Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Then tens of thousands, perhaps millions of Catholics, including the Magisterium are guilty of bad theology.

I at least can say I am a Theologian as I have a BA in Theology, but am an amateur scientist.

On what grounds do you say it is bad theology?
 
buffalo said:
How did they date those 3 billion year old rocks?
Click to expand...
With other, longer lived radioactive isotopes.

Here are the results for the Amitsoq Gneiss:
Code: 
Method             Age (billion years)
--------------------------------------
Rb - Sr isochron   3.70 ± 0.14  
Lu - Hf isochron   3.55 ± 0.22
Pb - Pb isochron   3.80 ± 0.12
U  - Pb discordia  3.65 ± 0.05
Th - Pb discordia  3.65 ± 0.08
weighted mean age 3.67 ± 0.06 billion years.

Source: Scientific Age of the Earth

None of the methods used involve 14C, instead other longer lived isotopes are used. Like my example of the scales, you don’t use a set of kitchen scales to weigh an 18-wheeler, you use a weighbridge.

rossum
 
This is like a merry go round. The Church does not have a position on pre-existing material for Adam and Eves material bodies. How many times must I quote the Church documents?

It is not good to prohibit what the even the chirch does not prohibit, to condemn what even the church does not condemn. Are you more wise, knowledgeable, inspired than the Magisterium.

Stop going above what the church teaches.
 
If you feather on a scale calibrated in millions of years it won’t register. If the RC dating is true for the dinos the decay method must be evaluated.
 
Whatever material was used to form Adam’s body was pre-existing. He could not have been conceived of animal gametes. I can’t say how the miracle of life arises, but it involves a zygote that is a unity of soul and matter. An animal zygote cannot turn into a human being.
 
God as Divine Artist begins with an idea. In this case it is Jesus Christ. In order to achieve that aim, the basic material for the Supreme Masterpiece must exist. It is brilliant, illuminating light. Everything physical that follows is a variation on that prime matter. What is for all intents and purposes, infinite time and space is set as the background. The environment follows in all its wonder and diversity. Homo naledi sounds like one of the preliminary sketches to arrive at the final figure. The sketch isn’t part of the painting, but a lead up to it, to help visualize the end result. In this case, a man who would fit in and function well on earth. But, who knows, maybe Homo naledi was human too. We’re talking our profound ignorance and about God, so it happened any way He wanted, and in the way that He has revealed to us in scripture and interpreted for us in the Catechism.
 
Last edited:
Aloysium said:
in the way that He has revealed to us in scripture and interpreted for us in the Catechism
Click to expand...
Yes, but science fills in the details in a way that the Catechism or the Bible or our imaginations can’t. Science’s object is God’s creation, and we can see into the past from what we know now, but it is like looking into a foggy mirror.

Like I said I have studied all the Church documents on the matter and see there is a lot of room for science to fill in the gaps. We don’t have the full picture but what seems to make a lot of sense from current science is that every species on earth seems to have changed over time, in a gradual way over many generations. We can imagine that God simply inserted a soul into one of those new generations.

This is homo naledi, tell me he couldn’t be a candidate for Adam and Eve’s biological pre-existing material.
 
“The account in Genesis uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.“

It was not written according to modern literary methods, and so are you absolutely sure the Genesis aaccount rules out all possibility that there was a missing link homo naledi or the like that played a part in the story of Adam and Eve?
 
Arcanum - Pope Leo XIII

“Though revilers of the Christian faith refuse to acknowledge the never-interrupted doctrine of the Church on this subject, and have long striven to destroy the testimony of all nations and of all times, they have nevertheless failed not only to quench the powerful light of truth, but even to lessen it. We record what is to all known, and cannot be doubted by any, that God, on the sixth day of creation, having made man from the slime of the earth, and having breathed into his face the breath of life, gave him a companion, whom He miraculously took from the side of Adam when he was locked in sleep.”
 
edwest211 said:
Arcanum - Pope Leo XIII

“Though revilers of the Christian faith refuse to acknowledge the never-interrupted doctrine of the Church on this subject, and have long striven to destroy the testimony of all nations and of all times, they have nevertheless failed not only to quench the powerful light of truth, but even to lessen it. We record what is to all known, and cannot be doubted by any, that God, on the sixth day of creation, having made man from the slime of the earth, and having breathed into his face the breath of life, gave him a companion, whom He miraculously took from the side of Adam when he was locked in sleep.”
Click to expand...
This may come as a surprise to you, but encyclicals are not all infallible.
 
Sure, they don’t know if Naledi belongs at the base of the family tree or not. Isn’t it the least bit wonderoua how you had all these human like animals running around before and perhaps even during the time of Adam?

The very fact that we are related so closely genetically to these non-humans is another wonder of God’s nature.

To say God did not use animals to form Adam is to say we are not related in any way to those hominids and all the rest who share similar DNA.

The biggest question anti-evolutioniats can’t answer is why do we have so much of the same DNA? We can trace the family trees in the same way as we trace human genetic family trees.

Surely the genetics can’t lie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top