Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Techno2000 said:
Why does the soup need God to keep it in existence ?
Click to expand...
Nothing can exist without God. Everything receives its existence from God. Once a thing exists it acts according to its given nature and its activity is sustained in existence by God.
 
No man can possibly know how active or direct God is in maintaining the universe or to what extent he uses “secondary causes”. For all we know, God could be holding together every atom in the universe and “dark energy” could be “God energy”.
 
Science agrees with you here. Quantum physics shows the universe to be porous. They think it is in these pores God works.
 
Genetic Entropy suggests new species are degradation of old species.
 
Last edited:
I think its largely a matter of commonsense. I think God does reasonable things, i don’t think he does things for no reason. Why make a thing a certain way if one doesn’t intend it to be a certain way… Whats the point of tinkering if God can create a reality that develops by itself. Observation gives most intelligent people the impression that physical reality is something that is in a state of development; it is growing, it is becoming. I don’t think they are wrong. I don’t believe that God would create a world of false appearances, smoke and mirrors. Especially when god could have created everything we see to day in an instant let alone 6 days.
 
Last edited:
anon65111186 said:
If Orthodox Jews jumped off a bridge, would you too? It’s kind of funny they can calculate that, since Orthodox Jews don’t learn math and don’t teach their children math.
Click to expand...
In that case, how come there is an organisation called the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists?
Too bad that current scientific facts put the human species at a lot older than 5778. There are bones of homo sapiens in America older than your supposed Orthodox Adam.
Click to expand...
So the story goes. But I suspect the truth is vastly different.
Who said they didn’t invent things, they certainly had tools. Many tribes living in remote places undisturbed for thousands of years never developed writing.
Click to expand...
If evolution is true, and since it progresses so slowly, the humans who lived a hundred thousand years ago would have had roughly the same intelligence as humans today. Yet you expect me to believe that the best those intelligent humans could come up with in all that time were stone tools? That makes no sense.
It certainly is important or we wouldn’t be having this conversation on this thread, it is the best theory to explain the unbiased data we have. Do you have a better explanation than evolution, if so, I’m sure the scientific community would love to hear it.
Click to expand...
Ideas have consequences and the philosophical implications of evolution are important, but the scientific implications of evolution add up to zero. A theory that supposedly explains the data is not necessarily useful. If you can think of a practical use for explaining the history of life in terms of evolution then you will be the first person who ever has. Until then I will continue to believe it is as useless as a fairy tale.
As Prof. Louis Bouroune used to say, “none of the progress made in biology depends even slightly on a theory”.
 
Last edited:
Imagine God as an artist. His canvas is the universe. He paints by thought and His thoughts added to the canvas.

He set in place a super program (language of DNA) and front loaded it with HIs vision of creation. He added in natural selection as the mechanism to keep His creation from going out of control.

There exists no false appearances. Man has limited ability to see the entire canvas at once like He does. Illusions are caused by man’s limitations of being on the canvas.
 
Last edited:
Glark said:
No Catholic with any sense would devote their time to a theory that contributes nothing at all to the advancement of science and has no practical scientific use.
Click to expand...
The Pope, Our beloved Pope Francis spends quite some time on it, the following are his words, note the bottom paragraph

When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,

He created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment.

n fact, the Roman Catholic Church has recognized Darwinian evolution for the past 60 years. It openly rejects Intelligent Design and Young Earth Creationism because it pretends to be science.

Pope John Paul II was reported as saying that evolution is “more than just a theory.”
 
buffalo said:
117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.

The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.84
Click to expand...
As St. Augustine wrote (City of God, Book XIII.XXI), “… allegorical interpretations may be put upon (the Genesis account of creation) without giving offence to anyone, while yet we believe the strict truth of the history, confirmed by its circumstantial narration of facts.”
 
Once again: No one wants to answer these two simple questions:
  1. Did God know what Adam would look like?
  2. Did Adam look as God planned?
 
Imagery is important. I like my version better and it agrees with the constant teaching and understanding of the Church.
 
How does God know the free actions of human beings? Answer that and you will have your answer for the other 2 qeustions
 
buffalo said:
Did God know what Adam would look like?
Did Adam look as God planned?
Click to expand...
Yes he is omniscient. Since we don’t know how God planned him to look, and how he actually looked, apart from revelation (which is lacking) we don’t know.
 
If that’s the case then why doesn’t the Catholic church dogmatically rule out natural evolution or natural anything for that matter?

Lets be honest here.
 
Last edited:
Glark said:
In what mad theological universe can inanimate matter (“dust” and “ground”) be interptreted to mean a living organism? Not even Origen, the King of Allegory, would have been wacko enough to come up with such a ridiculous idea.
Click to expand...
The same universe in which God says “you are that inanimate matter”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top