Pope Benedict admits evidence for evolution

[edwest2]

And the Pope did not state that evolution is a fact. If you don’t want to check my facts that’s fine with me.

God bless,
Ed

 

[BaLou]

Ed,

Where is the evidence that you assert?

I can reconcile evolution with faith, why not? God could have set the wheels in motion to have this 'ol world develop on it’s own. Natural selection certainly makes sense to me.

Enjoying the discussions.

Pax,
Perry

 

[edwest2]

No established American scientific group calls evolution a fact. It is referred to as the Theory of Evolution. Evolutionists are always careful to point out that there is what they call evidence that is interpreted to be in support of the theory but don’t call it proof. Proof, they insist, should only be applied to alcohol.

Natural Selection? I don’t think so. The old line about one group taking over because of changes in the environment looks to be untrue. Here we have reports of more ‘modern’ dinosaurs living together with their ancestors:

cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/20/tech/main3079845.shtml

Neanderthals (or Neandertals) not human? Looks like they were and did interbreed with ‘modern’ humans:

sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/11/061103083616.htm

And what about our earliest supposed primate ancestors? It was thought they weren’t around at the same time as the dinosaurs, but that turns out to be unlikely also:

nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/04/0418_020418_primates.html

The Hubble Space Telescope can see out to 13.3 billion light years. The speed of light is about 300,00 kilometers per second. These distant galaxies are moving away at better than the speed of light.

No, I’ll take the Bible over evolution any day. Besides, it is currently being marketed very heavily by atheists, secular humanists, brights, free thinkers, leftists and others. It’s not important.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Excelency]

We say creation (inteligent design). They say evolution. Whats wrong with an inteligently designed evolutionary process? One where the end result could not have been anything other than Man.

Recently scientists discovered a language written on the DNA molecule. This language has letters, words, stentences, statements, context and syntax. In no case does a language come into existance independent of a user. Language is always a tool of a user and never happens by itself. Just for the record, I proclaim that the author of this language is the God of Abraham Issac and Jacob.

 

[Steve40]

We say creation (inteligent design). They say evolution. Whats wrong with an inteligently designed evolutionary process? One where the end result could not have been anything other than Man.

Commonly this is refered to as theistic evolution. The problem with it is, is it true or not? Our bodies mean something. How we procreate means something so how original creation took place also means something. If we believe something untrue about how original creation took place we may not believe something God was saying when he created our original parent. When He created you through the sex of your parents He was saying something powerful. The same is true for original creation. We don’t need to distort that message with a scientific theory that is unproven.

 

[Excelency]

Commonly this is refered to as theistic evolution. The problem with it is, is it true or not? Our bodies mean something. How we procreate means something so how original creation took place also means something. If we believe something untrue about how original creation took place we may not believe something God was saying when he created our original parent. When He created you through the sex of your parents He was saying something powerful. The same is true for original creation. We don’t need to distort that message with a scientific theory that is unproven.

Before I agree with you I’ll have to say that our religion is unproven, if it was what is the need to trust God. Proof does not save us faith does. I only offer that hypothesis so as to have dialog with athiests who might read these posts.

 

[Titus]

The Bible is not a scientific document, and is not always required to be taken in a literalistic way. Who defined how long a ‘day’ (Gen. I) is? My point is that theistic evolution is fully possible and does not contradict the Bible. That is the Holy Father’s view too, and that is why he judges the Theory of Evolution a valid one for Catholics to believe. It is well supported by facts, and those making assertions against it here have not provided reliable source material. To assert that merely because God can do things immediately means he did in the case of the Creation is illogical and unreasonable. If the Church contradicts science or science contradicts the Church, there’s been a mistake.

 

[Steve40]

The Bible is not a scientific document, and is not always required to be taken in a literalistic way. Who defined how long a ‘day’ (Gen. I) is? My point is that theistic evolution is fully possible and does not contradict the Bible. That is the Holy Father’s view too, and that is why he judges the Theory of Evolution a valid one for Catholics to believe. It is well supported by facts, and those making assertions against it here have not provided reliable source material. To assert that merely because God can do things immediately means he did in the case of the Creation is illogical and unreasonable. If the Church contradicts science or science contradicts the Church, there’s been a mistake.

What has been the rule for 1000s of years in the Church is unless proven otherwise hold to the literal and obvious meaning of Sacred Scripture. This was a rule laid down by St. Augustine and restated by Pope Leo XIII in his Encyclical Provodensious Deous (spelling may be off on that). The point is, that evolution of man has not been proven nor has long time spans of the unverse been proven so we should still believe what the Bible says. Otherwise we are not being Apostolic, believing what he Apostoles believe and this is a mark of true church.

 

[SeekerJen]

What has been the rule for 1000s of years in the Church is unless proven otherwise hold to the literal and obvious meaning of Sacred Scripture. This was a rule laid down by St. Augustine and restated by Pope Leo XIII in his Encyclical Provodensious Deous (spelling may be off on that). The point is, that evolution of man has not been proven nor has long time spans of the unverse been proven so we should still believe what the Bible says. Otherwise we are not being Apostolic, believing what he Apostoles believe and this is a mark of true church.

The Bible also does not rule out long time spans of the universe. It does tell us that a day of God’s is like a thousand years (read: a really long time) to us. So it is not heresy to believe that it could have taken God millions of years to get us to this point.

 

[edwest2]

I insist on the reality of Jesus Christ, not on the words of internet theologians. Where does the “theistic” part of Theistic Evolution fit into the current Theory of Evolution? What would an evolutionist tell you if you say “God did it”? I’ll tell you what they do say. “You’re ignorant. Put down your book of fairy tales. Quit believing in the invisible man in the sky.”

Wake up Theistic Evolutionists, science and evolutionists will deny you always. The Bible is an eyewitness document and all Scripture is inspired by God. Do not spend any time worrying about whether or not evolution is true but study the true Word of God. The evolutionists don’t want God in their secular world.

God bless,
Ed

 

[richardwy]

it is hard to deny evolution anymore.

Name me a few lower life forms that have evolved into higher life forms over the last 2,000 to 2,500 years, going back to extant recorded history.

Lower to higher.

2,500 years

Not change or alteration.

Lower to higher.

Should be abundant examples if evolution were true.

Bah.

Also, have any ever read a Papal address then seen what newspapers say about it and how reporters/editors pick and choose? I have. And I do not know if the article in question matches up with what I have seen. I am skeptical though.

 

[Steve40]

The Bible also does not rule out long time spans of the universe. It does tell us that a day of God’s is like a thousand years (read: a really long time) to us. So it is not heresy to believe that it could have taken God millions of years to get us to this point.

If a day is 1000 years, creation would have taken 6000 years not millions. But just because it says for God 1 day is like 1000 years it doesn’t mean He didn’t create the world in 6 days like He said. God could have done it in 6 seconds. But He said 6 days. Why not just take Him at His word? We have no reason to believe otherwise, other than unproven scientific theory.

 

[SeekerJen]

If a day is 1000 years, creation would have taken 6000 years not millions. But just because it says for God 1 day is like 1000 years it doesn’t mean He didn’t create the world in 6 days like He said. God could have done it in 6 seconds. But He said 6 days. Why not just take Him at His word? We have no reason to believe otherwise, other than unproven scientific theory.

I accept that humans weren’t around in the very begining, as God had not created us yet, so we don’t know if creation took 6 attoseconds or 6 billion years. None of us were around to record the events. Thus, there’s no sense in declaring someone an idiot for believing that creation happened in six solar days, nor is there any sense in declaring someone a heretic for believing that it happened in 6 million years. WE DON’T KNOW. God made everything. How He did it is His business. I’ll find out when I meet Him face to face.

(And yes, I fully accept that I will probably get flamed for this post. Oh well.)

 

[DesertSaints]

Benedict is a manifest heretic. Evolution is the greatest scientific hoax in the history of civilization.

 

[DesertSaints]

Benedict is not up on scientific research and its discoveries. He needs to catch up on the current facts, or stay with what he knows —theology.

EVOLUTION: A THEORY IN CRISIS

Video Library: Scientists Refuting Evolution

theapologiaproject.org/video_library.htm

CREATION SCIENTISTS DEBATE (REFUTE) EVOLUTIONISTS (Free Videos on Youtube)

youtube.com/watch?v=wr6uvUNJLww&mode=related&search= youtube.com/watch?v=eL-cORRZdng&mode=related&search= youtube.com/watch?v=8cffk0zQ33k&mode=related&search= youtube.com/watch?v=xMpk7WerFWw

See also: REASONS.ORG, ORIGINS.ORG, ICR.ORG, DRDINO.COM

 

[edwest2]

We don’t know? Now we’re back to “maybe-ism” "who-knows-ism and “who-can-say-ism”. And calling the Pope a heretic is no answer either.

Is there evidence? Yes. Is the Bible the inspired Word of God? Yes. Is evolution so important to your faith that you need, desperately, to know if it’s true? Apparently, some people here are so insistent that you (a Christian) accept their interpretation of the evidence, you need to ask yourself, why is so important for them?

God bless,
Ed

 

[Steve40]

I accept that humans weren’t around in the very begining, as God had not created us yet, so we don’t know if creation took 6 attoseconds or 6 billion years. None of us were around to record the events. Thus, there’s no sense in declaring someone an idiot for believing that creation happened in six solar days, nor is there any sense in declaring someone a heretic for believing that it happened in 6 million years. WE DON’T KNOW. God made everything. How He did it is His business. I’ll find out when I meet Him face to face.

(And yes, I fully accept that I will probably get flamed for this post. Oh well.)

It’s a good idea to believe what the Bible says when we don’t know something because if you don’t you can question anything. We don’t know if Jesus really walked on water, We don’t know if He really healed the sick, We don’t know if He turned turned a few loafs of bread into 5000. I lump all the “I don’t know so I won’t believe” people into the same category.

 

[SeekerJen]

It’s a good idea to believe what the Bible says when we don’t know something because if you don’t you can question anything. We don’t know if Jesus really walked on water, We don’t know if He really healed the sick, We don’t know if He turned turned a few loafs of bread into 5000. I lump all the “I don’t know so I won’t believe” people into the same category.

Did I once say that I don’t believe that God orchestrated creation? Did I ever say that I didn’t believe that Scripture is divinely inspired? Did I ever say that I don’t believe in Jesus the Christ? I can guess which category you’ve lumped me into, and I don’t thank you for the insult. You sure have made a lot of false assumptions about me.

 

[jdnation]

Benedict was vague on what he means by ‘evolution.’ And most people in the world also don’t understand it.

There are two sides to evolution.

Micro-Evolution:

The constant changes of living things as they procreate and grow within their genetic group. Dogs begat dogs. Humans begat humans, birds begat birds. Overtime verious breeding and population isolation can create different varieties of the same species. And example are teh varieties of dogs descended from original an original wolf ancestor. This happens due to loss of genetic information where an isolated group loses certain features of their parents through mutations or natural selection. You end up with varieties of breeds with less complex genetic information than their ancestor. It is ‘evolution’ but downwards, more precisely it should be called ‘devolution.’ Things do not become more complex. They either stay the same or lose genetic information. This is observable and undeniable scientific fact.

Then on the other hand you have…

Macro-Evolution:

This is a hypothesis that suggests that living things through breeding actually become more complex through micro-changes. ‘That simple celled organisms can grow to become fish then amphibians then mammals then human beings.’ However this has never been observed, and mutations cannot be a mechanism for such change because they always result from mistakes and genetic loss. Natural selection cannot be a mechanism because it only selects what already exists. It has nothing to do with adding mroe information to genes to make them more complex. There is no explanation as to how this is possible. There is no evidence for macro-evolution at all. There are no examples of living organisms naturally generating more genetic information in order to evolve upwards by becoming more complex.

Then there are the problems with dating methods that claim the earth or the universe is millions of years old. The problems with these are that they rely on uniformatarian assumptions and are often in conflict with each other which results in what amounts to guesswork while adhering to faith based on macro-evolutionary dogmas. You can read more about this here:
answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dating.asp

 

[jdnation]

Now here are the problems with compromising macro-evolutionary beliefs with our faith, anyone who claims there are no issues hasn’t researched the problem in full or rejects articles of faith such as the Bible being the Inspired Word of God and its inerrancy as well as studies showing that the genre of the First books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus etc.) are intended by the author to be serious historical narratives and not simple poetic literature.

God Himself has told us that He created the world in 6 days as accounted in Genesis. God again verifys this claim later to the Hebrews when He commands them to observe the Sabbath and keep it Holy because He created the world in 6 literal days and rested on the 7th. In fact He inscribed this personally with His own finger onto stone tablets for Moses. Christ Himself upheld the authority of Scripture and personally referred to Adam and Noah as actual people. He used Genesis as the foundation for defending teh sacrament of marriage. Christ’s ancestry can be traced back to the original Adam! The Fall accounted in Genesis is the reason God sent a savior into the world.

And here’s the biggest problem… When God created the world, He created it perfect and very good. There was no death and suffering for any living thing. Death was an intruder when Adam and Eve rebelled against God. Christ came down to earth not only to save us from spiritual death, but to physically die for us and then rise again to an incorrupt body. The world was cursed because of sin. Death is the wages of sin. The entire world, the ground and the animals were cursed because it was under man’s domain. God did not create death. God is not some sadistic being. The apostles teach us that the world is groaning in pain and wants to be RESTORED. The Book of Revelation teaches us that this world will pass away and it and our bodies will be restored to what it was originally.

If you accept macro-evolution, you must then have to believe that before man, God created a world on purpose where for millions of years his creatures died and fought and killed each other so that the fittest may survive and all were plagued and suffered diseases in a world with natural calamaties and disasters, and all this was God’s fault as He did it on purpose. In other words, God is the author of death and suffering. If this is so then what did sin do that we otherwise would be better off without it? What was the point of Christs death? What was the message of the cross? And if this was always how the world originally was, then what is it being ‘restored’ to? Christianity no longer makes sense. It is entirely inconsistent. What are we being saved from if death and suffering always existed? Is all that “very good”?

Mankind fell when when Adam rejected what God clearly told them and wondered to themselves “Did God really say that we would die upon eating this fruit?” Did God really say that?

In the same way we question today… “Did God really say He created the world in six days?” We doubt His word… We are telling ourselves otherwise and that this whole thing doesn’t matter. We also believe otherwise because something that claims to be associated with ‘knowledge’ and ‘god-like ability’ is deceiving us! Its allure makes us doubt the clear Word of God and society has fallen because of it. On those grounds and the inconsistency of a Christianity married to atheistic philosophy no one takes the Word of God seriously, and therefore no one takes the Church Christ established seriously. All the things founded in Genesis, the purpose of the cross, the sacrament of marriage and all other doctrines associated with it are being attacked and discarded by the world following a new faith where men dream up countless versions for how the universe and life came into existence without the requirement of a divine being, and if you feel like it you can throw God into the picture there somewhere as long as proud humans tell their version of the story with self bestowed authority and the vestements of a laboratory jacket.

The creation/evolution debate is important! Unfortunately Pope Benedict XVI doesn’t realize this and neither do millions of Christians. Get involved! Study your faith and critically examine both the evidence and philosophical grounds for both evolution and Biblical Creation. Creation as the God of Christianity tells us He did it and the events that followed to amke the world the way it is today. Not just some grotesque vaguery called Intelligent Design. This is one of the most important topics of our time. Look past the propaganda and look for the truth yourself! Don’t simply fall for all the fairy tales being desguised and marketed as scientific facts. Evolution or otherwise…