Pope Francis: ‘Evolution … is not inconsistent with the notion of creation’

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimR-OCDS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Kephart said:
54 Pages!!!

Anyone change their mind yet? 😉
Click to expand...
On most sites the lurkers outnumber the posters by about 20 to 1.

Many of them are here through a search engine to find the subject of that thread because their minds are NOT made up.

And they wont answer your questions about who has made their minds up.

😃
 
RGCheek said:
On most sites the lurkers outnumber the posters by about 20 to 1.

Many of them are here through a search engine to find the subject of that thread because their minds are NOT made up.

And they wont answer your questions about who has made their minds up.

😃
Click to expand...
I just want to learn about this, but I have to have scientific support for what I believe.
 
edwest2 said:
Adam and Eve were our parents.

"Adam and Eve: Real People

"It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).

"In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

“The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).”

Best,
Ed
Click to expand...
Ed, how do you reconcile the above with the fact theres never been a bottleneck of fewer than maybe a couple thousand people?
 
Kephart said:
54 Pages!!!

Anyone change their mind yet? 😉
Click to expand...
I’m ashamed that I’m a Catholic and I can’t believe this discussion is still going on. :eek:

I will not return to this Topic any longer. Read Genesis for your answers! 👋
 
Faith1960 said:
Wow, can you dumb it down for me? If you mean, literally from Adams side, I disagree.
Click to expand...
St. John Paul II uses the term “Somatic homogeneity”

soma - being
homogeneity - sameness

“rib from Adam’s side” means that woman shares the same (in dignity, type, image and likeness to God) being as the man.

So Adam can say “she is bone from my bone and flesh from my flesh.”
 
triumphguy said:
You don’t have to.
Click to expand...
So then where did Eve come from? I mean, i believe that God gave a soul to a homo sapien, we call adam. Someone said that Adam came from a group of homo sapiens and became human when he was given his soul. I agree. But then i think someone else said that Eve didnt come to us in the same way so where did she come from?
 
Hans_W said:
Scientists don’t worry with adding “probably” to all their findings. Philosophers worry about things like that.
Click to expand...
No one worries. Possibility is a given in the scientific method. Please refer back to your excellent example of copper and electricity in your post 800. Thank you.
But scientists do know that our knowledge is corrigible and it gets refined all the time. That swans need to be white was never a “scientific” claim. As I said, it was the prime example for induction in textbooks on Logic. Why should science have considered the possibility of black swans?? Why not blue swans? We discover things all the time which are completely unexpected.
Click to expand...
All swans were assumed to be white because of the geographic location under study. Please refer back to your post 800 excellent example of the possibility of a geographic galaxy somewhere. Thank you.

Note: The basic concept of possibilities does appear in published research papers. One of the more interesting papers was one which was comparing information from a previous paper with the possibilities of current information. Sorry, I do not have that citation.

Footnote 1. in the acclaimed paper “Movement Intention After Parietal Cortex Stimulation in Humans”, Michel Desmurget et al, refers to Descartes, Meditations Metaphysiques as a possible source of information. This paper proposes the possible location of volition (free will). I have mentioned in the past the importance of the materials and methods sections. It was in these sections that it could be demonstrated that the paper’s possibility was not in accord with the Catholic teachings on free will. Note. This research was based on procedures and verbatims during awake brain surgery. This type of research is extremely beneficial in the medical arena. It did not work in the spiritual area of free will.

Regarding possible blue swans. The color is not the issue. The possibility of another geographic area was not considered in the assumed interpretation of the swan species. In current research, especially in locations where it is “publish or perish”, scientists constantly consider other possibilities. A good percentage of the studies, as in the above example, are related to health of anatomies, human and non-human. Here possibilities are a driving force.

In expanding the inferences in the Black Swan puzzle, the geographic area plays an important role. In the Science of Human Evolution, the geographic areas play an important role. The fascinating difference is that the Explorer Willem de Vlamingh captured two of these “swan” creatures. There is no way scientists can go back millions of years and capture any living being. We can capture DNA in fossils. However, captured DNA does not automatically eliminate other DNA possibilities. This was prominently displayed in last year’s truly amazing fossil find.
The latest findings on human genes indicate that we went through a bottleneck of possibly as low as 1,200 people, between 20 and 40 thousand years ago. We know that pretty well by now and don’t hold your breath that this figure is going to dwindle down to 2.
Click to expand...
This is a media description.

Actual temporary bottlenecks should not be confused with average effective population size estimates. Effective population sizes in the past have varied from 2,000 to 14,000.

The estimated amount of the HLA-DRB1 alleles (versions of a particular gene) in the current human population was originally used as a means of determining the beginning population of the human species. By using different methods, additional studies of the HLA-DRB1 alleles prior to the homo/pan split have been dramatically reduced. The significance of this particular science research is that genetic diversity is not written in stone.

Catholic teachings oppose large populations as founding human nature. The size of any population is irrelevant when it comes to Catholic theology which holds to an original human population of two people.

In summary, one can readily see that today’s research learned a lesson from past centuries. We need to apply this lesson to the possibility of a geographic population of two extremely gifted people.
When it comes to giving us a soul, as a Christian I don’t look for a scientific explanation in our 4-dimensional causal time-space world. That’s the problem with many people today. Everything is being analysed scientifically (without knowing what that really means) and be explainable in scientific terms, including the supernatural. Taking every word in the Bible literally is a fairly recent habit. St Augustine certainly didn’t have that problem 1600 years ago.
Click to expand...
Well said. Thank you. :flowers:
 
edwest2 said:
On the contrary, taking the Bible literally was quite common - until the fairly recent campaign regarding this topic. It’s all symbolic… allegory…

Not so.

Ed
Click to expand...
This is not true.
Biblical fundamentalism is a fairly recent development. Not even the ancient Hebrews saw Genesis as a literalist account. This is not to say that statements supporting rigid interpretations have not always existed.
Fr Robert Barron
youtube.com/watch?v=UVsbVAVSssc
 
Faith1960 said:
So then where did Eve come from? I mean, i believe that God gave a soul to a homo sapien, we call adam. Someone said that Adam came from a group of homo sapiens and became human when he was given his soul. I agree. But then i think someone else said that Eve didnt come to us in the same way so where did she come from?
Click to expand...
I said God fashioned eve from Adam’s rib, which you didn’t accept. Here is a good explanation :

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faith1960 View Post
Wow, can you dumb it down for me? If you mean, literally from Adams side, I disagree.

St. John Paul II uses the term “Somatic homogeneity”

soma - being
homogeneity - sameness

“rib from Adam’s side” means that woman shares the same (in dignity, type, image and likeness to God) being as the man.

So Adam can say “she is bone from my bone and flesh from my flesh.”

That’s all …no more need for discussion!
 
QUOTE - TRIUMPHGUY : St. John Paul II uses the term “Somatic homogeneity”
Why does God speak so plainly in the bible and the church makes things so complicated :confused:
 
buffalo said:
The question is: Could science find God?
Click to expand...
I think that God has given us tools of scientific methods and logic because He wants us to understand and appreciate His creation.

The idea that we will find God hidden in matter tends to over look the fact that He has already come to us as Christ.

The beauty of matter compliments the beauty of the spiritual. They are, in fact, two of many aspects of God’s love.
 
edwest2 said:
On the contrary, taking the Bible literally was quite common - until the fairly recent campaign regarding this topic. It’s all symbolic… allegory…

Not so.

Ed
Click to expand...
Back in time, for some uneducated people who half listened to the preachings in their church (also depends on the quality and understanding of the preacher), or who got frightened by the wall paintings in their churches…maybe. But serious scholars didn’t take it all literally. At the reformation, one of the worries of the original churchmen was that if people could read the bible for themselves, translated into their own language, without the guidance of a scholar, they’d start to misunderstand things which would cause all manner of conflict and strife.
I think this literal reading thing dates mainly from the reformation.
The OT was written to be interpreted, to be searched and discussed…to help and guide people as time and their circumstances changed.
 
HelenRose said:
I think that God has given us tools of scientific methods and logic because He wants us to understand and appreciate His creation.

The idea that we will find God hidden in matter tends to over look the fact that He has already come to us as Christ.

The beauty of matter compliments the beauty of the spiritual. They are, in fact, two of many aspects of God’s love.
Click to expand...
But God is not created things, he is other than created things. God is the ultimate “other”. So while he reveals himself to us in intelligible ways, he will always be a mystery.
What is a mystery?
newadvent.org/cathen/10662a.htm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top