Genesis not to be taken literal

  • Thread starter Thread starter Philology
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Philology

Guest
Evolution is now a scientific fact, there is a mountain of evidence, and I feel that evolution is completely compatible with Christianity. From different variations of the same species spread across the Galapagos Archipelago, to the very scientifically grounded proof we see for natural selection today; evolution has ceased being a theory and well…evolved into a scientific fact. Some day soon it might be considered the “Law of Evolution”. I believe in the Holy Trinity, as well as the Holy Catholic Church, and am wondering if perhaps the book of Genesis were told as a form of parable (Jesus, the Son of God, told plenty of these) and not as a historical account. I believe God created evolution to create man, and this certainly gives me more appreciation for God’s brilliance, when I try and comprehend the process of natural selection. Is this at all compatible with Catholic teaching, or should I pack my bags and head elsewhere (I wouldn’t like to leave the Catholic Church). Thanks for the help that you give.😃
 
Philology said:
Evolution is now a scientific fact, there is a mountain of evidence, and I feel that evolution is completely compatible with Christianity. From different variations of the same species spread across the Galapagos Archipelago, to the very scientifically grounded proof we see for natural selection today; evolution has ceased being a theory and well…evolved into a scientific fact. Some day soon it might be considered the “Law of Evolution”. I believe in the Holy Trinity, as well as the Holy Catholic Church, and am wondering if perhaps the book of Genesis were told as a form of parable (Jesus, the Son of God, told plenty of these) and not as a historical account. I believe God created evolution to create man, and this certainly gives me more appreciation for God’s brilliance, when I try and comprehend the process of natural selection. Is this at all compatible with Catholic teaching, or should I pack my bags and head elsewhere (I wouldn’t like to leave the Catholic Church). Thanks for the help that you give.😃
Click to expand...
You can believe in a theory of evolution that allows for God to have been the creator of all things, and allows for Adam and Eve to be one male and one female, the sole ancestors of every human being who has ever lived, who is alive today, and who will ever live. 🙂

But if you believe in a theory of evolution that supposes that things created themselves, or that the human race arose from a community of proto-humans, or worse, that each race evolved from separate ancestors, then no - this is forbidden.
 
I find it interesting that people dismiss genesis as a fantastical account that is clearly contradicted by modern science and reason, but many folks have no problem accepting that Christ magically multiplied bread, turned water to wine, raised people from the dead, and physically ascended into heaven.

They are all called miracles for a reason. It is inconsistent to believe in some and discount others.
 
Nec5 said:
I find it interesting that people dismiss genesis as a fantastical account that is clearly contradicted by modern science and reason, but many folks have no problem accepting that Christ magically multiplied bread, turned water to wine, raised people from the dead, and physically ascended into heaven.

They are all called miracles for a reason. It is inconsistent to believe in some and discount others.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how it would be possible to be a creationist, when so much evidence has been produced, and it’s also quite conclusive. I guess I would consider myself a creation evolutionist, if that makes any sense. Many creationist never come to fathom the immense wonder which our universe contains, because they only acknowledge 6,000 of the 5,000,000,000 years it has existed. In this way I appreciate God’s magnificent creation.
 
Philology said:
I don’t see how it would be possible to be a creationist, when so much evidence has been produced, and it’s also quite conclusive. I guess I would consider myself a creation evolutionist, if that makes any sense. Many creationist never come to fathom the immense wonder which our universe contains, because they only acknowledge 6,000 of the 5,000,000,000 years it has existed. In this way I appreciate God’s magnificent creation.
Click to expand...
Oh boy - do a search here and your eyes will be opened.
 
I accept faith, but i don’t want to fall into the pitfall which Richard Dawkins describes:
“The process of non-thinking called faith”
 
Evolution is temporarily banned in the Apologetics section.

God bless,
Ed
 
Philology said:
I accept faith, but i don’t want to fall into the pitfall which Richard Dawkins describes:
“The process of non-thinking called faith”
Click to expand...
Pitfall?
I don’t want to fall into Richard Dawkin’s pit either…
 
Philology said:
Why is this?
Click to expand...
There are very strict guidelines in Back Fence Forum. So far, this thread has complied with these guidelines.

Please check out the links to the guidelines in post 1.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=478146

Please note that this thread is devoted to the origin of the human species.

To get to Back Fence Forum, go up to the bar right at the top of this thread and click Forums. Scroll way down through the list of forums to get to Back Fence.

Ask your questions in this thread. If they do not get answered in a reasonable amount of time – what can I tell you – ask again.
 
Fidelis said:
See if these help: new from Msgr. Charles Pope of the Archdiocese of Washington:
Click to expand...
From Post 5

blog.adw.org/2010/10/on-the-g…ttle-question/

blog.adw.org/2010/10/can-a-ca…-uncritically/

blog.adw.org/2010/10/polygenism/

Grannymh, me, has two responses to the Polygenism article, 3rd link above.
They are for information only since they refer to a banned topic in this forum. It is my intention to respect the current ban in this forum and will not comment further.

First response: October 19, 2010 @ 11:11 PM
Msgr. Charles Pope replied with a single comment (October 19, 2010 @ 11:58 PM)
I am not quite sure what he meant so I replied the best I could. (October 20, 2010 @ 12:06 PM)

Second response: October 21, 2010 @7:44 PM
This particular response was replied to by J_Pat_H. (October 22, 2010 @ 3:23 AM)
I answered his question right below his contribution. (October 22, 2010 @ 8:27 AM)

Note: scroll back up the responses. Look for J_Pat_H who has made some very interesting contributions.
 
Philology said:
I accept faith, but i don’t want to fall into the pitfall which Richard Dawkins describes:
“The process of non-thinking called faith”
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

I wouldn’t take Richard Dawkins as an expert on faith, myself. Faith requires a lot of deep thinking, and it requires that sometimes what you think is different from what everyone else thinks - it’s not as comfortable as just taking science for granted, and assuming that you must be “thinking,” merely because you can accurately recite whatever you were taught in school.
 
Philology said:
… From different variations of the same species spread across the Galapagos Archipelago, to the very scientifically grounded proof we see for natural selection today;
Click to expand...
Evolution requires the increase of genetic information. Natural selection filters and decreases genetic information. If evolution existed without natural selection you would have no species ceasing to exist.

There are no creationists that deny natural selection. Stuff dies.

So yes. there is lots of evidence that within a species, different expressions of the available genetic code are expressed and favored due to environmental conditions. This is a wonderful resiliency that God had built into living things.

But no one has any evidence that one species has begotten another. So far, every kind begets it’s own kind, just like the Bible says. You may wish to believe what you want. But simply repeating that evolution is a fact does not make it so.

Furthermore, a-bio-genesis, the creation of life from non-living matter, was disproved by Louis Pastur and his work has never been falsified.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top