if not evolution....

  • Thread starter Thread starter WINGS_DAY
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
debora123 said:
one small difference. :d

in this source he writes his opinion. He doesn’t write what the church’s stance on the issue actually is. I have no need to contact him and complain because he has every right to have his opinions on the origin of the world, and his opinion is not contrary to church teaching, just as theistic evolution is not contrary to church teaching.

What we need are sources that actually, clearly and objectively state the church’s stance on the subject. Which i have already provided for everyone’s convenience.
Click to expand...
oh snap!!! :d
 
Farsight001 said:
No. At best Benedict holds an agnostic position on the subject. He was expressing personal opinion, not binding doctrine. He happens to be incorrect, too. Its quite possible to conduct experiments in a controlled environment to confirm evolution. It happens all the time.
Click to expand...
Citations please. Not media junk.
 
Debora123 said:
I’ll say it again.

The Church is not against the belief of evolution and as Catholics we have 2 requirements - we must believe that human beings have souls and that God is the ultimate creator of all things.

Other than that, we are free to believe in evolution, as I have shown per our apologist’s response.

To say otherwise is false.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your link to Catholic Answers. catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution

Here is its 3rd requirement for Catholic theistic evolution.

Adam and Eve: Real People

It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).

In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The *Catechism *states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).
Note that the reference in the last paragraph is to the* Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition*.

For truly interesting information about real human nature, check out parargraphs 355 -421.
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/355.htm

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
 
Gordon_Sims said:
Seriously, if you believe (unquestioningly) in evolution, how have we not had numerous spontaneous creations of new strands of life in the last 4 billion years??? What is your belief on why we haven’t had tons of new evolutionary explosions resulting in an untold number of kingdoms, families, etc.??? Why don’t we have more sentient lizard-men running around??
Click to expand...
Because lizards and man are two different species.
 
grannymh said:
Thank you for your link to Catholic Answers. catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution

Here is its 3rd requirement for Catholic theistic evolution.

Adam and Eve: Real People

It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).

In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The *Catechism *states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).
Note that the reference in the last paragraph is to the* Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition*.

For truly interesting information about real human nature, check out parargraphs 355 -421.
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/355.htm

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
Click to expand...
I don’t have a problem with the fall but if we have 2 and only 2 original parents that means that incest is the origin of the human race. Inbreeding causes many serious defects and these are not the exception but rather the rule.
 
adoglover1956 said:
I don’t have a problem with the fall but if we have 2 and only 2 original parents that means that incest is the origin of the human race. Inbreeding causes many serious defects and these are not the exception but rather the rule.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is also why the solution proposed by Feser and others is much better, which allows for theological monogenism and biological polygenism at the same time:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8931157&postcount=1327
 
adoglover1956 said:
I don’t have a problem with the fall but if we have 2 and only 2 original parents that means that incest is the origin of the human race. Inbreeding causes many serious defects and these are not the exception but rather the rule.
Click to expand...
As post 123 said – “Because lizards and man are two different species.”
Can we agree that man is a different species from all other species? Can we agree that the normal way of propagating a species is to breed within the same species?

From the Catholic position, we acknowledge God as the Creator of the human species. For the exact description of the human species, please start with paragraph 355 in the* Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. C*ontinue reading until your curiosity is satisfied. scborromeo.org/ccc/para/355.htm

The Catholic position is that the human person is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. Human nature, in itself, unites both the material *and *spiritual worlds. In addition, it is the Creator Himself Who directly and immediately creates the individual spiritual soul. It is not somehow produced by the parents.

The importance of the spiritual soul cannot be underestimated. It is precisely because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living human body. Spirit and matter, existing in humans, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature, a single living person, you and I.

Returning to the world of lizards and dinosaurs, for the most part propagation of species is considered to be random matting. Though lifelong love birds do exist. ❤️

When we look at the first three chapters of Genesis, we find the emphasis is on one very, very special breeding pair, Adam and Eve. They have the ability to propagate their own species according to Genesis 1: 28 "God blessed them, saying: “Be fertile and multiply…” So far so good?

Adam and Eve, being human, would have our genetics. Of course, Eve’s individual hair would not have all the colors of today’s population. And Adam would not have one brown eye and one blue eye. And their immune system would be basic.
It would take generations of migrations for their descendants’ genetics to adapt to environments, food sources, danger, etc. Beneficial gene mutations in their immune system would also occur as a way of keeping the body alive. Recent research showed that beneficial mutations are still occurring as certain populations live in extremely high altitudes.

We need to think of Adam and Eve as the first people having lots of children. To insure the proper transmission of human nature, their children married those who had the same human nature, bone of their bones and flesh of their flesh. In other words, the siblings married each other while their parents Adam and Eve continued to give birth to more children. This is known as overlapping generations. For example, due to the blessed fertility (remember Genesis 1: 28) a nephew could be older than his uncle. I have two friends in overlapping generations. I sincerely doubt that this happens currently.

Keep in mind that the children of Adam are the first offspring in a new and separate species. No matter how their anatomy came to be, God is still the Creator of their unique nature. As for genetics, did God start fresh with Adam and Eve? Or did He use “matter” from archaic beings? The correct answer is not all that important because the bottom line is that the genetics of both Adam and Eve were complimentary. God’s blessing is upon them.

Modern genetic studies tell us that mutations, both beneficial and deleterious in the code consisting of Adenine, Thymine, Guanine, Cytosine take time. Those who have seen sequences of DNA can become cross-eyed at the millions of the letters of A,T, G ,C which are the work horses of genes. Just kidding about the eyes.

Obviously, Adam’s children would have inherited complementary genes and not those serious defects which show up in current populations. As science demonstrates, major gene mutations take time to develop and become fixed in a population.

Practically speaking, because of the “chance” way genetic heredity can work, it took a large number of generations which experienced certain kinds of diseases before the scientific cause was recognized. As society realized the cause, in order to avoid the disease, it banned marriage within chosen degrees. Even so, the law of chance regarding transmission of certain genes prevailed. And throughout history, cousins have been able to marry cousins.

Since dramatic change is not part of the first possible mutation of a gene, the children of Adam and Eve could marry within the blessing given in *Genesis 1: 28. *Each couple born of Adam and Eve would begin their own separate genetic line of descendants. These separate lines would beget “cousins” who would beget their own separate genetic line of descendents.

Due to overlapping generations and the many separate genetic lines of descendents with their own individual chance mutations both good and bad, the need for brother to marry sister disappeared quickly. Eventually, to prevent certain genetic diseases, laws regarding proper marriage partners were put in place.

Blessings,
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.
 
PumpkinSeed said:
Sorry, what were you trying to say?
Click to expand...
Evolution is currently under ban in these forums. The title of the thread is - if not evolution…

I have answered the question of the thread and provided an alternative in IDvolution.

Others would like to drag us back into the forbidden area. IDvolution is a better solution.
 
Farsight001 said:
A citation for what? He provided the comment regarding Benedict’s words. I explained them. What is there to cite?
Click to expand...
Originally Posted by Farsight001 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
No. At best Benedict holds an agnostic position on the subject. He was expressing personal opinion, not binding doctrine. He happens to be incorrect, too. Its quite possible to conduct experiments in a controlled environment to confirm evolution. It happens all the time.

I put in bold the flimsy statements which need the research citations. Plural, because you declared “It happens all the time.” Now if you are referring to research on fast acting bacteria, I would still appreciate your citations since it would be interesting to compare it with other forms of animal life. Thank you.

However, I do not believe that Pope Benedict considers you and me as bacteria.😉

Perhaps, it is time to inject some common sense when talking about our first, sole parents. A bit of common sense would reveal that those mountains of evidence have foothills of assumptions.
 
adoglover1956 said:
I don’t have a problem with the fall but if we have 2 and only 2 original parents that means that incest is the origin of the human race. Inbreeding causes many serious defects and these are not the exception but rather the rule.
Click to expand...
The story of Adam and Eve is mystical and alagorical. It should be read as theological and real truth but not as a story book “play-by-play”.

Genesis is written as a theological and mystical text, not a historical one. The world is not 6000 years old.
 
grannymh said:
As post 123 said – “Because lizards and man are two different species.”
Can we agree that man is a different species from all other species? Can we agree that the normal way of propagating a species is to breed within the same species?
Click to expand...
Well, there is evidence that humans could produce offspring with chimps or bonobos even though the prospect is rather creppy.
 
ringil said:
Genesis is written as a theological and mystical text, not a historical one.
Click to expand...
Pope St. Pius X disagrees with you: “I: Do the various exegetical systems excogitated and defended under the guise of science to exclude the literal historical sense of the first three chapters of Genesis rest on a solid foundation?
Answer: In the negative.” (Replies of the Pontifical Biblical Commission)

So does Bl. Pope John Paul II: 390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents. (Catechism of the Catholic Church)

The theological-mystical meaning presupposes the historicity of the text. In other words, what is described in Genesis actually happened and is the basis of Christianity (no fall, no need for redemption).
 
Marocchino said:
So does Bl. Pope John Paul II: 390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents. (Catechism of the Catholic Church)

The theological-mystical meaning presupposes the historicity of the text. In other words, what is described in Genesis actually happened and is the basis of Christianity (no fall, no need for redemption).
Click to expand...
The CCC states just what I wrote. Yes, an event certainly occurred, the fall occurred, but I contest it doesn’t need to be read totally literally. The book of Genesis is indeed true.

I believe this is an excellent link describing a more Catholic and less Protestant way of reading the Bible.

wordonfire.org/WoF-Blog/WoF-Blog/March-2011/Theology-How-Should-the-Book-of-Genesis-Be-Interp.aspx
 
grannymh said:
Thank you for your link to Catholic Answers. catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution

Here is its 3rd requirement for Catholic theistic evolution.

Adam and Eve: Real People

It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).

In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The *Catechism *states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).
Note that the reference in the last paragraph is to the* Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition*.

For truly interesting information about real human nature, check out parargraphs 355 -421.
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/355.htm

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
Click to expand...
Edam and Eve being real people doesn’t have anything to do with the belief in evolution.

I posted the part about the Church’s position in evolution but then provided the link and said “please see full source for more detail.”

I was assuming everyone had read it. 🤷
 
grannymh said:
As post 123 said – “Because lizards and man are two different species.” [snip]
Click to expand...
If Adam and Eve’s children could mate without fear of adverse genetic or moral consequences, then couldn’t Adam also mate with his daughters and grand daughters and Eve with her sons and grand sons?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top