Evolution Vs. Creationism Who is Right?

[PhilVaz]

Mike << Therefore, can’t the Magisterium interpret the meaning of the word “day” in Gen 1. If not, why? It is an interpretive issue that divides the Church. >>

Again, that would not answer anything. Let’s say the Church did interpret day = 24 hours in Genesis 1. Then what? That doesn’t say anything about when this was done, or even how this was done.

Actually, I don’t agree there is any “division” in the Church on this, just some individual Catholics here and there who are totally ignorant of modern science, and are influenced by the bogus science and bad theology of Protestant creationist fundamentalism, as I’ve said.

There are still too many things left unanswered that can only be answered, and have been answered, by modern science. Not infallibly mind you, since science is always tentative. But “beyond a reasonable doubt,” yeah. The earth is a sphere, does rotate and move around the sun, the earth and universe is very old, and evolution is the best scientific explanation for the development of life. Known not infallibly, but beyond a reasonable doubt, for hundreds of years.

BTW, many of the Fathers did (apparently) interpret day to mean 24 hours, but the Church hasn’t ruled on the issue. Pretty smart of the Church huh?

There’s no question dinosaurs died million of years before mankind. And the Bible says nothing about that.

Phil P

 

[michaelp]

PhilVaz:

Mike << Therefore, can’t the Magisterium interpret the meaning of the word “day” in Gen 1. If not, why? It is an interpretive issue that divides the Church. >>

Again, that would not answer anything. Let’s say the Church did interpret day = 24 hours in Genesis 1. Then what? That doesn’t say anything about when this was done, or even how this was done.

Actually, I don’t agree there is any “division” in the Church on this, just some individual Catholics here and there who are totally ignorant of modern science, and are influenced by the bogus science and bad theology of Protestant creationist fundamentalism, as I’ve said.

There are still too many things left unanswered that can only be answered, and have been answered, by modern science. Not infallibly mind you, since science is always tentative. But “beyond a reasonable doubt,” yeah. The earth is a sphere, does rotate and move around the sun, the earth and universe is very old, and evolution is the best scientific explanation for the development of life. Known not infallibly, but beyond a reasonable doubt, for hundreds of years.

BTW, many of the Fathers did (apparently) interpret day to mean 24 hours, but the Church hasn’t ruled on the issue. Pretty smart of the Church huh?

There’s no question dinosaurs died million of years before mankind. And the Bible says nothing about that.

Phil P

Does the Church know the answer to the “day” in Genesis question?

 

[PhilVaz]

bible.ca/tracks/dp-age-bible.htm

Bad science. Carl Baugh’s creationism if I’m not mistaken.

Even Answers in Genesis repudiates Carl Baugh

More responses here

Paluxy Texas Man-Track controversy

Phil P

 

[PhilVaz]

Mike << Does the Church know the answer to the “day” in Genesis question? >>

I guess not. Do they know the answer to how many gaps to place between all the geneologies in Genesis 5 and 11?

I guess “no” to that also.

Do they know the answer to whether the snake actually spoke in Genesis 3? And whether there was literally a snake?

I guess not, since that is not infallibly defined either.

Do they know the answer to whether the original sin was literally eating a fruit from a forbidden tree?

You have a very limited understanding of infallibility. Read some commentaries on Genesis, and you’ll find some scholarly opinions.

And do you have good answers to these issues of biblical interpretation?

Phil P

 

[michaelp]

PhilVaz:

Mike << Does the Church know the answer to the “day” in Genesis question? >>

I guess not. Do they know the answer to how many gaps to place between all the geneologies in Genesis 5 and 11?

I guess “no” to that also.

Do they know the answer to whether the snake actually spoke in Genesis 3? And whether there was literally a snake?

I guess not, since that is not infallibly defined either.

Do they know the answer to whether the original sin was literally eating a fruit from a forbidden tree?

You have a very limited understanding of infallibility. Read some commentaries on Genesis, and you’ll find some scholarly opinions.

And do you have good answers to these issues of biblical interpretation?

Phil P

Thanks Phil. I appreciate your response.

No . . . I don’t. As an exegete, I lean toward the literal 7 days. As one who observes science, I get confused. But I am no scientist.

Michael

 

[PhilVaz]

Mike << Does the Church know the answer to the “day” in Genesis question? >>

BTW, this implies the Church must know how to interpret the Bible on any and every passage that comes up. Does the Church know what “day” means or how Genesis 1-3 should be interpreted? In a sense, yeah we are given a good outline in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, see the sections in there on creation and the Fall. There’s quite a bit there to chew on.

Infallibility on the part of the Church does not require omniscience or even “partial” omniscience. If you want to find out what Genesis means in this or that passage, do what I plan on doing and go to many Catholic, Protestant, and other commentaries on Genesis.

There’s isn’t much difference here how most evangelicals and Catholics go about interpreting the Bible on these points. We go to the biblical commentaries that deal in detail with the original languages, the meanings of words, the literary genre and backgrounds of the texts and history, etc. And some evangelicals and Catholics go to Protestant fundamentalist young-earth creationist web sites and books as well, which I suggest is a bad idea.

Phil P

 

[Tom_of_Assisi]

Tlaloc:

They only contradict each other if you take genesis literally instead of as a parable.

For the poster above who mistakenly believes an eye can’t evolve, perhaps you should read up on the eyespots planarian worms have. They are exactly that, crude eye structures that work quite well.

sure let’s take the book of Genesis as a parable…so when we ask Christ and Mary to have mercy on us–the poor banished children of Eve-- should we really be saying have mercy on us the poor banished children of the apes (and how exactly are we banished?)–so what other books of the Bible, which were previously not known as parables, have you now determined are parables…Is Moses still real? Noah? Mary? Is Christ still real as the Church teaches–wholly God and wholly Man? or have you determined part of that equation to be a parable too?

If we can just evolve from lower animals…then we don’t need God and we don’t suffer from original sin and therefore don’t need Christ.

You guys want to have your cake and eat it too…pick one: are you a liberal science geek wannabe or are you an orthodox Catholic?

 

[Tlaloc]

Tom of Assisi:

sure let’s take the book of Genesis as a parable…so when we ask Christ and Mary to have mercy on us–the poor banished children of Eve-- should we really be saying have mercy on us the poor banished children of the apes (and how exactly are we banished?)–so what other books of the Bible, which were previously not known as parables, have you now determined are parables…Is Moses still real? Noah? Mary? Is Christ still real as the Church teaches–wholly God and wholly Man? or have you determined part of that equation to be a parable too?

It really doesn’t matter. Whether its fact or parable the message is the same and the message is what matters.

If we can just evolve from lower animals…then we don’t need God and we don’t suffer from original sin and therefore don’t need Christ.

Thats your interpretation. Welcome to it.

You guys want to have your cake and eat it too…pick one: are you a liberal science geek wannabe or are you an orthodox Catholic?

I am a scientist and I’m not a Catholic. I’m just explaining how many thoughtful intelligent people have reconciled the well established fact of evolution with the Christian faith.

 

[Glenamyaglen]

Hello All, I hope your all well.

Once again I would point out that FULFILLED PROPHECY proves the validity of the Bible, and that God does exist. Who else can fortell the future hundreds, and in some cases, thousands of years in advance except God. There are many fulfilled prophecies that were fortold in advance in the Bible. The 4 kingdoms, for instance, mentioned in the Book of Daniel. Another example is the city of Tyre, God said that He scrape that city clean like a rock, and you know what He used Alexander the Great to do it - check it up in your history books.

The Bible says that the U.S.A. will decline and fall, suffering drought, famine, earthquakes like the one that just happened off the coast of Sumatra severe weather, and finally the U.S. will be defeated by a German led European Union. Consider that all this has already started, in the west we are having the worst drought in over 400 years, while the south eastern part of the country was blistered by storms being soaked bad enough to cause mold in certain areas, this also was prophesied, see Amos 4:7.

Science proves God is real, evolution is non-sense, they have tried tests of various sorts to no avail. You can have a million mutations of a fruit fly, but guess what you get at the end of the mutations? You guessed it, fruit flys. God doesn’t need any help from evolution. Evolution is just another distraction Satan sets out there for vain men to try to explain creation without a Creator to keep our attention away from the True God of the Bible.

As far as not being able to prove that God is real with only the Bible, well you just dont know yet thats all, the Bible is His inspired Word - and you CAN prove that He is real, with only the Bible. I know because I have done it.
Thanks GED

 

[Chris_Jacobsen]

Creationism is Catholic, Biblical and was taught to me in Catholic grade school. Creationism is scientific and can be proven.

The philosophy of Evolution existed before Darwin. Evolution is unscientific and is nothing but religious myth.

 

[Tlaloc]

Glenamyaglen:

Hello All, I hope your all well.

Once again I would point out that FULFILLED PROPHECY proves the validity of the Bible, and that God does exist. Who else can fortell the future hundreds, and in some cases, thousands of years in advance except God. There are many fulfilled prophecies that were fortold in advance in the Bible. The 4 kingdoms, for instance, mentioned in the Book of Daniel. Another example is the city of Tyre, God said that He scrape that city clean like a rock, and you know what He used Alexander the Great to do it - check it up in your history books.

Are you familiar with Nostradamus? Anyone can make accurate predictions simply by making them so vague that sooner or later they can apply to something. Consider Revelation, do you have any idea how many arguments there are about if any of the signs have come to pass and if they have which ones? Millions. Because the language is vague and symbolic. Is the beast with thirteen points the European Union? Well thats certainly one interpretation but thats all it is.

Science proves God is real, evolution is non-sense, they have tried tests of various sorts to no avail. You can have a million mutations of a fruit fly, but guess what you get at the end of the mutations? You guessed it, fruit flys. God doesn’t need any help from evolution. Evolution is just another distraction Satan sets out there for vain men to try to explain creation without a Creator to keep our attention away from the True God of the Bible.

where did you learn science? Evolution is well established and not even debated by serious scientists. Oh sure the details of it are but not the overall existence. Not only that but evolutionary principles are used in software and circuit design and actually work. Science has not proved the existence of God, nor can it. It also cannot disprove the existence of God. Its a question that science cannot address because it deals with intangibles.

As far as not being able to prove that God is real with only the Bible, well you just dont know yet thats all, the Bible is His inspired Word - and you CAN prove that He is real, with only the Bible. I know because I have done it.
Thanks GED

Tautology. You just claimed something was true because it proved itself. The Bible is true because God made it and God is true because the Bible says so.

God is a matter of faith, not proof.

 

[Glenamyaglen]

Hello Tlaloc, I hope you are well.

Yes I have heard of Nostradamus, you are correct his predictions were very vague. The prophecies of the Bible are not vague, again, read the actual prophecy against the city of Tyre in the Book of Ezekiel chapter 26, then study the actual history. God caused many nations, Vs.3, to come against Tyre - starting with Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. He finished the job with Alexander the Great, who scraped the city, as God said would be done, just like a rock,Vs. 14, to make a way out to the off shore part of the city, and just as the Bible says, that GREAT city NEVER came back, Ezekiel 26:14,19-21. Again I say LOOK INTO IT for yourself before you start arguing about it. It is anything but vague! God can make world events happen more easily than a man can make musical notes to orginize a song, or the outcome of a movie - He is the Great God He created everything that is! Dont you get it? He created the vast universe, do you think its hard for Him to make prophecy happen just as He says it will? Of course it isn’t.

Another prophecy is of Cyrus the Great mentioned in Isaiah 44:28 & 45:1, God named Cyrus by name between 100 and 125 years before Cyrus was even born, and used him just exactly the way He said He would.

Anyway, look into it. Thanks GED

P.S. Just for the record, the God of the Bible commands us to PROVE HIM, Malachi 3:10, 1 Thessalonians 5:21. So it is also a matter of proof!.

 

[PhilVaz]

Chris J << Creationism is Catholic, Biblical and was taught to me in Catholic grade school. Creationism is scientific and can be proven. >>

When did you attend grade school? In 1605 AD?

So you remember distinctly being taught in grade school that Adam and Eve had a pet T-Rex in their backyard who ate only plants before the Fall, and that the earth is around 10,000 years old? I doubt it.

I guess we need to define creationism.

The kind of creationism dealt with here is not science and cannot be defended as science

I went to Catholic high school in the 1980s and I dinstinctly remember being taught evolution in my honors biology class. Not that I remember much there.

Chris J << The philosophy of Evolution existed before Darwin. Evolution is unscientific and is nothing but religious myth. >>

Says who?

Not the Pope, not the Catechism (see 283-284).

Phil P

 

[Tom_of_Assisi]

Chris Jacobsen:

Creationism is Catholic, Biblical and was taught to me in Catholic grade school. Creationism is scientific and can be proven.

The philosophy of Evolution existed before Darwin. Evolution is unscientific and is nothing but religious myth.

Amen to you!!! great post

but for all the people who think they are the natural product of monkey love consider this: “No Christian can doubt that God has the power to make all men new, both body and soul, regardless of what had gone on before…no scientist can disprove that or prove the contrary…Aquinas teaches that body and soul cannot be…conceived as essentially seperate…consequently, the idea of the soul of a man inserted into the body of an animal is a philosophical monstrosity. The being man was a whole new creation .” --Warren Carroll The Founding of Christendom (1985)

 

[Tom_of_Assisi]

Tlaloc:

It really doesn’t matter. Whether its fact or parable the message is the same and the message is what matters.

Thats your interpretation. Welcome to it.

I am a scientist and I’m not a Catholic. I’m just explaining how many thoughtful intelligent people have reconciled the well established fact of evolution with the Christian faith.

The message doesn’t matter by itself. Christianity is a religion based on facts not implied messages in parables.

That is not an interpretaion. It is the logical consequence of your belief that you are descended from monkey love and not the Garden of Eden. I am explaining why your little idea is not compatable with Christian reality.

What are your scientific credentials? What university do you teach at, and in what department or do you work in a research facility?

 

[PhilVaz]

Tom A << Amen to you!!! great post >>

You’re freakin nuts man. This is what causes these creation-evolution discussions to last so long.

Tom A << but for all the people who think they are the natural product of monkey love consider this: "No Christian can doubt that God has the power to make all men new, both body and soul >>

Not that difficult, there are quite a few Christians and Catholics out there who accept evolution and God both. Many are scientists. Don’t worry, I’ll come up with quite a list in my response to Sungenis. Need to work out some more of the theological objections in Part 1…

Warren Carroll is a great historian, but if he thinks evolution is a big religious myth and classic creationism has good scientific backing he’s nuts too.

Look, you don’t have to work at a university or be a lab coat nerd to know that creationism is bogus science and evolution is the best scientific explanation we have today. Just read ONE book on evolution and/or THREE articles from TalkOrigins. I’ll let you pick the book or three articles.

Phil P

 

[PhilVaz]

Glen << Evolution is just another distraction Satan sets out there for vain men to try to explain creation without a Creator to keep our attention away from the True God of the Bible. >>

Oh please. So I guess the earth is flat as well. The flat earthers said the same thing about “modern astronomy” as anti-evolutionists say about modern biology.

Henry Morris suggested that the answer might be found in the Tower of Babel:

“…The solid evidence for the above sequence of events is admittedly tenuous…If something like this really happened, early in post-diluvian history, then Satan himself is the originator of the concept of evolution.” (Morris, The Troubled Waters of Evolution, 1975, p. 74-75)

Elsewhere, he has repeatedly claimed that evolutionists are guided by the hand of Satan, whose concept of evolution is even older than Babel.

“Behind both groups of evolutionists [theistic and nontheistic] one can discern the malignant influence of 'that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world’ (Rev 12:9). As we have seen, it must have been essentially the deception of evolution which prompted Satan himself to rebel against God, and it was essentially the same great lie with which he deceived Eve, and with which he has continued to ‘deceive the whole world’.” (Morris, The Twilight of Evolution, 1963, p. 93)

Morris’s words would sound familiar to flat-earthers. “I believe the real source of Modern Astronomy to have been SATAN,” wrote flat-earther David Wardlaw Scott (1901, p. 287). “From his first temptation of Eve in the Garden of Eden until now, his great object has been to throw discredit on the Truth of God.” John Hampden agreed, calling the spherical theory “that Satanic device of a round and revolving globe, which sets Scripture, reason, and facts at defiance” (1886, p. 60).

The Evolution of Bible-Science: Young Earthers, Flat Earthers, and Geocentrists

So I guess the earth is flat, is that it? When you guys imply Satan is responsible for evolution you sound like a bunch of ignorant fundamentalists. Thank you very much. Do I sound mad? Yeah. Do you have to accept evolution? No, but at least look into it a little bit (or a lot) if you are going to accuse it of being satanic.

Orogeny, Wanerius, Vern, Hecd2, I’ll handle this thread on my own, thanks. When I need help, I’ll call you.

Phil P

 

[Orogeny]

Tom of Assisi:

If we can just evolve from lower animals…then we don’t need God and we don’t suffer from original sin and therefore don’t need Christ.

How did God create us? I don’t mean when, but what was the mechanism?

You guys want to have your cake and eat it too…pick one: are you a liberal science geek wannabe or are you an orthodox Catholic?

What is your authority to determine that there are only two positions?

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

Chris Jacobsen:

Creationism is Catholic, Biblical and was taught to me in Catholic grade school. Creationism is scientific and can be proven.

Ok, I’ll play along. Where is the scientific evidence of creationism?

The philosophy of Evolution existed before Darwin. Evolution is unscientific and is nothing but religious myth.

So you claim. Can you please provide some supporting evidence for your position?

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

Glenamyaglen:

The Bible says that the U.S.A. will decline and fall, suffering drought, famine, earthquakes like the one that just happened off the coast of Sumatra severe weather, and finally the U.S. will be defeated by a German led European Union. Consider that all this has already started, in the west we are having the worst drought in over 400 years, while the south eastern part of the country was blistered by storms being soaked bad enough to cause mold in certain areas, this also was prophesied, see Amos 4:7.

Here is your citation.

Though I also withheld the rain from you when the harvest was still three months away; I sent rain upon one city but not upon another; One field was watered by rain, but another without rain dried up; (NAB Amos 4:7)

Where is the USA mentioned, or better yet, how in the heck do you even get to modern times with this passage?

Science proves God is real, evolution is non-sense, they have tried tests of various sorts to no avail.

Science doesn’t even deal with the possibility of God. Science is the study of nature. God is supernatural. Therefore, science cannot deal with God - it can neither prove nor disprove God. That is not what science does.

God doesn’t need any help from evolution.

And you know for a fact that God didn’t use evolution to create the living things we see today? You know that? God told you that?

Evolution is just another distraction Satan sets out there for vain men to try to explain creation without a Creator to keep our attention away from the True God of the Bible.

Here’s a clue for you. Evolution is real. God created everything and He gave us intelligence. God doesn’t deceive.

As far as not being able to prove that God is real with only the Bible, well you just dont know yet thats all, the Bible is His inspired Word - and you CAN prove that He is real, with only the Bible. I know because I have done it.
Thanks GED

We need proof?

24 Thomas, called Didymus, one of the Twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples said to him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands and put my finger into the nailmarks and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.” 26 Now a week later his disciples were again inside and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here and see my hands, and bring your hand and put it into my side, and do not be unbelieving, but believe.” 28 17 Thomas answered and said to him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 18 Jesus said to him, “Have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed.” (NAB John 20:24-29)

(Emphasis added by me)

How do you interpret Amos the way you do and ignore John?

Peace

Tim