Evolution and why God would use it?

[Christian5]

Why is evolution such a problem for christians (mainly Protestants)? Nothing about it is contray toward scripture. Until of course you compare scripture with scripture YOUR OWN WAY! Then there becomes a problem. Just look at all the 35,000 Protestant denominations out there today! All believe their guided by the Holy Spirit, yet ALL come to different conclusions. It is sad and creates a stumbling block for the world just as all the young earthers telling us there’s no evidence for evolution, and if it is true, then God is not. Oh boy.

Oolon, sorry about spelling your name like the tea, lol, I got a good laugh at myself when I saw that hehe. I usualy come to this site after a long days work and at night where I’m half asleep.

What I was saying that seemed to support “creationism in the 6 day literal sense” was arguments I heard from creationist. Yes I know of whale fossils with legs, ape-like man fossils, reptile to bird fossils etc. I believe they show more than enough evidence to support evolution. I am not aware of ALL the facts about evolution as you are, so the creationist were able to “win” my arguments against them about evolution. I merely flooded out all my doughts I had about evolution, so thank you all for those wonderful sites.

 

[Christian5]

I’ve heard this said before, and I usualy repeat it as well: “The god that the atheist doesn’t believe in is usualy not the God of the Bible.” Why is it so hard to believe in God because there are defects in creation? Or because there is physical evil (tornados, viruses, venomous spiders and snakes, etc.)? Of course an infinite God could have created the universe in six trillion years, six days, six seconds, or instantly. Why must WE say how He did it with NO EXCEPTIONS? He could have created it perfect as well. Yet creation is in a “state of journeying” just as the christian (true to his faith) is in a “state of journeying.”

God’s ways are not our ways and God’s thoughts are not our thoughts. There are verses as well in the Bible that show how God gives food to the carnivores, yet we say that’s inhumane? One day everything will be perfect (the new heavens and earth) where nothing, not even creation will suffer or have defect, yet we haven’t reached the goal yet. C.S. Lewis’ “Mere Christianity” (note that he was once a strong atheist) in the last chapter explains beautifuly the comparison of evolution and the evolving Christian.

Why is there moral evil? Oh sure, lets blame God for that! No one in the Bible had it easy and mankind are the ones who cause it, not God. Why does God allow it? Why doesn’t he appear? Why? Why? Why!!! We always ask. But as you study catholic christianity these questions come easier.

 

[hawkeye]

I recently read from the two Patricks, 2 seers in Ireland that in private messages on evolution that the craters on the moon were not caused by meteor strikes, rather it was a cooling down process.
Anyway caution is need when interpeting private revelation, I have met these two gentle men and they seem to do good work, but the final decision rests with the Magesterium.
I know that in the end time seers and prophets would rise up like a swarm of flies from hell, to confuse the genuine apparations and Prophets.

 

[PilgrimJWT]

God created the world in the way he wanted to. He did not have to ask us. Anyhow, he gave us brains to figure out the details, and that should keep us busy for many years to come if we don’t destroy ourselves first.

 

[amarkich]

You are incorrect in your false assumptions. Here is a post I presented in another thread on evolution:

The Church has always taught Genesis as a literal, historical document. The following is a post from Hananiah (not with his permission, so I hope he will notify me if he does not wish that this be used):

In 1909 the Pontifical Biblical Commission, which at that time had the power to bind the conscience of Catholics, decreed that it could not be taught that the first three chapters of Genesis were not true in the literal historical sense. Moreover, the Commission emphasized especially that the literal historical sense could not be impugned regarding Adam’s transgression of the divine commandment “through the devil’s persuasion under the guise of a serpent.” Also, in 1950 Pope Pius XII issued an encyclical entitled Humani Generis which denounces the ideas that Adam and Eve were not real, individual people, that there has ever existed any true human who was not descended from them, and that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are not history in a literal sense.

Quote:
When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is no no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own… [T]he first eleven chapters of Genesis, although properly speaking not conforming to the historical method used by the best Greek and Latin writers or by competent authors of our time, do nevertheless pertain to history in a true sense, which however must be further studied and determined by exegetes; the same chapters… in simple and metaphorical language adapted to the mentality of a people but little cultured, both state the principal truths which are fundamental for our salvation, and also give a popular description of the origin of the human race and the chosen people. If, however, the ancient sacred writers have taken anything from popular narrations (and this may be conceded), it must never be forgotten that they did so with the help of divine inspiration, through which they were rendered immune from any error in selecting and evaluating those documents. (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, no. 37f) (emphasis mine)

The Modernist belief that macro-evolution (or the big bang theory) can be held by faithful Catholics is absolutely foreign to anything the Church has authoritatively spoken or taught. This belief not only contradicts Sacred Scripture but also Sacred Tradition as well as the teachings of the Fathers, the Saints, and Popes throughout history.

 

[mjdonnelly]

The Catholic church also taught the epicenter model of the universe and that the world was flat.

These are all teachings that can and have been changed over time as we gain a better understanding of how things work.

 

[PilgrimJWT]

Dear Amarkich;

I disagree. Though it is certainly true that scientists have invaded the realm of revealation (Carl Sagan, to name just one), the Church has similarly invaded the realm of science. Examples–the geocentric view of the universe, which led it to condemn Galileo (to name just one). Best to leave science to the scientists, and revealation to the Church. Not that this will settle every turf war that comes down the pike. But they ought to respect each other.

Thomas Aquinas, a thinker that even the most conservative Catholics can respect, declared that truth is one–science and revealation cannot collide. He said that if we discovered something in science that seemed to contradict revealation, that we have not understood revealation correctly.

God’s creation is awesome. And He has given us brains so that we may explore His handwork. Praise be to God!

 

[ccav]

amarkich…you need to read your own quote. Let me repost it with my emphesis put in.

When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men **who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent ** of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is no no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by **an individual Adam ** and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own… [T]he first eleven chapters of Genesis, although properly speaking **not ** conforming to the historical method used by the best Greek and Latin writers or by competent authors of our time, do nevertheless pertain to history in a true sense, which however must be further studied and determined by exegetes; the same chapters… **in simple and metaphorical language ** adapted to the mentality of a people but little cultured, both state the **principal truths ** which are fundamental for our salvation, and also give a popular description of the origin of the human race and the chosen people. If, however, the ancient sacred writers have taken anything from popular narrations (and this may be conceded), it must never be forgotten that they did so with the help of divine inspiration, through which they were rendered immune from any error in selecting and evaluating those documents. (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, no. 37f) (emphasis mine)

So this quote is NOT saying what you are trying to make it say. It is talking about polygenism which many evolutionists (Christian or otherwise ) reject. It does not pertain to the broad idea of macro-evolution and has nothing to do with Big Bang theory.

 

[Ghosty]

The Big Bang Theory was put forth by a Catholic Priest, incidently, and this priest was never censored by the Church.