Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True? Part Two

[buffalo]

God created everything “in its whole substance” from nothing (ex nihilo) in the beginning.
(Lateran IV; Vatican Council I)

Genesis does not contain purified myths. (Pontifical Biblical Commission 1909[1])

Genesis contains real history—it gives an account of things that really happened. (Pius XII)

Adam and Eve were real human beings—the first parents of all mankind. (Pius XII)

Polygenism (many “first parents”) contradicts Scripture and Tradition and is condemned. (Pius XII; 1994 Catechism, 360, footnote 226: Tobit 8:6—the “one ancestor” referred to in this Catechism could only be Adam.)

The “beginning” of the world included the creation of all things, the creation of Adam and Eve and the Fall (Jesus Christ [Mark 10:6]; Pope Innocent III; Blessed Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus).

The body of Eve was specially created from a portion of Adam’s body (Leo XIII). She could not have originated via evolution.

Various senses are employed in the Bible, but the literal obvious sense must be believed unless reason dictates or necessity requires (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus).

Adam and Eve were created upon an earthly paradise and would not have known death if they had remained obedient (Pius XII).

After their disobedience of God, Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden. But the Second Person of the Trinity would subsequently pay the ransom for fallen man (Nicene Creed).

Original Sin is a flawed condition inherited from Adam and Eve (Council of Trent).

The Universe suffers in travail ever since the sin of disobedience by Adam and Eve. (Romans 8, Vatican Council I).

We must believe any interpretation of Scripture that the Fathers taught unanimously on a matter of faith or morals (Council of Trent and Vatican Council I).

All the Fathers who wrote on the subject believed that the Creation days were no longer than 24-hour-days. (Consensus of the Fathers of the Church)

The work of Creation was finished by the close of Day Six, and nothing completely new has since been created—except for each human rational soul at conception (Vatican Council I)

St. Peter and Christ Himself in the New Testament confirmed the global Flood of Noah. It covered all the then high mountains and destroyed all land dwelling creatures except eight human beings andall kinds of non-human creatures aboard the Ark (Unam Sanctam, 1302)

The historical existence of Noah’s Ark is regarded as most important in typology, as central to Redemption. (1566 Catechism of the Council of Trent)

Evolution must not be taught as fact, but instead the pros and cons of evolution must be taught.
(Pius XII, Humani Generis)

Investigation into human “evolution” was allowed in 1950, but Pope Pius XII feared that an acceptance of evolutionism might adversely affect doctrinal beliefs.

 

[buffalo]

Dogmas

II. God the Creator

All that exists outside God was, in its whole substance, produced out of nothing by God.
God was moved by His goodness to create the world.
The world was created for the glorification of God.
The Three Divine Persons are one single, common principle of creation.
God created the world free from exterior compulsion and inner necessity.
God has created a good world.
The world had a beginning in time.
God alone created the world.
God keeps all created things in existence.
God, through His Providence, protects and guides all that He has created.
The first man was created by God.
Man consists of two essential parts - a material body and a spiritual soul.
The rational soul per se is the essential form of the body.
Every human being possesses an individual soul.
God has conferred on man a supernatural destiny.
Our first parents, before the fall, were endowed with sanctifying grace.
In addition to sanctifying grace, our first parents were endowed with the preternatural gift of bodily immortality.
Our first parents in Paradise sinned grievously through transgression of the Divine probationary commandment.
Through sin our first parents lost sanctifying grace and provoked the anger and the indignation of God.
Our first parents became subject to death and to the dominion of the devil.
Adam’s sin is transmitted to his posterity, not by imitation but by descent.
Original sin is transmitted by natural generation.
In the state of original sin man is deprived of sanctifying grace and all that this implies, as well as of the preternatural gifts of integrity.
Souls who depart this life in the state of original sin are excluded from the Beatific Vision of God.
In the beginning of time God created spiritual essences (angels) out of nothing.
The nature of angels is spiritual.
The evil spirits (demons) were created good by God; they became evil through their own fault.
The secondary task of the good angels is the protection of men and care for their salvation.
The devil possesses a certain dominion over mankind by reason of Adam’s sin.

 

[Bradskii]

Glark:

If one rejects belief in God and hence a Creator, then one really has no choice but to believe that life on earth evolved from microbes.

You don’t think God could arrange such an evolution? Do you need him to create in some other explicit, dramatic manner? Whose creation is it?

Glark: Gee, look at that Grand Canyon. And the Andes. Magnificent work, God.
God: Well, thank you for saying so. Just glad that you appreciate the effort.
Glark: And to think that it was all done instantly. Just a click of the fingers?
God: Eh? Click of the fingers? I think that you have been misinformed.
Glark: How so, God?
God: Look mate. I’m not some stage musician who just waves a wand and makes stuff appear. This isn’t a Penn and Teller show, for my sake!
Glark: But it says in the bible…
God: Look, buddy. I KNOW what it says in the bible. It’s my inspired word, remember? But it was written thousands of years ago. People then knew Jack about the natural world. What, do you reckon I should have put in a few pieces about plate techtonics or evolution or quantum mechanics? Seriously? Look, it was written for those times. It was not meant to be a science manual.
Glark: But…
God: But me no buts, chum. People now know how I did all this stuff. Good grief, I left all the evidence there so that they could work it out. Can I ask where you went to school?
Glark: School? Why?
God: I think your parents should ask for their money back. Though I’m guessing home school.

 

[buffalo]

Better than the evo indoctrinization camps that parents so willingly pay for.

Could we agree that empirical science only in the science classroom? Evolutionism and ID in philosophy class?

 

[anon65111186]

Interesting question. In a harmonious state the dino’s would not be an issue. In a corrupted state they would be.

That’s what I’m saying, they still existed when Adam and Eve had fallen then right? When did they go extinct if not 65 million year ago?

Dinosaur is a recently coined word. In the past they were called dragons. Scritpture described the one with a tail like a cedar.

Could they have existed in the time of the Old Testament then, if they are those dragons?

 

[anon65111186]

All the Fathers who wrote on the subject believed that the Creation days were no longer than 24-hour-days. (Consensus of the Fathers of the Church)

Scott Han, a very learned professor said point blank “you know 24 hours are not what was intended, because the sun and moon weren’t created until the fourth day”. Is Scott Han wrong?

St. Peter and Christ Himself in the New Testament confirmed the global Flood of Noah. It covered all the then high mountains and destroyed all land dwelling creatures except eight human beings andall kinds of non-human creatures aboard the Ark (Unam Sanctam, 1302)

Wouldn’t flying dinosaurs still exist then? Also science says the marine reptiles were affected in the cretaceous period like land and air dinosaurs. That wouldn’t fit the flood narrative though.

Did simply all those periods not exist in the time scientists say they do?

 

[anon65111186]

Evolution must not be taught as fact, but instead the pros and cons of evolution must be taught.

Right

The Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions (on evolution).

This must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith.

Then again, Humani Generis is nearly 70 years old and our knowledge has increased since, so maybe the Pope would speak differently today?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Dinosaur is a recently coined word. In the past they were called dragons. Scritpture described the one with a tail like a cedar.

It is only a guess that the creatures referred to are the same creature. Remember, dinosaur refers to a large group of creatures with very different appearances, some of which looked nothing like dragons as commonly conceived.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Leo XIII was mistaken.

 

[buffalo]

We have carbon dating that shows dinos at 20,000 to 40,000 before present.

There is more coming.

 

[buffalo]

He could be. 24 hour time period could have started out and the sun and moon timed to it.

Uniformatarianism is what got this all started. It held ground for 150 years or so. Now scientists admit catastrophism.

Perhaps using rock layers is not accurate.

 

[buffalo]

Yes, he would double down on creation and Revelation.

 

[goout]

goout:

The billions and billions of various viruses and bacteria living in the hospital are “selected” as disinfectants clean out the susceptible ones and leave behind those with ever increasing resistance.

Here we go again…extrapolating microevolution and macroevolution.

Please explain what you mean

 

[vz71]

.The problem I see is that this takes an eternity to do.

I see another problem.
While the fish is changing, so is the environment.

For the theory to hold, the fish must always be unsuited in some way to the environment.

But every nature documentary I ever see tells me how perfectly suited for its environment whatever creature is.

 

[vz71]

We agree a mirage appears to contain water.

But one can readily prove a mirage does not.
It is not so easy to do the same for a design.
Your analogy fails here.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Techno2000:

.The problem I see is that this takes an eternity to do.

I see another problem.
While the fish is changing, so is the environment.

For the theory to hold, the fish must always be unsuited in some way to the environment.

But every nature documentary I ever see tells me how perfectly suited for its environment whatever creature is.

Your interpretation of those nature documentaries is in error. No creature is absolutely perfect for its environment.

 

[Aloysium]

We have a pretty sophisticated physics, we know how the forces of nature work for the most part, though we can’t predict the weather. It’s not perfect, but we do know something.

Right there must be a connection between that and living things obviously, and is certainly explainable in scientific terms.

He is active though, what rules out tweaking things, making things better and better? Especially since He is always with us. He is tweaking our spiritual state to greater holiness, what says He isn’t doing the same in the material realm.

Very sophisticated to be sure. And, the way the business goes, new knowledge simply signals how little we know. But, yes we do know something.

The myriad of processes involved in the simplest unicellular organism are exquisitely organized and are pretty well documented. You introduce the world of physics into the discussion, and from that perspective of life arise two issues that work against evolutionary theory as you portray it. This first has to do with the assumption that life on earth could have formed spontaneously, solely on the basis of the random activity of those fundamental processes that are explained by the physical sciences. This is not something you know; it is something you’ve been taught, perhaps hope to be true, probably something you believe. But things do not work that way. What is required is an over-riding principle or cause which brings the components of the structure together from the very basic upwards to the unity that is the holistic creature that exists as itself. And, this brings up the second issue which is life itself, irreducible to its components.

God guides us and it is our decision what to do in response to His call.

Maybe you are getting better, growing more effective cells through the various toxins, viruses and wear-and-tear that we encounter in life, making you brighter, stronger, better at least in some ways. I am getting older and sicker. I have been very sick, but managed to run from the wolves who will inevitably catch up. Hopefully it will be quick, unlike friends whose dementias rendered them unrecognizable at the end. This entire fallen universe, and I could spend hours on what that is, will fall to a similar fate; but that’s not the end.

You may be engaging in wishful thinking; better is hope arising from one’s relationship with God.

 

[rossum]

But one can readily prove a mirage does not.

Which in its turn shows that the human senses are not 100% reliable. Saying, “It sure looks designed to me” is not a reliable design detector. ID claims to have a reliable design detector, but as far as I am aware has never subjected its design detector to any rigorous testing.

For example, one of these two strings is designed, the other is randomly generated. Can ID tell the difference?

ATCTAGTGGGCGAACGACGAGCGCGAAGATTAGCTTAATGAACTATACTGAGCATCTTAAGCTTAATGTTTAGAT

GCGATTCTATGATCGAGATCAATATTGATTGCTGCCTCCTCTACCTCATGATGAGATGTGCTTTGATTAGCGAGT

Without a reliable, tested and objective design detector, ID has an uphill battle.

rossum

 

[Rau]

Random mutations supposedly work by seeing into the future and creating a animal fit for it’s new environment.

No, you are making faulty statements. You should first acquaint yourself with the principles of the theory, then you may gain a capacity to describe its processes to others.

 

[Rau]

Evolution must not be taught as fact, but instead the pros and cons of evolution must be taught.

(Pius XII, Humani Generis)

So Pius saw no reason to reject it out of hand?