F
fisherman_carl
Guest
About Catholicism and Evolution Theory. I was listening to a Catholic Apologist on EWTN radio and he was saying that Catholicism rejects Evolutionary theory as it is now being that it is from an atheistic point of view and does not acknowledge the possibility of God. It does not reject science and says that God could have used evolutionary processes to create us. But it does not say what we should believe about evolution, only that it rejects the idea that we are all here due to chance rather than by a divine creator.
I have studied evolution in detail in the past. My personal opinion on the idea of chance as an explanation for the formation of the universe is that it does not adequetly explain things. The possibility of random chance being responsible for the creation of the world is perhaps zero in my mind. There is no way to really determine what those numbers are. But we know intuitively that they get smaller for every random event that needs to occur during the universe formation. And when you think of how many billions of random events would have needed to occur in order to form the universe the random chance theory becomes less probable to the point of it not even worth considering.
To illustrate my point I will borrow someone elses illustration that I heard on Catholic radio. It went something like this.
Two men were walking on the beach. One was an atheist and the other a Christian. As they were walking they came upon a beautiful sand castle. It was perfectly formed with little windows, tiny little rooms inside. It had little figurines occupying the castle and flags flying up top. Now, did the atheist say, ‘wow what a castle. It occurred because of wind and waves eroding the sand over 1000’s of years with many random weather events causing it to come into shape.’
‘No, that would be ridiculous’, said the Christian. It’s obvious there was an intelligent creator that made this castle.
It would be ridiculous to our minds to think that such a beautiful sand castle could randomly appear. It would be such a low probability that it would not even be worth considering. Yet the probability that we are all here from random chance is even less than the sand castle. And the end result, being us, even more spectacular, and is therefore also ridiculous, to conclude as the result of random chance. No, the probable conclusion is a creator.
There is too much uncertainty and low probability for random chance to be a real consideration. I believe this alternative theory exists because atheists want to justify their belief that God doesn’t exist, not because there is anything particularly more logical about it. In my mind it would be more logical to assume there is an intelligent creator just like in the sand castle illustration. And if there is a creator then it would make sense to me that we would want to know this creator. That we would do everything possible while we still have the chance to get to know him.
God Bless
I have studied evolution in detail in the past. My personal opinion on the idea of chance as an explanation for the formation of the universe is that it does not adequetly explain things. The possibility of random chance being responsible for the creation of the world is perhaps zero in my mind. There is no way to really determine what those numbers are. But we know intuitively that they get smaller for every random event that needs to occur during the universe formation. And when you think of how many billions of random events would have needed to occur in order to form the universe the random chance theory becomes less probable to the point of it not even worth considering.
To illustrate my point I will borrow someone elses illustration that I heard on Catholic radio. It went something like this.
Two men were walking on the beach. One was an atheist and the other a Christian. As they were walking they came upon a beautiful sand castle. It was perfectly formed with little windows, tiny little rooms inside. It had little figurines occupying the castle and flags flying up top. Now, did the atheist say, ‘wow what a castle. It occurred because of wind and waves eroding the sand over 1000’s of years with many random weather events causing it to come into shape.’
‘No, that would be ridiculous’, said the Christian. It’s obvious there was an intelligent creator that made this castle.
It would be ridiculous to our minds to think that such a beautiful sand castle could randomly appear. It would be such a low probability that it would not even be worth considering. Yet the probability that we are all here from random chance is even less than the sand castle. And the end result, being us, even more spectacular, and is therefore also ridiculous, to conclude as the result of random chance. No, the probable conclusion is a creator.
There is too much uncertainty and low probability for random chance to be a real consideration. I believe this alternative theory exists because atheists want to justify their belief that God doesn’t exist, not because there is anything particularly more logical about it. In my mind it would be more logical to assume there is an intelligent creator just like in the sand castle illustration. And if there is a creator then it would make sense to me that we would want to know this creator. That we would do everything possible while we still have the chance to get to know him.
God Bless