Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part 4.0

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I do not think incompatibility with Scripture is flawed at all. Faith and Reason flow from the very same source God. It is a human reasoning failure that is the problem, particularly, “we cannot let the Divine foot in the door” a priori bias.

The science convinced me. Evolution is not empirical and is a philosophy.

Research is good. The church took no position in Humani Generis other than “go ahead, have at it”. Research all you want. The supernatural still exists.
 
Pope Benedict:

“VATICAN CITY (CNS) – Pope Benedict XVI said that far from being a product of chance the created world is an “intelligent project” that reflects a divine origin…"
 
Hugh_Farey said:
Techno2000: Thank you too. But are you speaking metaphorically? Had some earlier creature been watching, how might he have seen the ‘hand-crafting’ from clay? Are you suggesting that God took some kind of human form in order to dig up and mould the clay, and then ‘breathe’ on it? Or is that metaphorical, so perhaps whales formed from clay in situ, and then burrowed their way out into the sea?
Click to expand...
In the way he made a physical/material Adam… he did likewise for animals, all at the same time.Evolution can’t work because there was no food chain to fuel it.
 
Last edited:
Hugh_Farey said:
Fair enough. From clay then. With hands…
Click to expand...
Daniel 5

The Writing on the Wall :

Suddenly the fingers of a human hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall, near the lampstand in the royal palace. The king watched the hand as it wrote. His face turned pale and he was so frightened that his legs became weak and his knees were knocking.

But you did not honor the God who holds in his hand your life and all your ways. Therefore he sent the hand that wrote the inscription.
 
buffalo said:
I do not think incompatibility with Scripture is flawed at all.
Click to expand...
Then you and I must have heard two different arguments for incompatibility on this forum.
buffalo said:
Faith and Reason flow from the very same source God. It is a human reasoning failure that is the problem, particularly, “we cannot let the Divine foot in the door” a priori bias.
Click to expand...
First sentence is true. Whose reasoning? Again with the merry go round “some people think X”, therefore the theory is wrong. Off topic from “whether true or not”. Some people not thinking about God isn’t an argument for it being false.
buffalo said:
The science convinced me. Evolution is not empirical and is a philosophy.
Click to expand...
What is the one scientific reason that it is wrong, that is the end all be all?

Funny how no accredited University has ever placed evolution in a philosophy program, but in science classes.

It is clearly in the field of Biology, and inherent to it. From Encyclopedia Britannica “Evolution, theory in biology postulating that the various types of plants, animals, and other living things on Earth have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations. The theory of evolution is one of the fundamental keystones of modern biological theory.”

Again the argument for it being other than a scientific theory is weak, and far from common sense.
buffalo said:
The supernatural still exists.
Click to expand...
Sure, but evolution doesn’t take a position on spiritual things de facto, another merry go round.
buffalo said:
The church took no position in Humani Generis other than “go ahead, have at it”.
Click to expand...
Humani Generis said that the only necessary doctrine is that “souls are immediately created by God”, and that the idea that we evolved from other species whether true or false, is not against the faith. If it were against the Bible or Tradition, they would have not opened the Pandora’s box, which you can’t close once opened.
 
Last edited:
edwest211 said:
Pope Benedict XVI said that far from being a product of chance the created world is an “intelligent project” that reflects a divine origin
Click to expand...
I would agree and would expect that kind of teaching from the Church. There is nothing in the theory which says you have to say it is all chance, and there is no divine. It simply is not within the scope of science to say so.
 
Yup, man’s reasoning which everyone agrees is limited.

Simple - once again evolution is not observable, repeatable, or predictable.
anon65111186 said:
Humani Generis said that the only necessary doctrine is that “souls are immediately created by God”, and that the idea that we evolved from other species whether true or false, is not against the faith. If it were against the Bible or Tradition, they would have not opened the Pandora’s box, which you can’t close once opened.
Click to expand...
That is a very very loose interpretation. Plus it ignores the longstanding firm teaching on this.
 
buffalo said:
That is a very very loose interpretation. Plus it ignores the longstanding firm teaching on this.
Click to expand...
Fact 1. Church opens up to the possibility, depending on science and discussion, that we may come from another species of animal.
Fact 2. They give one firm rule for whatever conclusion may come, “souls are immediately created by God”.

What is your interpretation, based on those two facts?

Have some documents to back up “longstanding firm teaching” that it is impossible that we come from anything but clay in the strictest literal sense? We already have the pope saying that’s not so in the other quote.
 
Hugh_Farey said:
Fair enough. From clay then. With hands…
Click to expand...
Ephesians 2:10 :

For we are God’s masterpiece

Psalm 139:13

For you formed my inmost being. You knit me together in my mother’s womb.

Psalm 19:1:

The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.

Romans 1:20 :

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse.

Mark 10:6:

However, from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.'
 
Last edited:
“we may come from another species of animal”? Please provide a reference.
 
edwest211 said:
“we may come from another species of animal”? Please provide a reference.
Click to expand...
Humani Generis: “the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter”

another species of animal = 1. existing before Adam and Eve (pre-existent), 2. actual living animals (living matter)
 
Do you agree with my first two points?

Yup, man’s reasoning which everyone agrees is limited.

Simple - once again evolution is not observable, repeatable, or predictable.
 
Incorrect interpretation. Speaking generally, God would be molding living matter to make Adam. His subsequent actions are clear; He gave Adam a soul and breathed the breath of life into Adam. The word animal does not apply. Again, in general, I have noticed a strong attempt to shoehorn hominids into the Church’s understanding of evolution. That’s not going to happen.

Genesis 2:20

New International Version
“So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.”

New Living Translation
“He gave names to all the livestock, all the birds of the sky, and all the wild animals. But still there was no helper just right for him.”

English Standard Version
“The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him.”
 
No, no. You’re missing the point. From the beginning we were unicellular… Wait a minute. We weren’t.

Ed 🙂
 
buffalo said:
Yup, man’s reasoning which everyone agrees is limited.

Simple - once again evolution is not observable, repeatable, or predictable
Click to expand...
Man’s reasoning is limited, but can acheive great things.

One of the oldest scientific associations in America (169 years old) says this about the theory:

“A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not “guesses” but reliable accounts of the real world. The theory of biological evolution is more than “just a theory”. It is as factual an explanation of the universe as the atomic theory of matter or the germ theory of disease.”

The scientific community, nearly anywhere you go, has a pretty strong consensus that it is indeed testable, observable, and predictable. It is the foundation of modern biology.

This is what I meant when I said it is a bunch of laymen here sitting around philosophizing about something they have never studied in undergrad nor in graduate school, and are surely not scientists.

This is why I’m going off this thread, it is a merry go round.

You make a claim, I ask for details, your details are weak or unconvincing, we go round and round.
 
“foundation of modern biology”? Clearly, Biologists don’t have an evolution guidebook to figure things out. They sequence the genome and find out ‘it’s more complex than we thought.’ There is not even a hint, aside from assumptions, that evolution is the foundation of any work done by Biologists.
 
Produce the observable, repeatable and predictable experiments.

And we do not do science by consensus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top