P
PhiriTalk
Guest
Evolution doesn’t say that’s God doesn’t exist though. Evolution doesn’t say anything about God at all.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
E
edwest211
Guest
Science can’t say anything about the supernatural. However, the Catholic Church does provide people with critical missing information. I trust the Church to give me the whole story.
P
PhiriTalk
Guest
Science doesn’t claim to say anything about anything supernatural.
The Church doesn’t endorse intelligent design and literally says that science and Catholicism are not in conflict.
Why aren’t you answering my questions? How old do you think the universe is?
The Church doesn’t endorse intelligent design and literally says that science and Catholicism are not in conflict.
Why aren’t you answering my questions? How old do you think the universe is?
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
Oh there is a conflict. I’ve posted about it but you are either ignoring it or don’t believe it. Catholics should not settle for a partial answer from science, they should get the whole, complete answer from the Church.
P
PhiriTalk
Guest
The Church says there isn’t a conflict and you’d say there is. I’ll listen to the Church and not you if it’s all the same.
Just because you want there to be a conflict between Catholicism and science doesn’t mean there is one, especially when the Church says there’s isn’t a conflict.
God demands that I accept his creation as the sole reality and to reject all fanatasies not based on this reality.
Just because you want there to be a conflict between Catholicism and science doesn’t mean there is one, especially when the Church says there’s isn’t a conflict.
God demands that I accept his creation as the sole reality and to reject all fanatasies not based on this reality.
E
edwest211
Guest
From Communion and Stewardship
“In continuity with previous twentieth century papal teaching on evolution (especially Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis ), the Holy Father’s message acknowledges that there are “several theories of evolution” that are “materialist, reductionist and spiritualist” and thus incompatible with the Catholic faith. It follows that the message of Pope John Paul II cannot be read as a blanket approbation of all theories of evolution, including those of a neo-Darwinian provenance which explicitly deny to divine providence any truly causal role in the development of life in the universe. Mainly concerned with evolution as it “involves the question of man,” however, Pope John Paul’s message is specifically critical of materialistic theories of human origins and insists on the relevance of philosophy and theology for an adequate understanding of the “ontological leap” to the human which cannot be explained in purely scientific terms. The Church’s interest in evolution thus focuses particularly on “the conception of man” who, as created in the image of God, “cannot be subordinated as a pure means or instrument either to the species or to society.” As a person created in the image of God, he is capable of forming relationships of communion with other persons and with the triune God, as well as of exercising sovereignty and stewardship in the created universe. The implication of these remarks is that theories of evolution and of the origin of the universe possess particular theological interest when they touch on the doctrines of the creation ex nihilo and the creation of man in the image of God.”
“In continuity with previous twentieth century papal teaching on evolution (especially Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis ), the Holy Father’s message acknowledges that there are “several theories of evolution” that are “materialist, reductionist and spiritualist” and thus incompatible with the Catholic faith. It follows that the message of Pope John Paul II cannot be read as a blanket approbation of all theories of evolution, including those of a neo-Darwinian provenance which explicitly deny to divine providence any truly causal role in the development of life in the universe. Mainly concerned with evolution as it “involves the question of man,” however, Pope John Paul’s message is specifically critical of materialistic theories of human origins and insists on the relevance of philosophy and theology for an adequate understanding of the “ontological leap” to the human which cannot be explained in purely scientific terms. The Church’s interest in evolution thus focuses particularly on “the conception of man” who, as created in the image of God, “cannot be subordinated as a pure means or instrument either to the species or to society.” As a person created in the image of God, he is capable of forming relationships of communion with other persons and with the triune God, as well as of exercising sovereignty and stewardship in the created universe. The implication of these remarks is that theories of evolution and of the origin of the universe possess particular theological interest when they touch on the doctrines of the creation ex nihilo and the creation of man in the image of God.”
Last edited:
P
PhiriTalk
Guest
That encyclical literally says that evolution isn’t incompatible with Catholicism. The Catechism says that the Church isn’t in conflict with science and that God created everything and science is just another way of knowing the mind of God.
Also, evolution literally doesn’t say anything about the origin of life.
Also, evolution literally doesn’t say anything about the origin of life.
E
edwest211
Guest
That encyclical literally says: “including those of a neo-Darwinian provenance which explicitly deny to divine providence any truly causal role in the development of life in the universe.”
Since science can’t study God, the Church gives us the missing information. And yes, by excluding God through no fault of its own, modern science - offered as the only complete explanation - denies God, explicitly.
Since science can’t study God, the Church gives us the missing information. And yes, by excluding God through no fault of its own, modern science - offered as the only complete explanation - denies God, explicitly.
R
rossum
Guest
Exactly as predicted by evolution. Mutations are random, so a few of them will randomly be useful against future anti-bacterial agents.Bacteria have been found in dirt in the wild that were already resistant to man-madeanti-bacterial agents
Random means exactly that, they may or may not be useful in future precisely because they are random.
P
PhiriTalk
Guest
Your quote isn’t from the encyclical. It appears to be a commentary on the encyclical.
This is an actual quote from the encyclical: “The Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experiences in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.”
Science doesn’t deny God. Science doesn’t say anything God at all. You are spitting on all Catholic scientists when you say things like that.
This is an actual quote from the encyclical: “The Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experiences in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.”
Science doesn’t deny God. Science doesn’t say anything God at all. You are spitting on all Catholic scientists when you say things like that.
Last edited:
R
rossum
Guest
While you do not even have one equivalent experiment from last week showing a predictable repeatable ID result.The closest was @rossum two experiments from decades ago.
Evolution has the experimental evidence. ID does not. Where are your experiments buffalo?
E
edwest211
Guest
I’ve been a moderator on another forum for years. I know what you’re doing. It’s nothing new.
P
PhiriTalk
Guest
What am I doing? Using evidence to support my claims?
Why do you hate intelligent people so much? When did accepting science become taboo?
Also, you still haven’t told me who you think is brainwashing biologists?
Why do you hate intelligent people so much? When did accepting science become taboo?
Also, you still haven’t told me who you think is brainwashing biologists?
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
Let’s add the word hate. You are repeating a pattern I’ve seen many times.
The educational system in the United States was corrupted in the late 1960s.
The educational system in the United States was corrupted in the late 1960s.
Last edited:
P
PhiriTalk
Guest
What’s the pattern? Observation, question, hypothesis, experiment, data, conclusions, repeat?
P
PhiriTalk
Guest
Corrupted how? By whom?
P
PhiriTalk
Guest
You’re mad because Catholic universities allow for academic freedom? Would you prefer that teachers tell students what to think instead of how to think?
Why do conservatives hate Father Hesburgh so much?
Why do conservatives hate Father Hesburgh so much?
E
edwest211
Guest
I didn’t write that article but I agree with it. My own experience at University confirms what is written there.
P
PhiriTalk
Guest
So your experience is infalliable and overrules all other people’s experiences?
It’s sounds like you just don’t like academic freedom very much.
Also the Cardinal Newman Society is nothing but a conservative political group masquerading as a Catholic group. They care more about promoting American social conservativism than actual Catholic doctrines. They also seem to think they are the final authority on what is and isn’t heresy.
It’s sounds like you just don’t like academic freedom very much.
Also the Cardinal Newman Society is nothing but a conservative political group masquerading as a Catholic group. They care more about promoting American social conservativism than actual Catholic doctrines. They also seem to think they are the final authority on what is and isn’t heresy.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.