Does Darwin's theory of evolution contradict Catholicsm?

[rossum]

While the existence of a Divine Designer is evident in his creation, we cannot ascertain his identity by examining his handiwork. We must rely on transcendent revelation - as Yahweh revealed himself to Moses in the burning bush, for example.

So the evidence of your divine designer is essentially the same as the evidence for Vishnu: the world that Vishnu created and Vishnu’s revelation of Himself to Arjuna in Chapter Eleven of the Bhagavad Gita.

Do you have anything more specific?

rossum

 

[Aloysium]

Your question presupposes the primacy of the story over the reality to which it speaks. This approach reflects a dimming of the light of faith, which illuminates reality.

The major problem with invoking the Bhagavat Gita is that there is no Hindu magisterium to guide the reader. It’s actually a prayer dedicated to the contemplation and worship of God. As with pretty much all eastern religion, it speaks to ontological rather than historical reality, in contrast with the Bible.

Very few can otherwise pass through the narrow gate to know God, which Jesus has enabled all to traverse. He reveals Himself to people in all cultures, but as in the parable of the reckless sower, it can be very difficult for us to accept His graces. We are not sufficiently the fertile ground required to grow our faith. The Church, which He established, provides the surest way to know Him.

I would answer that nothing more specific is required. The ultimate aim is to know God, and at that point all Truth is known.

 

[rossum]

Your question presupposes the primacy of the story over the reality to which it speaks. This approach reflects a dimming of the light of faith, which illuminates reality.

Just as Glark’s post presupposed the primacy of the Bible over other scriptures.

The major problem with invoking the Bhagavat Gita is that there is no Hindu magisterium to guide the reader.

The major problem with invoking the Bible is that there is no Christian magisterium to guide the reader. There are many differing Christian magisteria: the Catholic Church, the Watchtower, the Primates of the Orthodox churches, the Synod of the Church of England etc. Christianity as a whole is in the same fragmented state as Hinduism. There are many different denominations, each with their own separate line of authority and their own individual interpretation of the relevant sacred text.

rossum

 

[Aloysium]

The Bible is a dialogue between God and mankind in history, using different forms of language and in accordance with the world as it was at the time the various books were written. It is part of the tradition of the Church, and for us in these times, seeing the world as we do, it requires interpretation. Hence we have the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

I understand this would be confusing to the outsider who lumps Catholics with Jehovah Witnesses and other protestant groups, not interested in entering the faith, which is the only means to truly know it.

BTW - I am allowed by the Church to disagree with Glark, as much as he might protest.

 

[edwest211]

And so the merry-go-round continues. Do not be confused my friends, God will guide you and the Church, usually taken out of context, has made it clear. God created, not rocks and water.

 

[buffalo]

Right, their a prior view is they “cannot let the Divine foot in the door”.

 

[buffalo]

Yes. Revelation is fixed and cannot change. Truth cannot change. Science is provisional and does change. Revelation is a standard we must reason our science against, not vice versa. The correct reasoning of scientific findings is important and when done in the past has served us very well.

 

[rossum]

Truth cannot change.

The statement “I am 50 years old” was true when I said it some years ago. It is not true now. You have a very fixed and rigid view of truth.

What is the “truth” of the human population of earth. What is the true number?

There is more change in the real world than your version of “truth” can encompass.

rossum

 

[buffalo]

It starts with whether absolute truth exists. In your view does it?

 

[sallybutler]

Not only that, the important thing from the first several chapters is not that God created the universe, but that he breathed a soul into Adam. And that Adam and Eve turned away from Him. But that is something most of us don’t want to concentrate on because we would have to look at how we have done the same. Much easier to get into arguments about how many years between the beginning of creation and now.

 

[edwest211]

Because of the Original Sin of Adam and Eve, it was passed on to all of us. Science can detect something but not that. That’s why Jesus Christ was born, so that sins could be forgiven and we can reach salvation. That is our hope.

 

[rossum]

It starts with whether absolute truth exists. In your view does it?

Your earlier statement was about “truth”, not “absolute truth”. That statement was incorrect, as I showed: some true statements are time-dependent.

How do you differentiate “truth” from “absolute truth”? Before I answer your question I need to be sure that your definition and my definition are near enough the same. For me, an “absolute truth” is true in any and all possible circumstances. How would you define it?

rossum

 

[buffalo]

The statements I am 50 years old today, and I was 50 years old last year are both true in different times.

Absolute truth is what we call God. He is true in all times and can be no other.

I found a gold watch on the beach today, and I found a gold watch on the beach 5 years ago 5 years from now are both true. It is how ii is stated.

 

[Rau]

“cannot let the Divine foot in the door”.

Could there be a scientific theory that lets the “divine foot” in the door? I’m sure God underpins the theory of gravity as much as he does human life, but I don’t expect Science to address that point in either.