Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Glark said:
The late William Provine stated that he couldn’t think of even one evolutionary biologist who wasn’t an atheist.
Click to expand...
I can think of three: Francis Collins, Keith Miller and Ken Miller (Catholic).

rossum
 
IWantGod said:
If God is keeping creation in existence, sustaining its very being, i would say God is eternally and intimately involved with his creation. Far from separated. By your standard there can be no natural events because that would mean God is separated from his creation and there can be no freewill becuase that would mean God is separated from his creation.
Click to expand...
The issue then is whether the four fundamental forces of nature and all the related constants are sufficient to explain life. It isn’t clear how random activity in that level of creation would explain the complexity we witness in the body, each cell, and in the genome. It makes more sense that these processes are the building blocks of which organisms were brought into existence and are maintained as such, doing what they do, each as a unified being. We can’t go by what happens now as an explanation of what happened when all the various levels of creation were actualized from nothing. Things do what they do, but there was a time when they did not exist. We have free will now because it is an essential feature of our being which incorporates matter in order to participate in time and space. The meaning of creation as it happens now, maintaining everything in existence, is different from creation as it happened at the beginning of time. Although it too was brought into being in its moment, it was temporally new.
 
Last edited:
Hundreds of years ago in Europe adults lost the ability to digest milk sugar. Most adults still can.
 
The TE God knew of course.
The IDvolution God Knew of course

Adam did not look as the TE God planned. He left it to chance.
Adam did look as the IDvolution God planned

The IDvolution God does not have to tweak his creation as He Himself proclaimed it good. Any tweaking is a result of the fall.
 
Last edited:
Yes, lactase persistence is actually a loss of a instruction in the genome to turn the lactase enzyme off

Critic ignores reality of Genetic Entropy – Dr John Sanford – 7 March 2013
Excerpt: Where are the beneficial mutations in man? It is very well documented that there are thousands of deleterious Mendelian mutations accumulating in the human gene pool, even though there is strong selection against such mutations. Yet such easily recognized deleterious mutations are just the tip of the iceberg. The vast majority of deleterious mutations will not display any clear phenotype at all. There is a very high rate of visible birth defects, all of which appear deleterious. Again, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Why are no beneficial birth anomalies being seen? This is not just a matter of identifying positive changes. If there are so many beneficial mutations happening in the human population, selection should very effectively amplify them. They should be popping up virtually everywhere. They should be much more common than genetic pathologies. Where are they? European adult lactose tolerance appears to be due to a broken lactase promoter.
 
Aloysium said:
It makes more sense that these processes are the building blocks of which organisms were brought into existence and are maintained as such, doing what they do, each as a unified being.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that God needs to make building blocks to create things?

It might not be absolutely clear to you how complexity arises from physical processes. However, everything points to physical processes being the mechanism by which these things have occurred.
 
“But from the beginning of creation He made them male and female.” Mark 10:6

Not later, not billions of years later, but right at the get go.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
40.png
Aloysium:
It makes more sense that these processes are the building blocks of which organisms were brought into existence and are maintained as such, doing what they do, each as a unified being.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that God needs to make building blocks to create things?

It might not be absolutely clear to you how complexity arises from physical processes. However, everything points to physical processes being the mechanism by which these things have occurred.
Click to expand...
I would not assume people know less than I do about a topic.

Just to recap: I know myself to be one being, made up of organ systems, which interact and themselves are constructed of various tissues. These in turn are made up of cells, which are a superbly intricate matrix of molecular, electrochemical, interactions. Molecules are made up of atoms that break down into subatomic components. This whole psyical structure informs the spirit to produce the experience I am having as I post these words in the moment.

So yes, God brought into existence the “bricks” that constitute physical matter in order to later create us, who have a free will.

There is nothing in the forces, processes and constants that can lead to the complexity that is an organism, let alone give it life. To assert that all this diversity of life is a random physical event based on those elementary physical phenomena, is to claim that they are the ground of our being and beyond that, nothing more than it happened because it happened.
 
Last edited:
That is very interesting and suggests that we are more than what we imagine ourselves to be and that there is a difference between what is God’s time and our time.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
Yes, lactase persistence is actually a loss of a instruction in the genome to turn the lactase enzyme off
Click to expand...
Oh no, buffalo, it is a gain in function: adults can digest milk.

You are playing with words here: is the ability to resist disease a loss of the information needed to die from that disease?

Lactase persistence is a gain in function.

rossum
 
Glark said:
It would look just what 99.9999% of Catholics believed before Darwinism came along
Click to expand...
Did you survey all 100% of Catholics, all of the ones from 33 AD to the 1800’s to come up with that number?
Glark said:
the present creation was created in six days of 24-hours duration
Click to expand...
Jews knew that the word (yom) meant age, which is longer than 24 hours. So Jews were interpreting it differently before Darwin. Thomas Aquinas had multiple interpretations, because he read the Fathers and saw that they did not all agree on the interpretation.
Glark said:
Adam was created in an instant from inanimate matter; Eve was created in an instant from Adams’s rib.
Click to expand...
You are inserting the word instant, that is not implicit in the text, and neither is it a necessary part of the interpretation of millions of Catholics. Again, how does that mesh with Hebrew literary forms? You are interpreting the Greco-Latin way.
 
Glark said:
This statement is wrong and very misleading. It states that the Genesis account IS symbolic. It leaves no room for a literal interpretation, which the Church allows.
Click to expand...
Wow, you judge the Catechism as being wrong, are you inspired by the Holy Spirit and given Authority from Christ? This smacks of a strong Protestant ethos.

You come off as arrogantly superior to the Catechism.
 
Glark said:
Inanimate matter, in other words. So there is no way to interpret “dust” as any form of life.
Click to expand...
We are composed of inanimate matter, and living tissue, the foundation of our being is that dust.

Remember, God says “you are dust”. Interpreted literally as you are so fond of doing (Greco-Latin style) that would mean we are a big pile of dust, no tissue, no organs, all dust, which is ridiculous.
 
Glark said:
No, but It is perfectly rational for me to conclude that a pseudo-scientific theory that has hijacked the intellectual high ground of a civilization and leads many people to believe that there is no need for a divine Creator is a theory invented by demons
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t it be rational instead (because I don’t think that is rational) if those scientists perverted the truth of evolution for their own demon-tempted ends? Demons work on humans, not on theories.
 
Glark said:
This the same Pope who devoted much of his papacy to praising false religions - even voodoo! He even went so far as to kiss that antichrist unHoly Book, the Koran, in public
Click to expand...
Wow, are you sure you are Catholic? You sound like a fundamentalist Protestant in all your comments. Doesn’t sound like you have much respect for JPII and his valuable contributions and instead focus what comments you have to his sins.

Mind backing up your claim with sources about voodoo and other praise of other religions?
 
Glark said:
I notice you didn’t comment on Genesis 3:23. I thought that for a trained theologian like yourself it would be easy to explain how this verse can be reconciled with your Darwinist belief that Adam was the offspring of a pre-existing creature.
Click to expand...
So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken.

Again with your Greco-Latin interpretation, too bad the “you are dust” verse, after he is clearly animate matter doesn’t mesh with your literal interpretation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top