Hello is anyone there?

[joshua_b]

It seems to me its getting a little hostile in here. Lets back up a minute, take a deep breath and slow down. Mike O, my question for you is, what exactly ARE the Church’s official teachings on creation ? I believe that is what the original question that started this thread is really all about anyway isnt it ?

 

[MariaG]

joshua_b:

Allow me to take a shot at this (and if I am wrong on any point I humbly request that someone with more knowledge correct my errors).

The Catholic Church gives no definitive teaching on Creation outside of a few simple tenents. We must acknowledge that God exists, created everything from nothing with a specific plan that came to fruition through his own power, created two original human beings (Adam and Eve), and those two original humans succumbed to temptation bringing sin into the world.

As long as you don’t deny these realities, I believe the Church allows you to hold whatever theories or opinions on creation that you choose.

This sums up what a Catholic should believe about Creation. A person is free to believe that the earth is young or old, as long as God created it.

A young earth is a relatively recent belief, not held by the Catholic Church for hundreds of years if at all.

In Psalms, it talks of God being as old as the stars. Since God has always been, young stars would not make much sense.

But I digress.

The Catholic Church gives no definitive teaching on Creation outside of a few simple tenents. We must acknowledge that God exists, created everything from nothing with a specific plan that came to fruition through his own power, created** two original human beings **(Adam and Eve), and those two original humans succumbed to temptation bringing sin into the world.

As long as you don’t deny these realities, I believe the Church allows you to hold whatever theories or opinions on creation that you choose.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[joshua_b]

Thank you Maria,

Im just trying to figure out (and maybe stop it) how a question so simple became what is the beginning of a heated debate.

 

[rossum]

joshua_b:

Thank you Maria,

Im just trying to figure out (and maybe stop it) how a question so simple became what is the beginning of a heated debate.

It is not so much the question itself as all the lengthy, and often heated, discussions that have gone on around the topic of the Bible, the Church and Evolution. This question has a long history, and not all of that history has been sweetness and light. Cooling the debate will be very difficult.

As an non-Christian outsider it seems to me that there is a wide range of views held within the Church from Young Earth-six days Creation to Theistic Evolution (God designed us to self-assemble through evolution). Given this range of views it would seem that the Church has not made a definitive pronouncement on this topic, leaving it up to individual Catholics to decide.

For my part, the Bible is not a Science Textbook. It contains much that is true, but “scientific truths” are a subset of truths which meet some very specific criteria. The truths in the Bible do not generally meet those specific criteria.

rossum

 

[CollegeCatholic]

  		The ultimate truth is that there is no Ultimate Truth.

There is a reason why that philosophy is called oxymorononic.

Just messin’! Old philosophy joke!!

 

[freesoulhope]

hello, its freesoul, im sorry for causing this debate, i should have never brought it up. Only god knows what happened.

 

[zian]

No worries, freesoulhope. Ask any question you feel needs asking.
We have fun like this on the board all the time!

dragonfly:

Evolution, there are two scientific beleifs,

Evolution by the big bang theory and evoultion that us humans evolved from apes. I was in your “rainbow” question and gave you the name of a man who will answer this very question in such a proving way, wow!! The bible is correct. We were CREATED, not Evolved.

I will leave you w/ these two thoughts just as an example:

in the big bang theory, basicly nothing evolved from nothing and we evolved from a rock!! I’d like to think I have better genes and a lot smarter than some substance such as a rock!!

freesoul - suggest you go to some legitimate sources of information if you are interested in evolution, as opposed to getting your education from dragonfly here.

dragonfly - since you didn’t link your source, I have no simple way to comment on it, except to say that that you’ve apparently been served heaping helpings of hooey as to what evolution really is. For example, the origin of the universe is completely independent of biological evolution, so the Big Bang is off the table. For those who need help, I suggest browsing (intensively, for some of you ) at Talk Origins. For a good read, try “Finding Darwin’s God”, by Catholic scientist Dr. Kenneth Miller.

Apes: if we evolved from apes, why haven’t all the other apes evolved?? there is actually a scientific answer to this one, but it is false.

Oh brother, this one again!! :banghead:
See here, and ALL the links as well. Even Answers in Genesis has given up on this old bit of blather.

Satan has always tried to discredit God!! Plain and simple!! so evolution is just another one of those things that will make you question your bible!

Get that scientist cd’s, download them free… Yep he publishes everything free. Dr. Kent Houind(Havind) I can’t read my own writing really off this cd. LOL

As for Kent Hovind (there you go ), well, sometimes you really do get what you pay for. See the discussion here

 

[dragonfly]

yes, i agree that the bing bang is off the table!! As for my references:

Book: war of the worlds, part 5: Astronomy and the big bang
part 4: Evolved from apelike creatures?? It expolres those two topics.
Book: The Pilgrims Progress Collection: a lot of great stuff
Book: Millions of years-where did it come from

I also studied the second law of thermodynamics, whic really, anyhow

some different web sites that I have reffered to when writing essay’s for my professors:
emporium turnpike
parent company
library thinkquest
ncsweb.org
edward babinski, theory in crisis

then there’s the Creation Magazine, I like to refer some of the authors: Ken Ham, Tas Walker, Don Batten, Tom Hennigan, you can go back thru the archives and look up by author!

To me; Philosophy and Theology are search for TRUTH and Science is search for Knowledge!!

Needless to say, I NEVER said anybody’s theory was wrong or insulted them as such!! I am always open to constructive critism, but I am not open to directly insulting my intelligence!! Even if my belief is wrong that we WERE created, I did not arrive at that conclusion sitting on my thumbs. A lot of reading, debate, discussions, essays, and critique went into my studies!

just interesting: A really good debate: When you have to argue something you don’t even believe in!! Based on “written” facts, dialouge, research, etc… So, that is cool if you don’t agree w/ me, but if not, try DEFENDING my belief based on research.

 

[freesoulhope]

Hello, if evolution is is real, then doesnt that open up doors to other posibitys. If created some genetic blob and put it in the sea, which then turned in to different organisms, which eventually turned in to us. the isnt it quite possible the god created ufos and life on other planets. It seems to me, with evolution on the cards, we can allow are imaginations run wild.

 

[dragonfly]

sure, we can let our imaginations run wild, come up w/ conclustions of our own, entertain our thoughts… but what after that??

Do you then come to believe your own theory?? Once you start to question, the natural thing to do is research it. So whatever you are thinking or questions that start popping up in your head, then go research it.

on the ufo theory and such i like : www.delusionresist.org

Take care and good night for now.

Mark, you have lots of things that are unanswered. What do you believe?? What do you feel in your heart?? Do they agree w/ eachother or contradict eachother??

 

[steveandersen]

Mike O:

I’m not sure that’s correct. A number of other threads have pointed out numerous discrepancies between evolutionary theory/scientific “fact” and Scriptural teaching…

Yes there have been numerous threads, but you can’t believe everything you read

the “discrepancies” don’t really amount to much

 

[dragonfly]

steveandersen:

Yes there have been numerous threads, but you can’t believe everything you read

the “discrepancies” don’t really amount to much

[/QOUTE]
I DO agree w/ that, you can not believe everything you read!! I do think it is good to know what is out there(research,studies,etc…)

And as I have always stated, I always devote my questions, doubts, etc… to prayer FIRST!!!

 

[zian]

freesoulhope:

Hello, if evolution is is real, then doesnt that open up doors to other posibitys. If created some genetic blob and put it in the sea, which then turned in to different organisms, which eventually turned in to us. the isnt it quite possible the god created ufos and life on other planets. It seems to me, with evolution on the cards, we can allow are imaginations run wild.

Yes, you can always let your imagination run wild, but when it comes to science, you have to get back to the data, regardless of what it is you want to imagine. There are no alternatives for science. Evolutionary ideas make for powerful theories because of their explanatory power for the available data. When theories (and imaginations) go beyond the data, then all bets are off.

 

[zian]

[/QOUTE]
I DO agree w/ that, you can not believe everything you read!! I do think it is good to know what is out there(research,studies,etc…)

And as I have always stated, I always devote my questions, doubts, etc… to prayer FIRST!!!

“to prayer first” - that’s fine. a perfectly reasonable thing to do, for those of us of a religious persuasion.

And just because we all agree that “you cannot believe everything that you read”, it does not follow that you should disbelieve everything that you do read either. Some writers are more trustworthy than others. But even they must have their ideas stand up to the scrutiny of the material evidence.

You say that I have insulted your intelligence. I submit that I have done no such thing. What I did do was point to references that dispute, for example, the invalid and wrong criticisms of Kent Hovind. Your supplied reading list seems short on anti-YEC views. I recommend you spend some time at the sites I recommended and measure the comparative worth of the evidence discussed therein. There are also many other sites of great value that are linked in the many older evolution threads on this forum - see anything by PhilVaz, hecd2, orogeny, rossum, steveandersen, etc. (there are many others, sorry for those I missed - mea culpa)