C
Catholic_Johnny
Guest
ByzCath, evolutionism disfigures divine revelation, attacks Adam and even our Blessed Redeemer. Everywhere it is syncretized with Catholicism, the faith dies. Here is where all this leads.
Blessings,
cj
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Blessings,
cj
E
edwest2
Guest
Sorry. I meant no offense. I’ll just ask a few questions.Show me where I stated that it was a fact?
I find it troubling that you would choose to attack someone who is asking a question and not even understand what they are asking. If you have issues with the question then you should ask clarifying questions rather than answering what you want.
I am pretty sure that Pope John Paul II said that the belief in evolution is ok as long is one believes that God is behind it and at some point God introduced the soul into two individuals.
But I see that this is a charged discussion and those who have not stated that they believe in either view (like myself) are open to attack from both sides.
Thanks everyone though for the Christian Charity. (sarcasm in case you can’t tell)
Are Adam and Eve our parents? The parents of all human beings?
Were there pre-humans or hominids before Adam and Eve?
Peace,
Ed
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Sorry. I meant no offense. I’ll just ask a few questions.
Are Adam and Eve our parents? The parents of all human beings?
Were there pre-humans or hominids before Adam and Eve?
Peace,
Ed
I believe that God created everything, that man was made by God in His image, and that sin and death entered though Adam and Eve.
T
tjm190
Guest
How so? Because an IDer, having lost the battle claiming specialization was impossible, decided to doctor their argument with nonsensical terminology the scientific terminology needs changing?I believe this system will either be overturned or tweaked so to speak.
T
tjm190
Guest
I say the odds are 99%.Dr Scott Hahn and Dr B. Wiker in Answering The New Atheism, 2008, show very clearly that the odds against life “evolving” from inanimate chemicals are so high as to be impossible. “Dawkins believes that the odds against a propitious string of DNA arising by chance are 1,000,000,000 to one. But when we do the actual calculations we find that the odds against it are a bit over 1,600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to one.”
Dawkins best guess at the age of the earth at 4.5 billion years is just not enough time for such odds to be overcome. (p 24, 27-8).
The fact that Dawkins maths and science are so erroneous merely reflects his desire to cling to evolutionism at all costs, much like many others.
C
Catholic_Johnny
Guest
How did our Creator manage without modernists to advise Him on the wisdom of His creation?As I said- we have binomial nomenclature for that.
Domain
Kingdom
Phylum
Order
Family
Genus
Species
’Kind’ is nonsense
11And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his** kind**, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
21And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
24And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
(Genesis 1)
T
tjm190
Guest
So we’re using biblical language in place of scientific terminology? Should science books teach about the things that creepth upon the Earth?How did our Creator manage without modernists to advise Him on the wisdom of His creation?
B
buffalo
Guest
Adaptation and variation within kinds happens much much faster than the slow going plodding deleterious evolution.Buffalo, are you arguing that all felines evolved by “microevolution” from the one pair of cats Noah had on the ark? If so, do you know whether there was enough time for this evolution to happen between Noah’s flood (I guess around 4,500 BCE) and the first literary mention of lions, tigers, cheetahs, leopards, sabre tooths, cougars, panthers, jaguars, bobcats, snow leopards, and domestic cats? That’s a lot of evolution to happen after the flood and before the writing of the Bible.
StAnastasia
T
tjm190
Guest
If such ‘kinds’ existed, there’d be a reason to look into that argument.Adaptation and variation within kinds happens much much faster than the slow going plodding deleterious evolution.
B
buffalo
Guest
Time to play the Dawkins Mutation Challenge once again. Try it StA.Yes.
Please share with us your results.
C
Catholic_Johnny
Guest
The point is that there is order in nature and there are no mutations from one species into another.So we’re using biblical language in place of scientific terminology? Should science books teach about the things that creepth upon the Earth?
God ordained that each should reproduce “after his kind.”
39 All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of fleshc] of men, another flesh of animals, another of fish, and another of birds.
(St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 15)
B
buffalo
Guest
Hello - the genetics will be a more accurate classification system. This is being done by geneticists who really don’t have a stake in the old system.How so? Because an IDer, having lost the battle claiming specialization was impossible, decided to doctor their argument with nonsensical terminology the scientific terminology needs changing?
B
buffalo
Guest
and they do.God ordained that each should reproduce “after his kind.”
T
tjm190
Guest
I know there is order- we have 7 different levels of it. And again, the goats that have been domesticated are their own species- their ancestors are still out there.The point is that there is order in nature and there are no mutations from one species into another.
So you don’t have horse-squirrels running around.God ordained that each should reproduce “after his kind.”
T
tjm190
Guest
They start from the assumption that man is not descended from any other mammals, that common descent is false, and that all ‘supposed’ transitional fossils are not. They may not have a stake in the old system, but they have clear motives.Hello - the genetics will be a more accurate classification system. This is being done by geneticists who really don’t have a stake in the old system.
R
rossum
Guest
Both. Linnaeus started this classification system in the Eighteenth century not knowing anything about DNA so he, and all those after him, classified organisms on the basis of their appearance, organs etc.Do these classifications result in species which are related by DNA (which would be logical for the TOE), or by similarity of looks, function, etc.? How is this different than 'kind?" I really don’t know, and I’m asking the question.
Once DNA was discovered a second tree was built using DNA. Comparing the two trees (the “Twin Nested Hierarchies”) the differences were very small, in about the 12th decimal place, and mostly happened in areas where the Linnaean tree had been doubtful.
The difference with the YEC “kind” is that YECs assert that evolution cannot cross the boundaries of a “kind”. To evolution there is only one kind - the ‘Life on Earth’ kind.
rossum
B
buffalo
Guest
Let’s wait and see.They start from the assumption that man is not descended from any other mammals, that common descent is false, and that all ‘supposed’ transitional fossils are not. They may not have a stake in the old system, but they have clear motives.
T
tjm190
Guest
Wait and see?Let’s wait and see.
creationbiology.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=201240&module_id=37891
They treat the bible as evidence- this isn’t taxonomy, this is remaking science to fit a literal interpretation of Genesis.
B
buffalo
Guest
Share with me what else could keep scientific reasoning on the true path?Wait and see?
creationbiology.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=201240&module_id=37891
They treat the bible as evidence- this isn’t taxonomy, this is remaking science to fit a literal interpretation of Genesis.
You speak like the interpretation of the Bible just happened. Catholics understand the Bible as it has been taught and understood from the beginning, Of course you knew that, which is why you are a dissident. You just cannot come to terms with it. I was there too.
T
tjm190
Guest
…so science isn’t doing it right unless every sentence in the bible is treated as it it were literal empirical fact?Share with me what else could keep scientific reasoning on the true path?
Science is based on observation and analysis- it can make short run mistakes when an individual observation or several observations are extrapolated beyond their scope- luckily supposed explanations for natural phenomena require mountains of evidence before being named theories.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.