In U.S., 46% Hold Creationist View of Human Origins

[tqualey]

Hi, Lost,

There is more evidence in your posts of fantasy worlds rather then Scriptural content, references to the Early Church Fathers or doctrine from the Magesterium. There is punishment for sin - prior to Adam and Eve’s sin, God punished Satan and the angels that followed his disobedience.

In the NT there are multiple references of where there is punishment for sin - for, “…the wages of sin is death…” (Rom 6:23) and this death takes place with never-ending torment, “…where the worm dies not…” (Mark 9:48) and “…there will be the weeping and ganashing of teeth…” (Matt 13:42, Lk 13:28). These are just a few examples. Hell is real - and not a fantasy. The punishments of Hell are real and not a fantasy. Eternity is real and this is where all of us will be after death. The exact location of where we will be spending eternity is something quite real and not a fantasy.

Your arguments are seriously flawed - and really, it looks like this fantasy world has quite a hold on your posts. May I suggest working with the ECF and the Magisterium to help in the development of Catholic thought?

God bless

No. It didn’t.

Nothing have of what you said addressed my point. For instance, we all know that punishment for sin is not the result of any action on God’s part. Divine wrath is an attribute of pagan deities, not our God. Superstition leads to similar belief that we are merely mortals waiting to be punished and rewarded for deeds the gods found pleasing and displeasing respectively. Catholic theology teaches a different world.

There is nothing worth being civil for when I’ve seen tactics like yours a hundred times over. Fundamentalists have done it. Atheists have done it. Now you’re doing it.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Your arguments are seriously flawed - and really, it looks like this fantasy world has quite a hold on your posts. May I suggest working with the ECF and the Magisterium to help in the development of Catholic thought?

Again, more strawmen. Are you so desperate to come into St. Francis’ defense that you’re committing great oversight?

Punishment =/= I are God! Worship and obey me or I throw youz in hellfire!

Such atheist caricatures of God are born from the mind of literalists! We wouldn’t be dealing with these ridiculous reductions to our theology if the mythic view of our religion wasn’t gaining such needless support.

You claim to sermon me on basic theology but you forget the basics that punishment doesn’t come from God but from the consequences of sin. Something so basic yet you overlook it purely for the sake of coming into some poster’s defense.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Lost,

St Francis really does not need any defense from me - he has been giving you accurate Catholic theology. He is really doing quite well. I can not say the same for you, however.

It would appear right now you are denying the existence of Hell. Please note, the existence of Hell is a matter of Faith - and here is a reference from the Catholic Catechism that will give you the information you seem to either lack or chose to ignroe: scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a12.htm

This is no straw-man argument from me - but, you may want to seriously look at your own posts on how you have mischaracterized others and the arguments they have presented to your fantasy world interpretation of life and God.

God bless

Again, more strawman. Are you so desperate to come into St. Francis’ defense that you’re committing great oversight?

Punishment =/= I are God! Worship and obey me or I throw youz in hellfire!

Such atheist caricatures of God are born from the mind of literalists! We wouldn’t be dealing with these ridiculous reductions to our theology if the mythic view of our religion wasn’t gaining such needless support.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

This is no straw-man argument from me - but, you may want to seriously look at your own posts on how you have mischaracterized others and the arguments they have presented to your fantasy world interpretation of life and God.

Really? I deny hell now? That’s your third straw man in a row.

Okay, now’s my turn to accuse you of false witness. I didn’t deny hell. Reread what I said. The fact that you say your friend gave an accurate view of Catholic theology only proves my point. You consider him an ally and me the enemy. It’s so easy for everyone to see.

Forget the fact that you even read the guy’s posts and read MINE word for word.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Lost,

I’ve said all I can say and provided you with legitimate references.

Your on-going attack of those who do not agree with you is really not in keeping with CAF guidelines - and this is something you know. In my opinion your rants and insults have become tedious. Life is short - I suggest you get one in the real and not the fantasy world.

I have concluded responding to your posts on this thread.

God bless

Really? I deny hell now? That’s your third straw man in a row.

Okay, now’s my turn to accuse you of false witness. I didn’t deny hell. Reread what I said. The fact that you say your friend gave an accurate view of Catholic theology only proves my point. You consider him an ally and me the enemy. It’s so easy for everyone to see.

Forget the fact that you even read the guy’s posts and read MINE word for word.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

I’ve said all I can say and provided you with legitimate references.God bless

And my posts can be read word for word. I ask you again, where did I deny hell? Where did I say hell did not exist?

Your lies and misrepresentation are against CAF guidelines too. So is saying God Bless while at the same time insulting me and my arguments. Pot, meet kettle.

 

[Robertanthony]

I apologize if it’s been dealt with before but given the sheer size of this thread, I don’t feel like reviewing them all. What are we to make of all the pretty in-detail accounts of how long Adam lived (close to a millenium, I have to find out what his diet and physical regimen were), how many years seperated Adam from Noah and so on. I understand we’re not to take things at face value, why give such a details if it turns out that they don’t add up. I’m beginning to think that God likes to confuse us. Would it have been so difficult to include a simple description of the big bang, along with a child-adapted description of how humans came about, general timeline (with a billion year margin of error). Why would it say Adam lived to be 900 some years if it was not so? If it’s written black on white that Adam lived that many years, that he had 500 children (made up number), that Noah lived that many years after him (the Flood had to happen during Noah’s lifetime-- sorry for stating the obvious), why would I not believe that? Are all dates and people.s ages in the OT to be taken as seriously as “Mermaids could live up to 400 years”. If The OT (and the Book of Genesis) is inspired by God, why would it state a fact plainly that was not factually accurate. There is no denying that if you add up all the numbers, dates, you do end up with a 6000 year old Earth. Why would God mislead us that way?

 

[Robertanthony]

And my posts can be read word for word. I ask you again, where did I deny hell? Where did I say hell did not exist?

Your lies and misrepresentation are against CAF guidelines too. So is saying God Bless while at the same time insulting me and my arguments. Pot, meet kettle.

LW, I’M not saying you are, but you do sound like someone who systematically doubts any supernatural event. Can you name a few examples of supernatural occurrences in the OT or the NT that you believe really happened. Parting of the Red Sea, staff becoming a snake, mannah, multiplication of the bread and fish, resurrection of Lazarrus. When Jesus would drive demons out of people, do you think it had more to do with psychiatry than the demonic? Did the OT prophet Elijah really set a heap of soaking wet wood on fire (did that to prove God’s existence and power)? Thank you.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

There is no denying that if you add up all the numbers, dates, you do end up with a 6000 year old Earth. Why would God mislead us that way?

Like all ancient peoples, it’s clear that the Hebrews were heavily influenced by the culture of myth and mysticism shared by many other civilizations at the time the first books of the Bible were written.

Prior to that, it’s common knowledge that these were all oral traditions but that only makes the mythic influence more likely because all oral traditions bear this trait.

And if all else fails for you, meditate on the fact that there are Catholics like me spending 9 hours a day writing online content for call centers instead of going around rescuing little Christian missionaries from evil pagan sorcerers and mythological monsters.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

LW, I’M not saying you are, but you do sound like someone who systematically doubts any supernatural event.

So does the Church when it’s investigating miraculous claims. Look at Medugorje. Sad case right there. An even worst case was Bayside.

Can you name a few examples of supernatural occurrences in the OT or the NT that you believe really happened. Parting of the Red Sea, staff becoming a snake, mannah, multiplication of the bread and fish, resurrection of Lazarrus. When Jesus would drive demons out of people, do you think it had more to do with psychiatry than the demonic? Did the OT prophet Elijah really set a heap of soaking wet wood on fire (did that to prove God’s existence and power)? Thank you.

Jesus can’t be compared to the other prophets. That’s like making Him equal to the saints. It’s no surprise He could do so many miraculous things because you’re talking about someone who was BOTH fully divine and fully human. Others are just human.

And frankly, let’s face it. Jesus did not rain fire and brimstone on pagan Rome when He was among us. He constantly placed more value on those who believed without constant recourse to signs and wonders.

That tells me something about wanting the world to be some land straight out of the fantasy genre.

 

[Robertanthony]

So does the Church when it’s investigating miraculous claims. Look at Medugorje. Sad case right there. An even worst case was Bayside.

Very good. Now, I understand you put little if no stock at all in the veracity of what we can read in the OT. Your point about Jesus having a dual nature is well taken. Now back to the OT, does your belief in an actual couple of first humans/parents (Adam and Eve) come from the CC saying it is mandatory belief, is that your standard? In other words, pretty much everything in the oT are tall tales except for this one fact: the actual and undeniable fact that Adam and Eve walked this Earth and were the 1st human beings to do so? Monogenism is also compulsory belief for Catholics, if genetics proved beyond reasonable doubt that the genetic bottleneck never got that low, what would you say?

 

[grannymh]

Hi, Grannymh,

Why do you say this?

Originally Posted by grannymh forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
I may be wrong (which would be the first time ) but it seems to me that creationists do not necessarily go into the depth of Adam’s existence pre-Fall the way Catholicism does. .

Adam and Eve being created by God in a state of perfect happiness is literally right there in black and white. Personally, I do not spend a lot of time with the Creationist approach because I think they are not giving God credit for All He Can Do.

God bless

Unless I know why you are saying Adam and Eve were created in a state of perfect happiness, I will contest that. In my estimation, they were not in a state of perfect happiness which in Catholic terminology would equal being in the presence of the Beatific Vision. The difference between Adam and Eve walking in friendship with God and being in the presence of the Beatific Vision is huge and is related to all kinds of Catholic doctrines which may not part of some of the other Christian faiths which preach “creationism”.

 

[Robertanthony]

Unless I know why you are saying Adam and Eve were created in a state of perfect happiness, I will contest that. In my estimation, they were not in a state of perfect happiness which in Catholic terminology would equal being in the presence of the Beatific Vision. The difference between Adam and Eve walking in friendship with God and being in the presence of the Beatific Vision is huge and is related to all kinds of Catholic doctrines which may not part of some of the other Christian faiths which preach “creationism”.

You mean at the moment when Lucifer started being too enamoured with himself and thinking he could overthrow God and be God instead, if at that moment, he had been shown Beatific Vision or experienced it for a fleeting moment, he would have given up his plan of rebellion and submitted to God, most likely not out of love for God but out of sheer, unadulterated, pure self-interest? Of course, this is mere speculation, theo-fiction, basically.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Grannymh,

The CCC provides a good answer - here is a link: vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p6.htm Take a look at #374.

In #376, the Catechism states:

“By the radiance of this grace all dimensions of man’s life were confirmed. As long as he remained in the divine intimacy…”

Now, maybe I jumped the gun here when I said Perfect Happiness - but, I did not mean the Beatific Vision. Before sin, Adam and Eve lived in Paradise (which really seems like a very happy place to be). Before sin, the only request for something that Adam found lacking (we now see this may not have been ‘Perfect’ Happiness) was he needed a helpmate like himself. God provided Eve - and Adam seems to be quite happy.

All I am addressing is the state of Adam and Eve before sin. They lived very happy lives with all of nature in harmony.

God bless

Unless I know why you are saying Adam and Eve were created in a state of perfect happiness, I will contest that. In my estimation, they were not in a state of perfect happiness which in Catholic terminology would equal being in the presence of the Beatific Vision. The difference between Adam and Eve walking in friendship with God and being in the presence of the Beatific Vision is huge and is related to all kinds of Catholic doctrines which may not part of some of the other Christian faiths which preach “creationism”.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Robertanthony,

A totally literal interpretation of the beginning chapters of Genesis probably brings about a lot of confusion and skeptical conclusions. But, the issue really isn’t, 'Why didn’t God write this in a different way, or include things that we can relate to (e.g., the Big Bang Theory)?" The real answer is that God chose the way He determined to be the Best Way for us - and that would be all of mankind throughout all of time - not just 21st Century man.

I think the ‘take home message’ from Genesis is that God created all things freely and out of Love. Everything He created was good. Sin entered, through the exercise of man’s free will, and the picture of the harmony that had be produced by God was shattered.

If the Bible is approached - not as a Faith Document - but as an alagorical tale with misleading and contradictory stories, then I think there will be difficuties in understanding God’s role in Creation - and Salvation - in every page. I honestly can not provide a convincing explanation for the Creationist view of how and why God acted as He did. There are real issues that Creationists can not address - but, this does not mean that they are wrong. The Catholic Church does not condemn the Creationists world-view - after all, they do believe that God is the princial cause of everything. Nor does the Church condemn that God-focused Evoloutin view. Wh.at is condemned is the Atheistic model of creation because it totally negates God from Creation.

My suggestion, if you are still having problems with Genesis (or any other Book) is to seek out the writings of the Early Church Fathers on that particular topic. Learn what the ECF taught and see how it is the same as what the CC teaches today.

I hope this helps.

God bless

I apologize if it’s been dealt with before but given the sheer size of this thread, I don’t feel like reviewing them all. What are we to make of all the pretty in-detail accounts of how long Adam lived (close to a millenium, I have to find out what his diet and physical regimen were), how many years seperated Adam from Noah and so on. I understand we’re not to take things at face value, why give such a details if it turns out that they don’t add up. I’m beginning to think that God likes to confuse us. Would it have been so difficult to include a simple description of the big bang, along with a child-adapted description of how humans came about, general timeline (with a billion year margin of error). Why would it say Adam lived to be 900 some years if it was not so? If it’s written black on white that Adam lived that many years, that he had 500 children (made up number), that Noah lived that many years after him (the Flood had to happen during Noah’s lifetime-- sorry for stating the obvious), why would I not believe that? Are all dates and people.s ages in the OT to be taken as seriously as “Mermaids could live up to 400 years”. If The OT (and the Book of Genesis) is inspired by God, why would it state a fact plainly that was not factually accurate. There is no denying that if you add up all the numbers, dates, you do end up with a 6000 year old Earth. Why would God mislead us that way?

 

[grannymh]

Could you elaborate on this? Mankind is capable of dreaming up many worlds. We wouldn’t have so many interesting myths and stories if otherwise.

Yes I know this is core doctrine but that’s not what I’m contesting here. I’m just troubled by how literal creationists seek to justify the very worldview that causes the delusion people accuse bookworms and gamers alike of falling into.

To really simplify, I don’t necessarily disagree with the finer points of theology that you’re pointing out. My focus is purely on the physical, material (and in my personal opinion, dull) side of reality.

In my old neighborhood there was an old “saying” something that Confucius might say – – Before one can really get to know another person, she or he has to walk a mile in that person’s moccasins. Part of that is getting to know how language is being used. Your signature, “Anime Writer and Learning Catholic” tells me you know what I am talking about.

In my personal opinion, your comment above – “My focus is purely on the physical, material (and in my personal opinion, dull) side of reality.” is a challenge for me. Maybe the dull side of reality bothered Adam. I could make a case for that and then describe a world that Adam could have dreamed. Or maybe Adam saw beyond his current material, physical environment and dreamed about leaving it all aside for something better. Furthermore, it could be possible for Adam to trip over an innocent rock and get a nasty bruise.

Fortunately, I need to lay aside the challenge due to some heavy commitments.:yup:

Will continue to talk with you much later.

 

[Not_Sure_1]

Well as you yourself have put it, the ‘nitty-gritty of research’ comes to mind. People aren’t willing to hear scientific explanations of OT events (not just the creation events mind you). It diminishes the literal value.

For instance, as with human origins, they reject the evolutionary development of the human body in favor of being made literally out of earth. This isn’t symbolism. They seriously insist that we’re made out of clay and God just magically turned into all into organic flesh.

In order for Evolution to occur, death must occur. But death did not come into the world until original sin (this is Church doctrine), therefore Evolution (if it did occur) could not occur until after the fall of Adam and Eve.

 

[vz71]

There is no denying that if you add up all the numbers, dates, you do end up with a 6000 year old Earth. Why would God mislead us that way?

Perhaps.
But there is question these numbers are supposed to be used in that fashion.

God is not going to mislead us, but our understanding of God’s word may.

 

[vz71]

He constantly placed more value on those who believed without constant recourse to signs and wonders.

Nevertheless, Jesus’ life was full of such signs and wonders.

 

[Not_Sure_1]

Could there be death before sin? No (that is doctrine)

Did Adam and Eve exist (directly created beings, one couple, from which every man on earth descends)? Yes (that is doctrine)

Did Abel exist? Yes (Christ mentioned his existence and his murder to be just as real as the death of Zechariah)

If the earth is millions of years old (or billions as they suggest), but no animal could die before the fall of Adam and Eve, either the world filled with animals before Adam and Eve, or they did not reproduce. Either that or Adam and Eve and humanity must have lived just as long as the animals. and Natural Selection couldn’t have worked before the Fall because it needed death, which could not exist until Sin came into the world.