Is The Theory of Evolution mandatory for the modern worldview

[ricmat]

As I was pondering some of the comments in this thread (and the other evolution threads), I stumbled across the following document, after googling “modernist heresy”.

thinking-catholic-strategic-center.com/modernism.html

Here are some excerpts from the above article:

The errors of Modernism came about due to an increasing infatuation with and obsessive over-emphasis of the Natural Sciences. Whenever natural science makes some great leap forward in history, there follows a period of exuberant celebration of science for its own sake

Note: I’m not anti-Science, actually I’m an engineer. But I never celebrated science for its own sake…

The problem of Modernism is that adherents most typically cannot bow before the mystery, or even accept that mystery is possible. There must, in the modernist view, be a scientific explanation for everything, eventually.

Among other things (and not for the first time) Vatican I taught, as dogma, that God is the Author of Scripture, and hence all of Scripture is free of error; and further, that the infallible Church maintains the sole right to correctly interpret her Scripture. It further anathematized anyone who would dismiss or question Scriptural miracles, or even hold “that miracles can never be recognized with certainty.”

If anyone says that all miracles are impossible, and that therefore all reports of them, even those contained in Sacred Scripture, are to be set aside as fables or myths; or that miracles can never be known with certainty, nor can the divine origin of the Christian religion be proved from them: let him be anathema.

If anyone says that the one, true God, our creator and lord, cannot be known with certainty from the things that have been made, by the natural light of human reason: let him be anathema.

 

[The_Barbarian]

I agree with the Pope, that truth cannot contradict truth. God is truth. And so whenever we learn something new about His creation, we should celebrate it, just for learning something new about it.

The heresy that nature and God are opposed should be resisted always.

 

[edwest2]

As I was pondering some of the comments in this thread (and the other evolution threads), I stumbled across the following document, after googling “modernist heresy”.

thinking-catholic-strategic-center.com/modernism.html

Here are some excerpts from the above article:

Note: I’m not anti-Science, actually I’m an engineer. But I never celebrated science for its own sake…

Thank you, very much, for posting that. Whatever man does, whatever he creates, is a reflection of the creative power of God. Too many idolize science. Too many idolize what man can do. Not enough humble themselves before God.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Memaw]

No, Memaw – I’m taking you at your word. You argue for a naively literal reading of the Genesis flood myth, and yet you refuse to engage in a discussion of the problems of a literal reading. There are insurmountable problems with such an interpretation, of which I’ve outlined a few, How would you address these issues in a learned and scholarly way?

GOD said it, I believe it, that settles it!!!

 

[ricmat]

From the Liturgy of the Hours, fifth week of Lent, Tuesday Evening Prayer (today):

Rather, God chose the foolish of the world to shame the wise, and God chose the weak of the world to shame the strong, and God chose the lowly and despised of the world, those who count for nothing, to reduce to nothing those who are something, so that no human being might boast before God.

 

[Memaw]

I agree with the Pope, that truth cannot contradict truth. God is truth. And so whenever we learn something new about His creation, we should celebrate it, just for learning something new about it.

The heresy that nature and God are opposed should be resisted always.

God and nature are NEVER opposed, but science and God can be. Science is not always telling the truth. Especially when science tries to fill in the gaps when they don’t know all the answers.

 

[drpmjhess]

GOD said it, I believe it, that settles it!!!

It’s certainly your right to read the flood myth literally. But then stop trying to explain the flood scientifically, which you simply can’t do. Treat it as miraculous from beginning to end.

Petrus

 

[Memaw]

From the Liturgy of the Hours, fifth week of Lent, Tuesday Evening Prayer (today):

Rather, God chose the foolish of the world to shame the wise, and God chose the weak of the world to shame the strong, and God chose the lowly and despised of the world, those who count for nothing, to reduce to nothing those who are something, so that no human being might boast before God.

More harm has been done to the human race by intellectuals that think they know more than God, or leave God out of what they do.

Intellectuals that have deep, humble, faith (like Mo. Theresa) are the ones that do good to their fellow man.

 

[drpmjhess]

Note: I’m not anti-Science, actually I’m an engineer. But I never celebrated science for its own sake…

I understand, ricmat. Among those who doubt the theory of evolution, engineers outnumber biologists 100 to one.

 

[Memaw]

It’s certainly your right to read the flood myth literally. But then stop trying to explain the flood scientifically, which you simply can’t do. Treat it as miraculous from beginning to end.

Petrus

I would like you to show me where, on the forum, that I have tried to explain the flood scientifically!! That oughta keep you busy for awhile.

 

[ricmat]

I understand, ricmat. Among those who doubt the theory of evolution, engineers outnumber biologists 100 to one.

And about 70% of biologists are professed atheists.

Actually, I don’t doubt all of the theory of evolution, only about 1% of it.

 

[The_Barbarian]

Actually, I don’t doubt all of the theory of evolution, only about 1% of it.

So, drawing on what you know of evolutionary theory, as biologists know it today, what do you doubt?

 

[ricmat]

So, drawing on what you know of evolutionary theory, as biologists know it today, what do you doubt?

As I’ve mentioned dozens of times, I doubt that simple life could develop into complex life in only 4.5 billion years without guided intervention (i.e divine) in causing the correct mutations at the right times. We went into this about 3-5 months ago. No, I don’t want to do it all over again

 

[The_Barbarian]

I understand, ricmat. Among those who doubt the theory of evolution, engineers outnumber biologists 100 to one.

Hey, most engineers aren’t expected to know anything about biology. But most engineers don’t doubt evolution. Years ago, at a university where I worked, there were a couple of engineering professors in the school who were creationists. Someone did a straw poll of the other engineering professors. None of the others doubted evolution.

In general, the more education one has, the more likely one is to accept evolution. (Pew Poll)

 

[Memaw]

Hey, most engineers aren’t expected to know anything about biology. But most engineers don’t doubt evolution. Years ago, at a university where I worked, there were a couple of engineering professors in the school who were creationists. Someone did a straw poll of the other engineering professors. None of the others doubted evolution.

In general, the more education one has, the more likely one is to accept evolution. (Pew Poll)

Like I said, more harm has been done to the human race by intellectuals than by humble, faithful folk.

 

[ricmat]

In general, the more education one has, the more likely one is to accept evolution. (Pew Poll)

And in general, the rich are the least likely to get to heaven.

 

[The_Barbarian]

As I’ve mentioned dozens of times, I doubt that simple life could develop into complex life in only 4.5 billion years without guided intervention (i.e divine) in causing the correct mutations at the right times. We went into this about 3-5 months ago. No, I don’t want to do it all over again

I believe I pointed out that evolutionary theory doesn’t say that God didn’t do it. You’re free to believe that.

However, the evidence shows that if He was doing it, He was doing it in a remarkably predictable way, consistent with scientific laws. But then, they are His laws, aren’t they? Why wouldn’t He do it according to His own laws?

If you believe that God just did a sudden miracle and popped complex metazoans into existance, then no, that’s not consistent with the evidence, nor is it the teaching of the Church.

You’re still free to deny it all, of course.

 

[hecd2]

As I’ve mentioned dozens of times, I doubt that simple life could develop into complex life in only 4.5 billion years without guided intervention (i.e divine) in causing the correct mutations at the right times. We went into this about 3-5 months ago. No, I don’t want to do it all over again

However we have established that this opinion of yours does not have any empirical support nor is it based on rational theoretical analysis, but, rather, it is based on your personal incredulity or on gut feel. Similar to the basis for a belief in astrology or homoeopathy or geocentrism or the efficacy of rabbits’ feet.

So, although it is very important to you, do you think, given that it is entirely based on your personal prejudice, that it should be of the slightest relevance to anyone else? Why do you keep repeatedly bringing it up as though it can form part of a rational argument (which it obviously cannot)?

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[drpmjhess]

I would like you to show me where, on the forum, that I have tried to explain the flood scientifically!! That oughta keep you busy for awhile.

You want a literal interpretation of the flood story. For such an interpretation to be credible, you have to answer questions about hydrology, manure disposal, how to provision for 60 million animals for 150 days on one boat, how to regrow the vegetation after the flood so as to keep the animals alive, and how to account for biogeographical dispersion after the flood. None of these have you done.

 

[hecd2]

And in general, the rich are the least likely to get to heaven.

Are you an authority on the entrance fees for heaven? But what has that to do with education?

Are you suggesting that we should keep people ignorant, uninformed and stupid for the sake of their souls?

Alec
evolutionpages.com