Evolution and God

[JRKH]

I’ve been following some of the evolution threads and while I confess that I am not an evolutionary theory expert I do wonder of one thing: how do theories of evolution change how we view God, man’s relation to God and mankind’s Original Sin?

Honestly, in my case, they make no difference in how I view God. Nor does it effect my view of man’s relationship to God.
In so far as the idea of original sin goes, it is a moot point in my view.
Books of the Bible were written for people of a particular time. As such they were written in language, and terminologies that those people could understand and grasp.

Evolution seems to downplay the unique nature of Adam and Eve as the two distinct parents of mankind who were in the Garden with God and then disobeyed, placing themselves and all their descendants under the consequences of Original Sin.

If science demonstrates differences from the biblical accounts, it doesn’t change the underlying principles for Christians. That principle being that we are born seperated from God by natural sin (original sin) and that we must strive to be united with God though faith in action.
No theory of science, no matter how it might effect the “History” of the Bible stories can undermine the moral lessons of the Bible.

What about the natural selection folks who think that humans can evolve still or who want to mix an ape with a human to make an ape-human being who may become the dominant species one day? Isn’t that logical conclusion with natural selection and evolution, that if species have evolved why not expect it to continue to do so?

Not sure what you are refering to with the ape-human unless it is some work that was attempted in the Soviet Union in the 1930’s.
Again, in the evolution vs creation discussion everyone seems to confuse the mechanisms of life, with the miracles of Creation. As far as evolution goes, I don’t see why evolution and creation are seen as being at odds? After all, do we not “Evolve” spiritually from children of nature to Children of God?

Why are most strict evolutionists atheistic? Is it coincidence?

Couldn’t tell you - Got no idea.

Any thoughts or comments?
Pax Christi tecum.

In order for me to become concerned about such debates, I would have to see how it effects salvation. In my view it has no effect. Jesus did not tell us to seek all knowledge and fit it all together with the Bible, nor did he tell us to question everything. He commanded us to Have Faith and to Love God and each other - To teach and proclaim the Kingdom of God.
Science cannot study God. He is too far above us, and too all encompassing. All Science can do is study and explain certain mechanisms that allow us to better understand the universe in which God placed us. Science is great at explaining how things work, but less good at explaining why they work the way they do, and most especially what the core reason and mechanism is that causes and holds life in existance.

I would happily concede the imprecise historical aspects of the Bible. I happily concede the reality of Scientific discovery and theory on evolution, the age of the earth etc.
I also happily acknowledge that Science is limited and not infallible. Scinece teaches what it sees as correct within the limited ability of Human intellect. Just as it did cenuries ago when it was commonly held that everything revolved around the earth. Which it does if we just watch and observe the skies. Likewise, our teachings about God and Spirit is also limited by our human intellect. Is a Scientific theory that may be later proved wrong really much different than our understanding of the trinity which may later be clarified by further understanding of revelation?

Allowing ourselves to be caught up in such drivel as evolution vs creationism is just anothr ploy of the Devil to distract and divide us. Let us remain focused and on target. Let us embrace the scientific community and Love them to God rather than debete them to confusion.

Peace
James

 

[buffalo]

Are you hinting that the Church has declared that acceptance of the scientifically true aspects of evolution is not allowed?

The Church does not need to answer questions which don’t come up. What good would it have been for the Church to declare in 200AD that acceptance of Quantum Mechanics did not conflict with belief in God?

I am not hinting I am stating that any area of intersection must both be true.

Let’s look at Adam and Eve. Eve coming from Adam would put evolution at least with respect to man suspect. Bodily immortality - how does evolution reconcile this? Preternatural gifts, infused knowledge - how does evo deal with this.

I believe a deeper understanding of the natural and supernatural working together is the answer. Science won’t and cannot combine these. Therefore the scientific theories regarding the origins of man are incomplete.

 

[edwest2]

Honestly, in my case, they make no difference in how I view God. Nor does it effect my view of man’s relationship to God.
In so far as the idea of original sin goes, it is a moot point in my view.
Books of the Bible were written for people of a particular time. As such they were written in language, and terminologies that those people could understand and grasp.

If science demonstrates differences from the biblical accounts, it doesn’t change the underlying principles for Christians. That principle being that we are born seperated from God by natural sin (original sin) and that we must strive to be united with God though faith in action.
No theory of science, no matter how it might effect the “History” of the Bible stories can undermine the moral lessons of the Bible.

Not sure what you are refering to with the ape-human unless it is some work that was attempted in the Soviet Union in the 1930’s.
Again, in the evolution vs creation discussion everyone seems to confuse the mechanisms of life, with the miracles of Creation. As far as evolution goes, I don’t see why evolution and creation are seen as being at odds? After all, do we not “Evolve” spiritually from children of nature to Children of God?

Couldn’t tell you - Got no idea.

In order for me to become concerned about such debates, I would have to see how it effects salvation. In my view it has no effect. Jesus did not tell us to seek all knowledge and fit it all together with the Bible, nor did he tell us to question everything. He commanded us to Have Faith and to Love God and each other - To teach and proclaim the Kingdom of God.
Science cannot study God. He is too far above us, and too all encompassing. All Science can do is study and explain certain mechanisms that allow us to better understand the universe in which God placed us. Science is great at explaining how things work, but less good at explaining why they work the way they do, and most especially what the core reason and mechanism is that causes and holds life in existance.

I would happily concede the imprecise historical aspects of the Bible. I happily concede the reality of Scientific discovery and theory on evolution, the age of the earth etc.
I also happily acknowledge that Science is limited and not infallible. Scinece teaches what it sees as correct within the limited ability of Human intellect. Just as it did cenuries ago when it was commonly held that everything revolved around the earth. Which it does if we just watch and observe the skies. Likewise, our teachings about God and Spirit is also limited by our human intellect. Is a Scientific theory that may be later proved wrong really much different than our understanding of the trinity which may later be clarified by further understanding of revelation?

Allowing ourselves to be caught up in such drivel as evolution vs creationism is just anothr ploy of the Devil to distract and divide us. Let us remain focused and on target. Let us embrace the scientific community and Love them to God rather than debete them to confusion.

Peace
James

Let’s just give science a big hug?

The possible answers are:

Evolution is a fact.
Evolution did not happen as currently described.
It doesn’t matter.
And now, science just deserves our love and acceptance.

The origin and true identity of man are at issue here, not plumbing, not quantum mechanics and certainly not gravity. As Pope Benedict has stated, science and religion are complementary and that we must not abandon areas of reason we still need. The answer must be found outside of science, as currently practiced.

Nature has no intelligence. It is not a purposeful, guiding force. The same with evolution. According to the theory, there is no reason we couldn’t all be talking bears. All that had to happen was a few genes to have mutated differently a couple hundred million years or so ago.

But no, the contention is we have new, new knowledge and your holy book is wrong. That is the core of the debate.

Now, the Catholic Church teaches that something similar to evolution occurred, it has not infallibly ruled on the age of the earth and it identifies Adam and Eve as our first parents. What some people always leave out of the equation is God’s supernatural abilities. But, I have to assume, that based on some comments I’ve read here, that acts of God don’t matter. They are not relevant. Well, to Catholics they are, and obviously, to many other Christian denominations. Speaking generally, if your only purpose in coming here is to present evidence you think proves the Church or Bible wrong on some point, I think you’re wasting your time.

Divine revelation clearly tells us that mutation and natural selection as the driving force for our being here simply cannot exist without divine providence.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Orogeny]

Divine revelation clearly tells us that mutation and natural selection as the driving force for our being here simply cannot exist without divine providence.

And science clearly doesn’t deny that.

Peace

Tim

 

[edwest2]

Science doesn’t exist. It’s not an object or person. But scientists are denying God regularly, based on science.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Orogeny]

Science doesn’t exist. It’s not an object or person. But scientists are denying God regularly, based on science.

What? There is no such thing as science? Are we discussing a figment of our imaginations? Does the Pope know that science doesn’t exist? He sure talks about science as if it exists. Maybe he is just old and delusional?

Does gravity exist? How about accounting? Plumbing? Metallurgy? Cosmetology?

Something needs to be a person or an object to exist? Really?

Peace

Tim

 

[edwest2]

Who does science?

Who evaluates the information or results?

Who introduces bias and/or falsehood into those results?

Who makes claims about philosophy, metaphysics and the origin of man based on those results?

Not science but scientists.

The same scientists who refer to the “alien hiss of religion” (Sam Harris) or the “corrosive influence of science on religious belief” (PZ Myers) or “we no longer believe in the Greek or Roman gods, I’m simply adding one more” (Richard Dawkins).

Scientists perform a series of operations that they label science. But you are missing the relationship between the observer and the objects he is observing. If one bias is used to evaluate the results then that bias will corrupt the results. All people here are saying is we have new, new knowledge and your holy book is wrong.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Orogeny]

Who does science?

Scientists. But how can they do something that doesn’t exist?

Who evaluates the information or results?

Scientists. But how can they evaluate information or results from something that doesn’t exist?

Who introduces bias and/or falsehood into those results?

I give up. Who? I would like you to back up your reply with a reference, please.

Who makes claims about philosophy, metaphysics and the origin of man based on those results?

Probably a lot of people. I know you do.

Not science but scientists.

Let’s see if I have this right. Science doesn’t exist, but evil, athiestic scientists use that thing that doesn’t exist to make claims about philosopy, metaphysics and the origin of man. Is that about right?

The same scientists who refer to the “alien hiss of religion” (Sam Harris) or the “corrosive influence of science on religious belief” (PZ Myers) or “we no longer believe in the Greek or Roman gods, I’m simply adding one more” (Richard Dawkins).

Well, you can’t blame it on scientists because if there is no such thing as science, there is no such thing as scientists. So those athiestic scientists that live under your bed at night don’t exist. You have no need to fear!

Scientists perform a series of operations that they label science. But you are missing the relationship between the observer and the objects he is observing. If one bias is used to evaluate the results then that bias will corrupt the results. All people here are saying is we have new, new knowledge and your holy book is wrong.

What results? What scientists? They don’t exist, Ed. Remember?

Peace

Tim

 

[JRKH]

I’m not sure if you were trying to answer or compliment or refute any of my post above. As to your points.

Let’s just give science a big hug?

Why not. Science has given us much, including many cures and treatments of horrific diseases. I think Science is just fine.

The possible answers are:

Evolution is a fact.
Evolution did not happen as currently described.
It doesn’t matter.
And now, science just deserves our love and acceptance.

Oh Boy - Multiple Choice. Can I pick more than one?

I’m not sure of the question but,
Ah well - I pick ---- It Doesn’t matter.
What can science teach or do that would negate the reality of God?

The origin and true identity of man are at issue here, not plumbing, not quantum mechanics and certainly not gravity. As Pope Benedict has stated, science and religion are complementary and that we must not abandon areas of reason we still need. The answer must be found outside of science, as currently practiced.

Agreed

Nature has no intelligence. It is not a purposeful, guiding force. The same with evolution. According to the theory, there is no reason we couldn’t all be talking bears. All that had to happen was a few genes to have mutated differently a couple hundred million years or so ago.

But we already know that a theory, even a long held theory, can be shown to be wrong. In so far as evolution goes, I tend to disagree with those who say it functions without intelligence. After all if the theory of Evolution says anything it is that things evolve to allow for the survival of the given species. Thus the evolving traits attempt to do just that. Those that best serve the purpose survive, those that do not die out.
In any event, we are still just talking about mechanisms in nature, and this has little to do with the reality of God, and the journey of the soul, and spirit which strive to be reunited with Him.

But no, the contention is we have new, new knowledge and your holy book is wrong. That is the core of the debate.

Those individuals who make that argument are just plain wrong. However that does not negate the entire idea of evolutionary processes.

Now, the Catholic Church teaches that something similar to evolution occurred, it has not infallibly ruled on the age of the earth and it identifies Adam and Eve as our first parents.

This certainly seems a logical and reasonable position for the Church to take.

What some people always leave out of the equation is God’s supernatural abilities. But, I have to assume, that based on some comments I’ve read here, that acts of God don’t matter. They are not relevant. Well, to Catholics they are, and obviously, to many other Christian denominations. Speaking generally, if your only purpose in coming here is to present evidence you think proves the Church or Bible wrong on some point, I think you’re wasting your time.

I do not believe I ever said any such thing as the “Church or Bible is Wrong on some point”. Nor have I tried to present any evidence exept that of my own opinion , which seems to align pretty well with what the Church teaches on the matter.
My Primary point is that, by spending so much time trying to debate every tittle, we are falling into the same trap as the Pharesees, Scribes and Lawyers in Jesus day. Staining the gnat and missing the Camel.
Arguing over things that cannot be proven or disproven one way or another. And losing our Love in the Bargain. Meanwhile ol’ beelzebub is wringing his hands in glee.

Divine revelation clearly tells us that mutation and natural selection as the driving force for our being here simply cannot exist without divine providence.

Absolutely Agree. I exist BECAUSE God Exists. All the rest is details.

God bless,
Ed

And you, friend.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Who does science?

Who evaluates the information or results?

Who introduces bias and/or falsehood into those results?

Who makes claims about philosophy, metaphysics and the origin of man based on those results?

Not science but scientists.

The same scientists who refer to the “alien hiss of religion” (Sam Harris) or the “corrosive influence of science on religious belief” (PZ Myers) or “we no longer believe in the Greek or Roman gods, I’m simply adding one more” (Richard Dawkins).

Scientists perform a series of operations that they label science. But you are missing the relationship between the observer and the objects he is observing. If one bias is used to evaluate the results then that bias will corrupt the results. All people here are saying is we have new, new knowledge and your holy book is wrong.

Peace,
Ed

Ed,
Take some time to evaluate what you are saying my brother in Christ.
Saying science doesn’t exist but scinetist do is like saying Belief (faith) doesn’t exist but Believers (faithful) do. The Logic isn’t there.

In addition, you seem to be lumping all “Scientists” into one large Anti-God Group. That is just as fallacious as lumping all Christians into a single group.
Even prestigious Catholic Colleges teach Science, fund research and other things that promote our understandings of the physical world around us.

Science is not the enemy. Some Scientists may be.

Peace
James

 

[strugglingalong]

What can science teach or do that would negate the reality of God?

True science can never negate the reality of God. The problem is when ideology and atheistic philosophy masquerades as science; people then believe it as science because of some sort of “facts” presented when the substance of the argument and the holes are filled in with their own philosophies, their own assumptions that are not scientifically proven or provable. We cannot confuse true science with something pretending to be such.

Pax Christi tecum.

 

[edwest2]

Scientists. But how can they do something that doesn’t exist?Scientists. But how can they evaluate information or results from something that doesn’t exist?I give up. Who? I would like you to back up your reply with a reference, please.Probably a lot of people. I know you do.Let’s see if I have this right. Science doesn’t exist, but evil, athiestic scientists use that thing that doesn’t exist to make claims about philosopy, metaphysics and the origin of man. Is that about right?Well, you can’t blame it on scientists because if there is no such thing as science, there is no such thing as scientists. So those athiestic scientists that live under your bed at night don’t exist. You have no need to fear! What results? What scientists? They don’t exist, Ed. Remember?

Peace

Tim

More drama.

I have a degree, I have the word Professor in front of my name, and for whatever reason, I think god is this awful being, but, more likely, he or it never existed at all. I’ve decided that man came up with the idea! I have no way to prove God exists, I tell people. And you know, I go on, I’ve decided all those religious people are crazy.

I call my clearly biased revelations evolutionary psychology.

Follow the bouncing ball Tim.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Orogeny]

More drama.

Yeah. Nothing like claiming that science doesn’t exist but scientists do, though, huh?

How about answering that one basic question, Ed. How can there be scientists if science doesn’t exist?

Follow the bouncing ball Tim.

I don’t get it. Are you writing your fiction about science again?

Peace

Tim

 

[buffalo]

What? There is no such thing as science? Are we discussing a figment of our imaginations? Does the Pope know that science doesn’t exist? He sure talks about science as if it exists. Maybe he is just old and delusional?

Does gravity exist? How about accounting? Plumbing? Metallurgy? Cosmetology?

Something needs to be a person or an object to exist? Really?

Peace

Tim

It’s akin to the big old bad corporations. Corporations are evil. Who is a corporation?

 

[edwest2]

Exactly buffalo. I’ll just get a bunch of people and put them into a building. Since the people do stuff there, we’ll call it a corporation, or a government.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Orogeny]

It’s akin to the big old bad corporations. Corporations are evil. Who is a corporation?

Corporations are evil? Really?

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

Exactly buffalo. I’ll just get a bunch of people and put them into a building. Since the people do stuff there, we’ll call it a corporation, or a government.

Won’t answer the question about science and scientists, will you Ed?

Actually, I know better that to expect you to defend your position. After all, I am still waiting for the highschool biology textbook that explicitly excludes God.

Peace

Tim

 

[edwest2]

Thousands of years ago, a man put paint on a bowl and liked it. Was he an artist? An artisan? A craftsman? Was he a scientist?

And thousands of years later, somebody gives him a label.

Science doesn’t do science, only human beings do something labeled science.

Peace,
Ed

 

[buffalo]

Corporations are evil? Really?

Peace

Tim

C’mon Tim, we know they are not for they are only paper entities. But America thinks they are evil. And the government has found a way to tax a non-person.

 

[JRKH]

True science can never negate the reality of God. The problem is when ideology and atheistic philosophy masquerades as science; people then believe it as science because of some sort of “facts” presented when the substance of the argument and the holes are filled in with their own philosophies, their own assumptions that are not scientifically proven or provable. We cannot confuse true science with something pretending to be such.

Pax Christi tecum.

Very well put and also true.
Science - in the practical sense, studies phenomena and makes observations about it. Nothing more.
Once persons take that information and infer other things, spiritual things from it it can become clouded.
However we have many intelligent Scientists who do not do this, Plus talented authors and apologists who hold these persons accountable.
The debates will continue to go on the scientific communities and in the Religious ones, but God will remain - Glorious and steadfast - Above us all and protecting His Children.

Peace
James