Need response

  • Thread starter Thread starter lemonbeam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

lemonbeam

Guest
An atheist sent this to me, can you please help in responding:

''Why don’t we still think the earth was created in six days, is 6 or 7,000 years old and that woman was made from man’s rib? Because we now know about mutating cells and evolution.

Earthquakes and volcanoes have been around since the beginning of time. The planet always sought to cool itself and lower its pressure and internal heat through these natural events. To primitive man witnessing the earth crack open and swallow up his screaming family and acquaintances, seeing a mountain belch liquid fire and ash and killing a village, what conclusion would he reach in his trauma without the benefit of a scientific explanation? That there were raging fires beneath the earth, and that’s where he would go when upon death, if he succeeded in angering the invisible gods. Beneath the earth was the place of punishment and the idea of hell was born.

To him, the sky gave its bounty and made his crops grow. It gave him water to drink and the sun gave him warmth. What better reason to think heaven was above and hellfire beneath? After all, when the disasters came, they caused bloodshed. Isn’t that what the gods wanted to appease themselves? Blood?

So he started to give the gods blood so they would stay his execution, so he could live instead of die, so the gods could avert the volcanic eruptions and the earthquakes. He started throwing babies and virgins in the volcano as sacrifice to the gods. The whole need to worship the invisible being was based on this fear of death.

Sacrificial offerings were conceived as a means of keeping the disaster away. And since these events may have taken place once in his short lifetime, man believed his sacrifices were the solution to keeping them at bay. It made perfect sense to beings who were ignorant of the natural processes around them, who had no idea of microbes, who died by drinking dirty water, died of decaying teeth and saw death during the night when the wild animals came and there was no light. In some civilizations because some days were cloudy and he couldn’t see the sun, man thought it prudent to give blood to the gods to make the sun rise each day, and so arranged sacrifices to the god or goddess of the dawn. Animal blood was also used because the natural disasters claimed the lives of animals too.

All this made perfect sense to primitive man. Tales told in the dark from generation to generation gave way to superstition, and when writing was invented the superstition became written codes of conduct, and formalized religion emerged. But we are no longer in the Stone, Iron or Bronze Age. We now have explanations for natural phenomena. We know why there is lightning and we don’t think it is God speaking in the thunder. We know the earth needs to cool itself and we understand why the winds get violent and storms and floods arise.

By 2025 the US military will control the weather. Man is moving towards the day when he can harness the power of the sun. Technology is moving so fast, GPS is 40 years old and the civilian population only learned of it less than 15 years ago. Now there is technology that permits the military to listen to conversations from afar and “see” through concrete walls. Years ago these would have been miracles. Man is now going to store energy from the sun in satellites and use lasers to create earthquakes AWAY from heavily populated areas, so the earth can still cool itself and shift its tectonic plates without taking a toll on human life.

Mankind will drift away from religion when he is no longer dependent on a God to answer life’s mysteries. It will take a long time, yes, but we will eventually lose our fear of death, and our need for adrenalin will diminish. So will our need to comfort ourselves at the hour of death by lying to each other about living forever and seeing each other again.’’
 
I assume you have some ongoing conversation with this person and that’s why you feel obligated to respond?

I would point out that it is no more an act of faith to believe that there is a Creator than there is to believe that there is no Creator.

And why not believe that the Creator spoke even to primitive man by the signs “written” in Creation?
 
catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp

ewtn.com/library/HUMANITY/EVOLUTN.TXT

catholiceducation.org/articles/science/sc0035.html

From the writings of St Augustine

Creation and Genesis

Some defenders as well as critics of evolution, as we shall see later, think that belief in the Genesis account of creation is incompatible with evolutionary biology. Aquinas, however, did not think that the Book of Genesis presented any difficulties for the natural sciences, for the Bible is not a textbook in the sciences. What is essential to Christian faith, according to Aquinas is the “fact of creation,” not the manner or mode of the formation of the world. In commenting on different views concerning whether all things were created simultaneously and as distinct species, Aquinas remarks: "There are some things that are by their very nature the substance of faith, as to say of God that He is three and one. . . about which it is forbidden to think otherwise. . . . There are other things that relate to the faith only incidentally. . . and, with respect to these, Christian authors have different opinions, interpreting the Sacred Scripture in various ways. Thus with respect to the origin of the world, there is one point that is of the substance of faith, viz. , to know that it began by creation. . . . But the manner and the order according to which creation took place concerns the faith only incidentally." Aquinas notes that although the interpretation regarding successive creation, or what we might call “episodic creation,” is “more common, and seems superficially to be more in accord with the letter,” still that of simultaneous creation is “more conformed to reason and better adapted to preserve Sacred Scripture from the mockery of infidels.”(24)

Saint Augustine, On the Literal Meaning of Genesis I:38-39
 
You do know there is a temporary ban of atheist/evolution threads here right?
 
From the writings of St Augustine

Creation and Genesis

Some defenders as well as critics of evolution, as we shall see later, think that belief in the Genesis account of creation is incompatible with evolutionary biology. Aquinas, however, did not think that the Book of Genesis presented any difficulties for the natural sciences, for the Bible is not a textbook in the sciences. What is essential to Christian faith, according to Aquinas is the “fact of creation,” not the manner or mode of the formation of the world. In commenting on different views concerning whether all things were created simultaneously and as distinct species, Aquinas remarks: “There are some things that are by their very nature the substance of faith, as to say of God that He is three and one. . . about which it is forbidden to think otherwise. . . . There are other things that relate to the faith only incidentally. . . and, with respect to these, Christian authors have different opinions, interpreting the Sacred Scripture in various ways. Thus with respect to the origin of the world, there is one point that is of the substance of faith, viz. , to know that it began by creation. . . . But the manner and the order according to which creation took place concerns the faith only incidentally.” Aquinas notes that although the interpretation regarding successive creation, or what we might call “episodic creation,” is “more common, and seems superficially to be more in accord with the letter,” still that of simultaneous creation is “more conformed to reason and better adapted to preserve Sacred Scripture from the mockery of infidels.”(24)

Saint Augustine, On the Literal Meaning of Genesis I:38-39

catholiceducation.org/articles/science/sc0035.html
 
An atheist sent this to me, can you please help in responding:

''Why don’t we still think the earth was created in six days, is 6 or 7,000 years old and that woman was made from man’s rib? Because we now know about mutating cells and evolution.

Earthquakes and volcanoes have been around since the beginning of time. The planet always sought to cool itself and lower its pressure and internal heat through these natural events. To primitive man witnessing the earth crack open and swallow up his screaming family and acquaintances, seeing a mountain belch liquid fire and ash and killing a village, what conclusion would he reach in his trauma without the benefit of a scientific explanation? That there were raging fires beneath the earth, and that’s where he would go when upon death, if he succeeded in angering the invisible gods. Beneath the earth was the place of punishment and the idea of hell was born.

To him, the sky gave its bounty and made his crops grow. It gave him water to drink and the sun gave him warmth. What better reason to think heaven was above and hellfire beneath? After all, when the disasters came, they caused bloodshed. Isn’t that what the gods wanted to appease themselves? Blood?

So he started to give the gods blood so they would stay his execution, so he could live instead of die, so the gods could avert the volcanic eruptions and the earthquakes. He started throwing babies and virgins in the volcano as sacrifice to the gods. The whole need to worship the invisible being was based on this fear of death.

Sacrificial offerings were conceived as a means of keeping the disaster away. And since these events may have taken place once in his short lifetime, man believed his sacrifices were the solution to keeping them at bay. It made perfect sense to beings who were ignorant of the natural processes around them, who had no idea of microbes, who died by drinking dirty water, died of decaying teeth and saw death during the night when the wild animals came and there was no light. In some civilizations because some days were cloudy and he couldn’t see the sun, man thought it prudent to give blood to the gods to make the sun rise each day, and so arranged sacrifices to the god or goddess of the dawn. Animal blood was also used because the natural disasters claimed the lives of animals too.

All this made perfect sense to primitive man. Tales told in the dark from generation to generation gave way to superstition, and when writing was invented the superstition became written codes of conduct, and formalized religion emerged. But we are no longer in the Stone, Iron or Bronze Age. We now have explanations for natural phenomena. We know why there is lightning and we don’t think it is God speaking in the thunder. We know the earth needs to cool itself and we understand why the winds get violent and storms and floods arise.

By 2025 the US military will control the weather. Man is moving towards the day when he can harness the power of the sun. Technology is moving so fast, GPS is 40 years old and the civilian population only learned of it less than 15 years ago. Now there is technology that permits the military to listen to conversations from afar and “see” through concrete walls. Years ago these would have been miracles. Man is now going to store energy from the sun in satellites and use lasers to create earthquakes AWAY from heavily populated areas, so the earth can still cool itself and shift its tectonic plates without taking a toll on human life.

Mankind will drift away from religion when he is no longer dependent on a God to answer life’s mysteries. It will take a long time, yes, but we will eventually lose our fear of death, and our need for adrenalin will diminish. So will our need to comfort ourselves at the hour of death by lying to each other about living forever and seeing each other again.’’
We don’t have evolution we have a theory of evolution and I understand that every attempt to prove this theory has resulted in failure. We don’t need God to answer scientific questions, we have true science to do that. God answers many other questions. Man is supposed to “subdue the earth” however he must follow certain rules established by God to do so, when he steps outside those rules he fails.
 
Your atheist friend hasn’t said anything about religion. He has simply said a few things about science that all intelligent people–whether religious or atheist–know to be true.

So where’s the argument?
 
Well, no, her atheist friend is suggesting that “religion” was a natural thing for primitive man to have made up, and that as we become more well-informed (I actually don’t think there is an evolution argument going on here, just an “expansion of knowledge” one) we will all come to recognize that all our religious beliefs are just stories our ancestors made up to explain the world around them.

And what I said wasn’t about Creation vs Evolution, it was about whether we “made up” God or whether God revealed Himself to us. I think either belief requires an act of faith, since neither can be “proved” by science.
 
A good book to read about this is Scott Hahn’s *A Father Who Keeps His Promises, especially chapter two. *Hahn points out that Genesis wasn’t written to describe *how *God created the world but rather *what *He created and *why *He created it.

He also points out that the Hebrew word *yom *(which is translated in Genesis as “day”) doesn’t necessarily refer to clock time.
 
That’s a nice little speech, but it doesn’t say anything substantive. Our Catholic religion is not an ancient one. We have our roots in a historic event: the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.
 
Technology has enabled many advances in science and this is wonderful if it is used within the boundaries of natural law. To allow ourselves to exercise this knowledge without wisdom is tantamount to allowing a child play with power tools.

We’ve learned a lot about our environment and how to prolong our lives. But we don’t often ponder enough about the source of all this “matter” or better yet, the source of life itself. Science boasts that it has cloned sheep and created test tube babies, but all it has really done is taken pre-existing materials and duplicated God’s recipe.

Life can only come from another source of life. If science is honest with itself, it will see that it’s discoveries point to something larger than it’s subject matter…and that something is God.

CSJ
 
If you feel you must respond to this same old baited hook, realize that other theologians far greater than you or I have already responded quite thoroughly. Mail him a copy of Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica (or send him a link to New Advent, where its contents are published online) and C.S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity. That should keep him busy thinking for awhile. Scott Hahn’s Reasons to Believe is another good choice.
 
mankind will drift away from religion when he is no longer dependent on a god to answer life’s mysteries. It will take a long time, yes, but we will eventually lose our fear of death, and our need for adrenalin will diminish. So will our need to comfort ourselves at the hour of death by lying to each other about living forever and seeing each other again.’’
how depressing!!!😦
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top