E
edwest211
Guest
The Church limits what may be allegory, and defines what is actual Divine revelation. That will always be the ongoing stumbling block. No way around it.
- Status
M
mVitus
Guest
A
Aloysium
Guest
And, the creation of matter, different kinds of plants and animals and we ourselves is something altogether different.
I doubt anyone will say.
With no one other then random mutation in the driver’s seat there is no telling how long it will take to go from one point to the next.
Personally, I so not believe there is sufficient time in the universe.
But then I also have no problem believing God has been creating and continues to create.
B
buffalo
Guest
Trillion trillion years.
Essential reading…a trillion trillion years or more
Uh OH! Essential reading for evo supporters.
When Theory and Experiment Collide
idvolution.blogspot.com
Essential reading…a trillion trillion years or more
Uh OH! Essential reading for evo supporters.
When Theory and Experiment Collide
Essential reading.....a trillion trillion years or more
IDvolution - Where faith and reason intersect. - intelligent design Jim Serafin
idvolution.blogspot.com
A
Aloysium
Guest
Although we intellectually separate the spirit from the body, human beings are a unity.
Adam would have to be conceived, if that was the route to his appearance on earth, as a human being. Living organisms are a complex of biochemical processes, much simpler forms of being, organized by the soul that is the reality of the particular being. My cat is itself, its body and catness subsumed by what it is in itself, one being with specific insticts and physical structure, whole, with which I can relate and who relates to me. While I have an eternal soul, grounded in the ever-present here and now, that is ultimately God’s Here and Now, let’s call him Felix, exists as far as I can discern, completely in the moment, its existence as fleeting as anything else time. A circle is always a circle and distinct from a square in spite of the fact that we can imagine one transforming into the other. There are no in-between states in reality.
Just because we distance ourselves from others because they look different does not mean they are not human. Along those lines, I just want to point out that you’d likely agree that to call someone with a trisomy or other genetic disorder not human would be extremely cruel.
Matter, let’s say an atom, as I understand it, is also a form of being although far less complex in itself and its relationship with other atoms. God’s breath gives life to, organizes the beingness, instinctual and material, of our components in accordance with who He is - Love, the will, goodness and knowledge of perfect relationality.
We die because we have damaged our relationship with Him by placing ourselves first. It matters that we die because we are made eternal, and while fulfilled in knowing God, cannot truly be ourselves disembodied. Matter is like information or data to the processor; it is the spirit that is truly real. The eternal spirit which we are has space and time flow through it, as it is transformed in the journey wihin ourselves, individually and together along the Way to God, that is God.
Not as Darwinism sees it. Perhaps it happened in a way something like what you say, which does fit better with the actual science.
I would think that Adam’s DNA would have to be perfect in the sense that he was optimally equiped to participate in the environment that was the earth as Eden. No hominid imperfections, right? Whatever. Can we agree that he was created using the information contained in lesser life forms. The issue then may boil down to whether he was born with a belly button or not. Does it matter?
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
I’m seeing this in the scientific literature. The amount of time required, or assumed, is longer than originally thought. The innovations are more complex than originally thought, requiring a lot more time. But, I suspect, this will be ignored. Must “stay on message.”
M
mVitus
Guest
What I’m getting from you as I understand it is that you’re emphasizing a true human is the union of body and soul. That at Adam’s conception he was a true human. You’re pointing out that you, as a human, have an immortal soul, whereas your cat does not, termed an ‘in the moment’ soul. And you’re saying that there is no in-between from an immortal soul and the in the moment soul.
If that understanding is correct, I agree. Going from what I’ve said before, Adam’s mother would’ve had an in the moment soul and not been a true human, but still sharing biological similarities. And Adam would’ve had an immortal soul from his conception and been a true human.
And in regards to your circle and square analogy, I’ll try making one of my own. Let’s imagine two near-identical boxes. One of the boxes you fill with with sand and use as it as a doorstop. In the other you put gold coins and use it as a treasure chest. For this analogy the boxes represent biological bodies and souls are represented by the sand and gold. While outward appearances would say they’re the same, they are fundamentally different in their realities as one is a doorstop where the other is a treasure chest.
And to now really stretch this analogy to its limits, let’s imagine that the first box you made was a few sticks tied together and then filled with sand. Then you copied it, but with a slight difference. Time goes on maybe your boxes start being nailed together, you started sanding them, but they’re still filled with sand (and are doorstop) until finally you’re making that box you fill with gold and have a treasure box. You’ll look back and see a progression that greatly changed from the first one you made and be able to say the boxes went through the different stages. So in that regards they’re similar. But one day they stopled being door stops and started being treasure boxes. That’s kind of how I view evolution. Our pre-Adam ancestors were a large part of our physical heritage, our door stops, but then Adam came along, filled with gold, an immortal soul, and we started being treasure boxes. Physically there’s not a lot of difference between us and those last few door stops, but spiritually we are wholly distinct from our predecessors. I wish I could’ve found a better analogy, but I hope it helps with understanding my view.
E
edwest211
Guest
This conclusion about Adam goes against Church teaching.
"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).”
"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).”
M
mVitus
Guest
And the possibility of Neanderthals having been true humans is something that has lead me to, fruitlessly so far, look into the possibility of Adam and Eve having been before the split of homo sapiens and Neanderthals.
With evolution, it states the scientific aspect of it. It studies the material world and it’s up to us to say the ‘why’ it happened. For example when Father Lemaître came up with the Big Bang Theory for the origins if the universe, he still knew God is the creator. The big bang just showed a ‘how.’
In terms of perfect DNA, it’d depend on what perfect means. What we view as imperfections post-Fall could’ve been perfection pre-Fall. Not to mention the possibility of continuous miracles. So I really can’t say anything on genetic perfection. As for using information from a lower life form, his parents being non-true human would necessitate that. And as for whether or not he had a belly button, theologically it doesn’t matter. But I’d say he did, by virtue of my view that evolution occured.
M
mVitus
Guest
Where did I contradict any of that? Because from my point of view, I did not contradict anything.
E
edwest211
Guest
Right here:
“Our pre-Adam ancestors were a large part of our physical heritage, our door stops, but then Adam came along, filled with gold, an immortal soul, and we started being treasure boxes. Physically there’s not a lot of difference between us and those last few door stops, but spiritually we are wholly distinct from our predecessors. I wish I could’ve found a better analogy, but I hope it helps with understanding my view.”
What ancestors? God just picked two random almost-humans and dropped souls into them?
“Our pre-Adam ancestors were a large part of our physical heritage, our door stops, but then Adam came along, filled with gold, an immortal soul, and we started being treasure boxes. Physically there’s not a lot of difference between us and those last few door stops, but spiritually we are wholly distinct from our predecessors. I wish I could’ve found a better analogy, but I hope it helps with understanding my view.”
What ancestors? God just picked two random almost-humans and dropped souls into them?
M
mVitus
Guest
What I was saying: Two pre-true humans did the deed and God created individually an immortal soul for Adam. Adam was never a non-true human. He was a true human from conception.
E
edwest211
Guest
Who are these “Two pre-true humans…”? Again, you’re saying that beings that were pre-humans conceived a human being with a soul? What is your reference for this?
B
buffalo
Guest
We are learning just how smart early man was.
M
mVitus
Guest
Well, evolutionary science would suggest it. And also, the Catholic Church allows for one to hold that man’s body evolved. The soul of course is individually created by God. I only claim evolution on the part of the body.
From the section “The Catholic Position.”
@Glark
Also from that source in the part labelled “The Catholic Position”
From the section “The Catholic Position.”
@Glark
Also from that source in the part labelled “The Catholic Position”
That may be something that dispermits your view of a second creation using stuff from the first.
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
It does not allow it. Eve came from Adam.
M
mVitus
Guest
But for Adam, it does allow.
B
buffalo
Guest
Adam was specially created.
Lastly, He formed man from the slime of the earth, so created and constituted in body as to be immortal and impassible, not, however, by the strength of nature, but by the bounty of God. Man’s soul He created to His own image and likeness; gifted him with free will, and tempered all his motions and appetites so as to subject them, at all times, to the dictates of reason. He then added the admirable gift of original righteousness, and next gave him dominion over all other animals. By referring to the sacred history of Genesis the pastor will easily make himself familiar with these things for the instruction of the faithful (Catechism of the Council of Trent).
PBC 1909
This passage upholds the Lateran IV doctrine that all things were created by God “in the beginning of time.”
Lastly, He formed man from the slime of the earth, so created and constituted in body as to be immortal and impassible, not, however, by the strength of nature, but by the bounty of God. Man’s soul He created to His own image and likeness; gifted him with free will, and tempered all his motions and appetites so as to subject them, at all times, to the dictates of reason. He then added the admirable gift of original righteousness, and next gave him dominion over all other animals. By referring to the sacred history of Genesis the pastor will easily make himself familiar with these things for the instruction of the faithful (Catechism of the Council of Trent).
PBC 1909
- “The creation of all things wrought by God in the beginning of time”
This passage upholds the Lateran IV doctrine that all things were created by God “in the beginning of time.”
- “The special creation of man”
- “The formation of the first woman from the first man”
E
edwest211
Guest
I don’t agree. A possibility is not a fact. And Eve was created from Adam’s side as taught by the Church. She was fashioned by God, not born in a conventional way.
"While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution. "
Adam and Eve were special creations. Pre-humans do not exist. They are, or were, animals more like apes. That a man could be born from pre-human parents has no basis in fact. It is conjecture.
"While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution. "
Adam and Eve were special creations. Pre-humans do not exist. They are, or were, animals more like apes. That a man could be born from pre-human parents has no basis in fact. It is conjecture.
Last edited:
- Status