Pope: Humanity isn't random product of evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter irishpatrick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s worth noting that in fact evolution isn’t random. Two important parts of evolution are Mutation and Natural Selection. Mutation is random. If Selection was random, organisms would all have an equal probability to survive no matter how well adapted they are to their environment. In fact, those best adapted to their environment are more likely to survive.
 
Man certainly did not come into being at random and without purpose. I share the opinion that forming man from clay is a beautiful metaphor to show the ancient Hebrews the fundamental Truth of how God made us - despite the severe limits of their comprehension. It is incredibly elegant when taken alongside guided evolution because God made man’s body from crude matter on up with His own hands. Our invisible God’s hands and patience are beyond our understanding.

The image of God the Father as “a giant human with a big white beard” is something I wish the common culture hadn’t inherited from the pagans. Sometimes it causes us to lose our appreciation for the beautiful lessons in the Bible and impose our own flawed limits on our perfect and infinite Creator.
  • Marty Lund
 
Redratfish said:
True, vestigal organs do not have a current purpose. But they do not disprove God, or God guided evolution.

Catholics are free to believe in God guided evolution. I myself do.
Click to expand...
Catholics are not free to believe in an evolution that never ever was and so could not be God guided.What has been and is binding on Catholics is belief in “instant and complete creation out of nothing” and belief in evolution has been and is forbidden and anathema to and for Catholics according to Church teaching - see Catechism at CCC327 and Latern IV,Florence,Cologne and Vatican I Councils - see www.cfnews.org/sung-pio.htm and Evolution and the Magisterium at www.scripturecatholic.com - twinc
 
mlund said:
Man certainly did not come into being at random and without purpose. I share the opinion that forming man from clay is a beautiful metaphor to show the ancient Hebrews the fundamental Truth of how God made us - despite the severe limits of their comprehension. It is incredibly elegant when taken alongside guided evolution because God made man’s body from crude matter on up with His own hands. Our invisible God’s hands and patience are beyond our understanding.
Click to expand...
Methaphor? Limits of comprehension? Nonsense. They were perfectly able to comprehend longer ages or vague timeframes if God so wished to speak that way. But God didn’t, He specified certain things several times.

You do realize that if you subscribe to the religious belief in evolution and marry it to Christianity then it makes God the Creator out to be a sadistic being who used death suffering, violence, bloodshed, and countless mistakes and corruptions and destruction of DNA sequences and mistakes over millions of years to ‘create’? In other words, God is responsible for death and suffering. Not sin. And then God sent His son Christ to save us from something He originally implemented and used to create? And at the end of time the entire creation will be restored… to precisely what it is now? We will still die, suffer, get sick, get cancer, kill each other so that the strongest survive even in the new creation following Christ’s 2nd Coming?

God’s deeds are not all beyond our understanding. He quite specifically clarified some distinct details about how we were created and where sin and death come from because these are key for us understanding where we went wrong and how God is calling us back to Him and how we relate to Him. It is human error that wishes to ignore this for false science and philosophy that seeks to rid themselves of God and so justify their immorality.

Belief in the atheistic and naturalistic worldviews of the origin of life and matter and marrying them to our Christian beliefs should be a defined heresy. It completely contradicts our faith, our salvation and the good and perfect character of God. On top of that none of it is even good science. The only fruits evolution has bourne is loss of faith, mass apostasy, and justification of immorality and a reduction of the worth of human life. Look upon all the nations and cultures that adopted it.

All actual scientific evidence favors creation ex nihilo, a literal beginning to our universe, supernatural creation, fixed animal kinds, intelligent design and signs that point to and are in favor of a young universe.

However evolutionary worldviews are the backbone of secular ideology that they must maintain as a justification to ignore Christian truths and persist in sin and rebellion.

Catholics should start studying and paying attention to actual science rather than consensus driven nonsense and ideologically driven interpretations of scientific evidence to suit a worldview that rejects God. This has gone on for far too long.
 
kaid100 said:
It’s worth noting that in fact evolution isn’t random. Two important parts of evolution are Mutation and Natural Selection. Mutation is random. If Selection was random, organisms would all have an equal probability to survive no matter how well adapted they are to their environment. In fact, those best adapted to their environment are more likely to survive.
Click to expand...
%between%IDvolution

And you don’t believe natural selection is the answer?
This is the problem I have with neo-Darwinists: They teach that what is generating novelty is the accumulation of random mutations in DNA, in a direction set by natural selection. If you want bigger eggs you keep selecting the hens that are laying the bigger eggs, and you get bigger and bigger eggs. But you also get hens with defective feathers and wobbly eggs. Natural selection eliminates and maybe maintains, but it doesn’t create.
 
jdnation said:
Methaphor? Limits of comprehension? Nonsense. They were perfectly able to comprehend longer ages or vague timeframes if God so wished to speak that way. But God didn’t, He specified certain things several times.
Click to expand...
You can keep telling yourself that if you want to. The historical context of the Hebrew scriptures indicates otherwise, as does their accompanying tradition.
You do realize that if you subscribe to the religious belief in evolution and marry it to Christianity then it makes God the Creator out to be a sadistic being who used death suffering, violence, bloodshed, and countless mistakes and corruptions and destruction of DNA sequences and mistakes over millions of years to ‘create’?
Click to expand...
I don’t see anything particularly wrong or sadistic with the natural order of plants and animals (sans man) living and dying as they do now.
In other words, God is responsible for death and suffering.
Click to expand...
Plenty of God-haters still argue that God is to blame for everything since an all powerful being could stop it from happening and God chooses not to. That logic is, however, just as flawed as that which you present above.

Man, who came from the “dust” and “clay” of the earth was originally intended to dwell with the Lord forever. The first humans, out of the gate, sin and thus lose the protection of the Garden of Eden. Man chose to divorce himself from God and the paradise God had made for him, and thus suffers vulnerability from the physical forces of the universe that God previously sheltered him from.
Not sin.
Click to expand...
Sin isn’t really responsible for most fires, earthquakes, floods, and diseases. Sin doesn’t cause it to rain or lightning to strike. Sin is to blame for Man no longer enjoying God’s supernatural protection from those natural forces. God’s not constantly cherry picking people to die out of petty spite or to make an example out of him all the time like the Westborough Baptists seem to believe.
And then God sent His son Christ to save us from something He originally implemented and used to create? And at the end of time the entire creation will be restored… to precisely what it is now? We will still die, suffer, get sick, get cancer, kill each other so that the strongest survive even in the new creation following Christ’s 2nd Coming?
Click to expand...
Jesus didn’t come to shield us from the suffering and death of a mortal existence. Just look at how Peter and Paul ended up for serving their Lord faithfully. He came to redeem us to God’s Love that we had divorced ourselves from - restoring us to eternity with God in life beyond natural death.
Belief in the atheistic and naturalistic worldviews of the origin of life and matter and marrying them to our Christian beliefs should be a defined heresy.
Click to expand...
It’s a good thing you’re not the arbiter of heresy and doctrine, and that those who are happen to be Catholics rather than Luddites.
All actual scientific evidence favors creation ex nihilo, a literal beginning to our universe, supernatural creation, fixed animal kinds, intelligent design and signs that point to and are in favor of a young universe.
Click to expand...
Yeah, lumping all those things together isn’t going to get you far. Ex nihilo and a literal beginning, and intelligent design all work. Fixed animal kinds and a “young universe” - not so much. You can thank the Catholic Church for the Scientific Method you are so eager to dismiss, as well as a devotion to examining the natural world around us to gain more understanding of creation and the beauty of God’s handiwork.
  • Marty Lund
 
jdnation said:
You do realize that if you subscribe to the religious belief in evolution and marry it to Christianity then it makes God the Creator out to be a sadistic being who used death suffering, violence, bloodshed, and countless mistakes and corruptions and destruction of DNA sequences and mistakes over millions of years to ‘create’? In other words, God is responsible for death and suffering. Not sin.
Click to expand...
Even in the second creation story in Genesis, the man and woman had to eat from a special tree to have immortality (the tree of life). They weren’t naturally immortal. Eternal life is a supernatural gift from God, not a natural gift.
 
Neil_Anthony said:
Even in the second creation story in Genesis, the man and woman had to eat from a special tree to have immortality (the tree of life). They weren’t naturally immortal. Eternal life is a supernatural gift from God, not a natural gift.
Click to expand...
Man was created immortal because God and death are incompatible - Catholics,especially have no excuse for not knowing or accepting this for Wisdom.1:13-14 and 2:23-24 can only be found in Catholic bibles - twinc
 
kaid100 said:
It’s worth noting that in fact evolution isn’t random. Two important parts of evolution are Mutation and Natural Selection. Mutation is random. If Selection was random, organisms would all have an equal probability to survive no matter how well adapted they are to their environment. In fact, those best adapted to their environment are more likely to survive.
Click to expand...
buffalo said:
%between%IDvolution

And you don’t believe natural selection is the answer?
This is the problem I have with neo-Darwinists: They teach that what is generating novelty is the accumulation of random mutations in DNA, in a direction set by natural selection. If you want bigger eggs you keep selecting the hens that are laying the bigger eggs, and you get bigger and bigger eggs. But you also get hens with defective feathers and wobbly eggs. Natural selection eliminates and maybe maintains, but it doesn’t create.
Click to expand...
The defective feathers and wobbly eggs will also be selected against, and if the benefit from larger eggs is no greater than the disadvantage from those problems, you would be unlikely to see the larger eggs you describe. Natural Selection isn’t so much about “create” as it is about “evolve”, where pre-existing structures gain new uses and change as they go.
 
I hope that someday the Pope denounces Evolution altogether and promotes Creationism. Charles Darwin was an atheist (Secret Satanist) and used Evolution to remove any reference to God. There has never been any species ever that has evolved into a different species.
 
kaid100 said:
The defective feathers and wobbly eggs will also be selected against, and if the benefit from larger eggs is no greater than the disadvantage from those problems, you would be unlikely to see the larger eggs you describe. Natural Selection isn’t so much about “create” as it is about “evolve”, where pre-existing structures gain new uses and change as they go.
Click to expand...
I would read the entire article.
 
INCONSPICUOUS said:
I hope that someday the Pope denounces Evolution altogether and promotes Creationism. Charles Darwin was an atheist (Secret Satanist) and used Evolution to remove any reference to God. There has never been any species ever that has evolved into a different species.
Click to expand...
At the time Darwin discovered the theory of evolution, he was Christian. He became an atheist later, but he was certainly not a Satanist. Apart from anything, atheism and Satanism are mutually exclusive.
 
mlund said:
Yeah, lumping all those things together isn’t going to get you far. Ex nihilo and a literal beginning, and intelligent design all work. Fixed animal kinds and a “young universe” - not so much. You can thank the Catholic Church for the Scientific Method you are so eager to dismiss, as well as a devotion to examining the natural world around us to gain more understanding of creation and the beauty of God’s handiwork.
  • Marty Lund
Click to expand...
Are you saying you do not believe in a young Universe? Explain then how spiral galaxies sill hold an organized form, how blue giant stars have not exhausted themselves, how comets are still in existence, how the Earth’s electomagnetic field hasn’t entirely degraded, how new stars can not be seen forming.

Are you also saying that we are evolved from inorganic molecules? Explain then how fossils or even indications of the exorbitant number of intermediate organisms necessary to support this idea are completely absent, how even according to evolutionists’ models rapid mutation of a population would result in more negative than positive mutations leading not to survival of a few superior organisms but to extinction of the population as a whole, how every example of adaptation with in genera or species is already coded within the genus or species genome and is not an acquiring of genetic material via mutation, how biodiversity is decreasing rapidly but new species are not coming into existence.

Evolutionists do not follow scientific method. The Big Bang theory contradicts the first and second laws of thermodynamics. The conclusion of adaptation within an organisms genetic code to be able to better survive in its environment is a far cry from macro-evolution. Darwin used good observational scientific method to discover adaptation and then followed no scientific guidelines when he began concocting his hypothesis of molecule to man evolution.

Honestly, I feel the more you truly study God’s creation with the teaching of Sacred Scripture in your heart (and not the domineering and indoctrinating teachings of atheists and arrogant theists) the more you see the direct work of God’s hands in the instant and complete creation of the universe… many saints attest to this.

Science is indeed always uncovering evidence for the Young Universe and the Great Flood that the Church Fathers and Sacred Scripture have taught of all along. Although the ‘mainstreamed’ evolutionist scientists never admit to a young earth and cosmos or to a global flood to explain findings contradictory to the ‘mandates’ of evolution.

Why do so many good people in their minds deny God the power to create the universe in six 24 hour days? Why can they not humble themselves to have the faith to accept this integral aspect of our faith even if they can not fully understand it?
 
ijf90 said:
Why do so many good people in their minds deny God the power to create the universe in six 24 hour days?
Click to expand...
Straw Man logic fallacy. Nobody is denying God’s power to do so if He wished to.

In question is whether God saw fit to limit the scope of His work to six 24 hour days. Considering the universe started out Void and without a Sun or Earth to even use as a mortal reckoning of time and that our Catholic understanding of God already makes it clear that God the Father exists outside of time I think it is largely a moot point. It certainly doesn’t warrant the sort of context-poor literalism that leads to people insisting that the Bible teaches us that the Earth is flat.
Why can they not humble themselves to have the faith to accept this integral aspect of our faith even if they can not fully understand it?
Click to expand...
It would likewise require humility to accept that a literal interpretation of this particular passage is not demanded by the Church.

But why bother? It isn’t like God ever came down to earth and spoke in metaphor only understood later in a revelation that inspired faith and awe in His power …
The Gospel According to John:
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”
Click to expand...
But at least God never spoke in parables where he used characters or objects in a story to represent real people, places, and things, right?
  • Marty Lund
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top