Evolution refuting catholicism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brown10985
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Orogeny:
Which certain scientists are you refering to?
Severeal of folks who have posted to this thread and several of the articles referenced in this tread have used eveolution theory to directly attack religion and or the supernatural.

I’m not really intrested in looking for them again. But I’ll be happy to post links to them when they show up if your really interested. (If I can firgure out how to create those nifty links that fit righ into the text without lookin like giberish. How do ya do that?)

Maybe in the next 250 post thread…on evolution.

Chuck
 
40.png
clmowry:
Severeal of folks who have posted to this thread and several of the articles referenced in this tread have used eveolution theory to directly attack religion and or the supernatural.
I’ve been following the thread pretty closely, and I don’t remember any “attacks”, though I haven’t followed all the links either. I had stated, along with Alec, that science cannot possibly be used to postulate or verify any supernatural activity, but that isn’t much of an attack. Such an alleged attack is really not even supportable, since conversely science can also never falsify a religious claim. Science can only obviate the divine intervention, showing that natural processes are sufficient.
 
40.png
wanerious:
I’ve been following the thread pretty closely, and I don’t remember any “attacks”, though I haven’t followed all the links either. I had stated, along with Alec, that science cannot possibly be used to postulate or verify any supernatural activity, but that isn’t much of an attack. Such an alleged attack is really not even supportable, since conversely science can also never falsify a religious claim. Science can only obviate the divine intervention, showing that natural processes are sufficient.
On the other hand, there have been attacks on science, some of them reflecting an almost perverse unwillingness to see science for what it is.
 
<< Maybe in the next 250 post thread…on evolution. >>

Hello, I am post #260. 😃

Kill me now. :rolleyes:

Phil P
 
vern humphrey:
On the other hand, there have been attacks on science, some of them reflecting an almost perverse unwillingness to see science for what it is.
people who don’t have faith in your understanding of science are unintellectual and uneducated cavemen. They are so unevolved 😃
 
VATICAN LETTER Sep-24-2004 (920 words) Backgrounder. With photo. xxxi

Creative tension: omnipotence of God vs. dynamism of a universe

By John Thavis
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) – A recent Vatican document analyzed evolution in the light of faith, stepping into an area that has long been a religious and scientific minefield.

The document, prepared by the International Theological Commission and made available in mid-September, examined man’s relationship with the created world.

Why bother to get into evolution? Because, as the text said, Catholics have a responsibility to “locate” the scientific understanding of the universe within a Christian vision of creation.

That’s an assignment that challenges even the experts, however.

“That’s a very big task, and a very complicated issue. It’s not settled yet, by any means,” said U.S. Jesuit Father George Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory, who has closely followed the evolution debate.

The theological commission operates in conjunction with the Vatican’s doctrinal congregation, and its document is remarkable in several ways.

**First, it accepts as likely the prevailing tenets of evolutionary science: the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in a “big bang”; the earth formed about 4.5 billion years ago; all living organisms on earth descended from a first organism; and man emerged some 40,000 years ago with the development of the larger, human brain.
**
**Second, the document does not argue for a “divine design” in specific processes of evolution. While acknowledging that some experts do see a providential design in biological structures, it says such development might also be “contingent,” or dependant on chance.
**
**“True contingency in the created order is not incompatible with a purposeful divine providence,” it said.
**
**In other words, God’s plan may have allowed for all kinds of variables to play out. Or, as the document put it, “any evolutionary mechanism that is contingent can only be contingent because God made it so.”
**
But is the emergence of man one of these chance results? Or did God play creationist in this instance?

That’s the crux of the current debate, said Father Coyne.

“Most people would pose the question this way: ‘Did we come out of a necessary process or a chance process? If it’s a necessary process, God did it. If it’s chance, why do you need God?’” Father Coyne said in an interview.

“But I think the question itself is wrong. It’s not just necessity or chance, it’s also opportunity. We live in a universe that statistically offers so many opportunities for the life-building processes to work together,” he said.

“In a universe so fertile in opportunity, it was inevitable – I say inevitable, not necessary – that human beings emerged,” he said.

Pope John Paul II made headlines in 1996 when he told the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that the theory of evolution was “more than a hypothesis” and had been widely accepted by scientists.

But in opening a dialogue on the subject, **the pope insisted that man was not just a link in the evolutionary chain. He said the emergence of man marked an “ontological leap … the moment of transition to the spiritual” that cannot fully be explained in scientific terms.
**

(continued)
 
Part 2 of 2 of VATICAN LETTER Sep-24-2004 Creative tension: omnipotence of God vs. dynamism of a universe
By John Thavis of Catholic News Service:

Expanding on that argument, the theological commission’s recent document said the appearance of the first members of the human race must be attributed to some form of divine intervention. **It spoke of God acting through “causal chains” from the beginning of cosmic history to prepare for the “special creation of the human soul.”
**
**It also emphasized the “personal character of creation” and said man, fashioned in the image of God, responds to a personal creator, not an impersonal force or energy. It cited the teaching of the Second Vatican Council: “Man is the only creature on earth that God willed for his own sake.”
**
In a paper presented last year on the subject, **Father Coyne said this argument raises the question: “Are we forced by revealed, religious truth to accept a dualistic view of the origins of the human person – evolutionist with respect to the material dimension, creationist with respect to the spiritual dimension?”

Father Coyne and others have suggested that a case could be made for a type of divine creation that did not pre-ordain human beings, or which might have even produced thinking beings different than humans.

**Does that contradict religious truth?

“Not, it appears to me, if theologians can develop a more profound understanding of God’s continuous creation” that allows for “freedom at all levels of the evolutionary process,” Father Coyne said.

Father Coyne said the wider discussion on evolution between religion and science is marked by misunderstandings. He said the term “creation,” for example, is about existence itself, not the “chain of events which bring about a specific kind of being.”

Likewise, when religions speak of God “creating out of nothing,” scientists often equate it – incorrectly – with the vacuum of quantum mechanics, Father Coyne said.

**Among believers, Father Coyne said, there’s an unfortunate tendency to “latch onto God” when scientific explanations fall short.
**
“One gets the impression from certain religious believers that they fondly hope for the durability of certain gaps in our scientific knowledge of evolution, so they can fill them with God,” he said.

**Father Coyne argues that God should not be understood as a dictator, who has fine-tuned the universe to run like a watch. But he said it will take considerable dialogue and reflection by Catholic thinkers before a central tension is resolved: between the omnipotence of God and the dynamism of a universe in evolution.

**END

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0405245.htm
 
Astonishing Admissions
Code:
   The *HERALD *recently featured an article on creation and evolution      which quoted extensively from the musings of Father George Coyne, director      of the Vatican Observatory (ACH 9/30/04, page 3). The article gave the      impression that Father Coyne was a reliable source of information about the      proper integration of faith and reason. But nothing could be further from      the truth. In an interview article in the Chicago *Catholic New World*      newspaper (June 23, 2002), entitled "Searching the Heavens: Vatican      Astronomer sees Hand of God in the Stars," Father Coyne made some      astonishing admissions that contradict Catholic doctrine:

          "Did God do this? Do I need God to make the human brain? As a        scientist, I can get completely satisfactory answers without bringing God        into the picture. But I find it difficult to accept. It’s a mystery that        the universe could come from nothing. … Once I believe in God it’s not        just a rational process. I can’t prove to you that God exists, but you        can’t prove to me that he or she doesn’t. …The God I now believe in is        very different from the God the sisters taught me about. He’s not keeping        control of everything. The universe has a dynamism about it, and even        the Creator can’t know everything. I see God with the universe as sort        of hoping and wishing and setting things up so there’s a strong        possibility for human life."

        In a few short sentences, Father Coyne contradicts several important      doctrines of the Catholic faith. He refers to God as a "he or she" who is      "not keeping control of everything." But the *Catechism of the Catholic      Church* teaches that "God is the *Father *almighty, whose fatherhood      and power shed light on one another" (emphasis in original) (*CCC*,      270).Father Coyne teaches that the "Creator can’t know everything."      But the *Catechism *teaches that God’s knowledge, like His power, is      infinite: "In God power, essence, will, intellect, wisdom and justice are      all identical" (*CCC, *271). 

   Father Coyne sees God "sort of hoping and wishing and setting things up      so there’s a strong possibility for human life." But the *Catechism *     teaches that "God is the Lord of the universe, whose order he established      and which remains wholly subject to him and at his disposal" (*CCC, *     269).Sadly, Father Coyne’s musings illustrate the confusion that      results when men attempt to reconcile the Catholic faith with naturalism and      molecules to man evolution.

   Last weekend at Christendom College, Catholics had the opportunity to      hear Catholic experts in theology, philosophy and natural science expose the      fatal flaws in evolutionary science and in the theological ideas of      apologists for evolution like Father Coyne who use natural science as a      cloak under which to disseminate philosophical and theological errors. The      Third International Catholic Conference on Creation gave Catholics the      opportunity to evaluate the evidence for special creation and the literal      historical interpretation of Genesis and to decide for themselves whether      theistic evolution or special creation better explains the facts of      Scripture, tradition and natural science. Tapes are available from this      conference by visiting the Kolbe Center Web site at [www.kolbecenter.org](www.kolbecenter.org). 

   Hugh Owen
Director
Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation
 
Buffalo,

Good try but it doesn’t cut the mustard. As you may already know, many websites on the Internet are not endorsed by U.S. Bishops hence not approved by the Vatican. Thank you GOD!

I’ll stick with the VATICAN’s scientist Father Coyne on this one since he claims **omnipotence of God. I’m a lover of Saint Dionysius’ the Theologia Mystica! 👍 **

Are you aware that the majority of people who claim to be **creationalists **are Intelligent Design folk who are unaware they are supporting Freemasonary? I’m totally against all three and by the way I’ve been a Catholic for over 40 years. Am I modern and unique? YES, I am! And that is the cause!

Mary ~
 
buffalo said:

This the same Robert Bennett who, on national television, was discussing the sex scandal in the Church. When asked if a priest who sinned could remain a priest, he said;

“That was settled in the Middle Ages, by the Council of Trent. They decided that it’s the way you hold your hands and so on that makes the sacrement.” (Quoting from memory.)

How many errors can you find in that statement?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif
 
40.png
ISABUS:
Buffalo,

Good try but it doesn’t cut the mustard. As you may already know, many websites on the Internet are not endorsed by U.S. Bishops hence not approved by the Vatican. Thank you GOD!

I’ll stick with the VATICAN’s scientist Father Coyne on this one since he claims **omnipotence of God. I’m a lover of Saint Dionysius’ the Theologia Mystica! 👍 **

Are you aware that the majority of people who claim to be **creationalists **are Intelligent Design folk who are unaware they are supporting Freemasonary? I’m totally against all three and by the way I’ve been a Catholic for over 40 years. Am I modern and unique? YES, I am! And that is the cause!

Mary ~
Ok then try this one

SCIENCE AND RELIGION NOT ON SPEAKING TERMS IN TODAY’S WORLD

**Doctor David Byers
****Executive Director: Committee on Science and Human Values
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

**

…Scientists continue to wage warfare grounded in old prejudice. So do religious leaders who, basing themselves upon a wrongheaded reading of Genesis, flatly deny the broad validity of evolution. As Pope John Paul himself said in a 1980 address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, “the Bible . . . does not wish to teach how heaven was made but how one goes to heaven.”

…Both science and religion suffer from this historic rift, and both could benefit from a more cooperative relationship. A papal letter to Jesuit Father George Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory, which was reprinted as the preface to the 1988 book Physics, Philosophy and Theology: A Common Quest for Understanding, declared that: "Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish."

**
…**The religious community, on the other hand, is curiously passive, almost shy, about claiming its right to cooperate in the analysis of scientific and technological change. Too often, Christians seem unconsciously to accept the notion that empirical reasoning is the only valid source of knowledge. This “scientism” is a dangerous form of moral blindness, leading to acceptance of every form of scientific advance as progress. It left the leaders of Eastern Europe disarmed before the technologies that devastated their environment. It threatens to paralyze moral reflection upon the exploding biotechnologies which, in the 21st century, may enable us to engineer “desirable qualities” into human children as we breed cattle today.

…"On a broader plane, science lacks the tools to tackle ultimate questions': Who are we? Where are we going? What meaning do our little lives have?….** Too often, Christians seem unconsciously to accept the notion that empirical reasoning is the only valid source of knowledge. This scientism’ is a dangerous form of moral blindness, leading to acceptance of every form of scientific advance as progress. We can all reject the notion that empirical reasoning is the only valid source of knowledge if we seriously know that love puts a different view on all reality.**
 
Buffalo,

What is your point? Also what is the publication date on this article you have presented to me? It seems to me to be years old. Also, it states:

Dr. David Byers* has been** Executive Director of the Bishops’ Committee on Science and Human Values, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. *

Byers is no longer on that committee. From what I can gather in 2000 Byers was Director of ‘The Home Missions office which is part of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops Secretariat for Missions’.

usccb.org/comm/archives/2000/00-028.htm

The Vatican’s scientists and theologians are still in debate. Coyne seems to disagree with Haught in 1994.

http://www.georgetown.edu/centers/woodstock/report/r-fea38.htm

I favor Coyne!

Buffalo, are you a **creationalist who favors ****Intelligent Design? Are you a **Freemason?

Mary ~
 
Why would you think I am a freemason?

Beyond that, I believe the points I have bolded in my earlier posts should be considered. The Pope’s statement of

“**Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish.”

**makes much sense to me.
 
Buffalo,

Are you a **creationalist who favors ****Intelligent Design? Are you a **Freemason? If you can’t answer these two questions with a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ then we will all know your answer must be YES. 😃

I’m not into games. I have presented you with two simple questions. Answer them please.

Mary ~
 
As a Catholic I believe in Intelligent Design, namely God.

Cosmological findings are showing ultimate design… Of course intelligent design would make me a believer in creation.

I also believe in the Church’s teachings on faith and science.

I still don’t understand the freemason question?

.
 
Buffalo,

Thank you for answering my questions. You are a creationalist who believes in **Intelligent Design and a Freemason. **

Buffalo, when you asked me**, “Why would you think I am a freemason**?” I immediately knew you were well acquainted with Freemasonary and when you avoided answering my simple questions with a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ it only convinced me that you were.

Any Catholic or religious person who loves God and Jesus should avoid following the path of Intelligent Design and Freemasonary. The Vatican is opposed to Freemasonary because it undermines all reason behind science being kept separate from religion.

Have a nice day. 🙂 I’ll be back next week.

Mary ~
 
40.png
ISABUS:
Buffalo,

Thank you for answering my questions. You are a creationalist who believes in **Intelligent Design and a Freemason. **
That’s news to me!! :bigyikes: I still don’t understand?:confused:
 
Buffalo, when you asked me**, “Why would you think I am a freemason**?” I immediately knew you were well acquainted with Freemasonary and when you avoided answering my simple questions with a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ it only convinced me that you were.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top