insist it must be read. So, it’s a choice between Glark and the Pope. That a tough one!

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

Boy you’re just pulling the quote mines of the Creationist sites. Asked and answered below:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/part3.html1

The link you provide more or less supports the quotes I used: Horse evolution was long marketed as one of the best examples of Darwinian evolution, and cherished accordingly … but not anymore.

When you hear Darwinists saying things like “horse evolution didn’t proceed in a straight line” and “horse evolution was not smooth and gradual … and occasionally reversed direction” and when the magic of Punctuated Equilibrium is resorted to, you know they are really clutching at straws. Understandably, the cult of Darwinism is having trouble letting go of this former poster-child.

No the link doesn’t. It shows the links you grabbed from AIG or whatever other Creationist site you’re frequenting are out of context quotes. Out of context quotes are lies, and aren’t lies a sin? Is repeating someone else’s lies a sin?

 

[niceatheist]

Well may you ask. The theory of evolution insults human intelligence and leads to theological strife, so how can it be the work of the Holy Spirit?

So because of your particular theological leanings and because it makes you uncomfortable, it is wrong?

 

[niceatheist]

By the way, Glark, you haven’t answered my question. What observation or test could you apply to falsify the claim “God did it”?

Indeed, let’s start with something simple. You come upon a body, with a bullet hole through the chest. Standing over the body is a man with a smoking gun. He declares to you “God pulled the trigger.”

Now, what test would apply to demonstrate the man’s claim was wrong.