T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Maybe so. What difference does it make? If we never were anything more then H. erectus, would He love us less?
- Status
A
Amu
Guest
Wouldn’t it contradict the Bible? That’s the problem in the first place, no?
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Barbarian asks:
Maybe so. What difference does it make? If we never were anything more then H. erectus, would He love us less?
Maybe so. What difference does it make? If we never were anything more then H. erectus, would He love us less?
Not for a Christian, it wouldn’t.
For IDers and creationists, maybe. For Christians, no.
A
Amu
Guest
Doesn’t the Bible say that Adam was not from another species? What do you mean for a Christian it wouldn’t?
M
melensdad
Guest
Why are you looking for a ‘showdown’ when the Catholic Church accepts that evolution is a reasonable theory to accept and that it does not contradict our belief in the creation of the world, but simply can be added to our belief. We do not learn that the “days” in the creation story equate to “24 hour” periods. Consequently the two theories can exist in harmony as God created everything and can create the evolutionary process as a part of the creation of the universe.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
No, it doesn’t.
Christians don’t add to scripture. Or shouldn’t.
A
Amu
Guest
I wasn’t aware of this fact. Why are so many Christians speaking against evolutionism then?
P
PhilVaz
Guest
Amu << Why are so many Christians speaking against evolutionism then? >>
Because some fundamentalist Christians, some fundamentalist atheists, and some Catholics in here prefer the “warfare model” of evolution vs. creation, of science vs. religion.
For example, the astronomer/cosmologist and prominent atheist Neil Degrasse Tyson:
“Let there be no doubt that as they are currently practiced, there is no common ground between science and religion. As was thoroughly documented in the 19th-century tome A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, by the historian and onetime president of Cornell University Andrew D. White, history reveals a long and combative relationship between religion and science…” (from “Holy Wars: An Astrophysicist Ponders the God Question” by Tyson, in Science and Religion: Are They Compatible?, 2003, Prometheus Books)
Appealing to 19th century scholarship on the science-religion question is no better than appealing to 19th century astronomy for our current understanding of the universe. For some rebuttals, see the books I’ve mentioned: Finding Darwin’s God by Ken Miller, Perspectives on an Evolving Creation by Keith Miller (and the bibliography in this book), also the chapter "The Church and Science" (MP3) in How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. Some people just prefer the outdated 19th century “warfare” model.
As for Adam/Eve, the hominids, and evolution, here is what a prominent geneticist has to say:
How does the genetic Adam relate to the Adam of the Bible?
“It’s interesting that both genetics and the Bible show that there is a common origin of humanity. According to genetic data we come from a single male ancestor. In the Bible too it is mentioned that there is a single male Adam and single female, Eve. I don’t equate our results one-to-one with the biblical story, of course, because if you count back through the generations described in the Bible, Adam should have existed in 4004 BC, and our Adam existed 60,000 years ago. Also, our Adam and Eve weren’t the only people alive at the time, just the lucky ones who left descendants down to the present day. But it is nice to know that we arrive at the same general conclusion: we’re all related.” (from an interview with Spencer Wells)
Phil P
Because some fundamentalist Christians, some fundamentalist atheists, and some Catholics in here prefer the “warfare model” of evolution vs. creation, of science vs. religion.
For example, the astronomer/cosmologist and prominent atheist Neil Degrasse Tyson:
“Let there be no doubt that as they are currently practiced, there is no common ground between science and religion. As was thoroughly documented in the 19th-century tome A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, by the historian and onetime president of Cornell University Andrew D. White, history reveals a long and combative relationship between religion and science…” (from “Holy Wars: An Astrophysicist Ponders the God Question” by Tyson, in Science and Religion: Are They Compatible?, 2003, Prometheus Books)
Appealing to 19th century scholarship on the science-religion question is no better than appealing to 19th century astronomy for our current understanding of the universe. For some rebuttals, see the books I’ve mentioned: Finding Darwin’s God by Ken Miller, Perspectives on an Evolving Creation by Keith Miller (and the bibliography in this book), also the chapter "The Church and Science" (MP3) in How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. Some people just prefer the outdated 19th century “warfare” model.
As for Adam/Eve, the hominids, and evolution, here is what a prominent geneticist has to say:
How does the genetic Adam relate to the Adam of the Bible?
“It’s interesting that both genetics and the Bible show that there is a common origin of humanity. According to genetic data we come from a single male ancestor. In the Bible too it is mentioned that there is a single male Adam and single female, Eve. I don’t equate our results one-to-one with the biblical story, of course, because if you count back through the generations described in the Bible, Adam should have existed in 4004 BC, and our Adam existed 60,000 years ago. Also, our Adam and Eve weren’t the only people alive at the time, just the lucky ones who left descendants down to the present day. But it is nice to know that we arrive at the same general conclusion: we’re all related.” (from an interview with Spencer Wells)
Phil P
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Not every Catholic accepts the Magesterium. And therefore, they feel compelled to add a little to Scripture to justify creationism.
A
Amu
Guest
Thanks Phil. I’ve actually been looking for a good rebuttal against The God Delusion by Dawkins. But I’m sure there are a million threads about him.
B
buffalo
Guest
Here is Catholic Dogma -
*] The first man was created by God. (De fide.)
*] The whole human race stems from one single human pair. (Sent. certa.)
*] Man consists of two essential parts–a material body and a spiritual soul. (De fide.)
*] The rational soul is per se the essential form of the body. (De fide.)
*] Every human being possesses an individual soul. (De fide.)
*] Every individual soul was immediately created out of nothing by God. (Sent. Certa.)
*] A creature has the capacity to receive supernatural gifts. (Sent. communis.)
*] The Supernatural presupposes Nature. (Sent communis.)
*] God has conferred on man a supernatural Destiny. (De fide.)
*] Our first parents, before the Fall, were endowed with sanctifying grace. (De fide.)
*] The donum rectitudinis or integritatis in the narrower sense, i.e., the freedom from irregular desire. (Sent. fidei proxima.)
*] The donum immortalitatis, i.e., bodily immortality. (De fide.)
*] The donum impassibilitatis, i.e., the freedom from suffering. (Sent. communis.)
*] The donum scientiae, i.e., a knowledge of natural and supernatural truths infused by God. (Sent. communis.)
- Status