The 867th Thread on Evolution: I counted

[iamme]

“believing in something without proof is ridiculous… bible…”

This is the heretical, There are NO Absolutes, and I’m absolutely sure about that, mantra.

God bless,
Ed

thats not even kinda close to what i was saying, but i understand the need to misquote and take out of context things that prove a biased hypocrisy on your part…

and my “mantra” you claim i espoused directly conflicts with the rest of my post, which i noticed you ignored too…

 

[iamme]

The Church teaches Adam and Eve were actual people.

God bless,
Ed

it also teaches devolution…

snakes could walk, remember?

 

[jmcrae]

it also teaches devolution…

snakes could walk, remember?

The snake is an allegorical figure that stands for the Devil. (The Devil is pure spirit - it doesn’t actually “look like” anything.)

The people in the story were real people, but the story itself is an allegory that represents the thing (which has been lost to conscious memory) that happened to them. Get it?

The evidence that something really happened to them, and that the world isn’t working right anymore, is on the front page of every newspaper in the whole world.

 

[Asuno]

I personally always thought Adam and Eve weren’t real people, but were figurative for the whole of humanity. However, in recent years I have run into some ideas that, while ridiculous in themselves, got me to thinking.
What if at some point in history God took proto-humans (such as cave men), and altered them in some way (His own Way, if you will), thus creating the first homo sapiens we are today? In fact, these humans wouldn’t be ‘just like us’, they would have been more than us. Remember, He made them perfect in every way, physically, mentally, and spiritually. Even after these people “fell”, they probably didn’t lose all their “specialness”, heightened abilities which would have made them seem “godlike” to those proto-humans who weren’t altered. So maybe Cain, when he went off, married one of these proto-humans. So maybe it was just two people–Adam and Eve–who started it all. And as the children of Adam and Eve intermarried with proto-humanity,
much of their genetic contribution to the newly coming humanity (us) was still diluted by the proto-human contribution. And by the time the Great Flood happened (and I believe there is enough evidence in the fossil records to confirm it did happen), the survivors were already much “less” (so to speak) than their common ancestors, Adam and Eve. Heck, since this appears to be in that time period, maybe it was these people who built the first pyramids, and the Natzca lines, and so forth. (There still seems to be so much debate about these ancient wonders; no one really seems to be able to say definitively who built the most ancient of them.) Anyway, that’s my two cents (allright, given how much I wrote, it was a buck and a quarter).

 

[iamme]

The snake is an allegorical figure that stands for the Devil. (The Devil is pure spirit - it doesn’t actually “look like” anything.)

The people in the story were real people, but the story itself is an allegory that represents the thing (which has been lost to conscious memory) that happened to them. Get it?

The evidence that something really happened to them, and that the world isn’t working right anymore, is on the front page of every newspaper in the whole world.

no, i dont “get it”…
im not doing this for the sake of being argumentative, but i dont understand why everything has to be one or the other?
why cant i believe that theres one god, who created and governs the universe, and at the same time, a personal god who cares for me intimately, and protects me? why cant i believe that every life is precious, and yet the choice to bring a life into the world should be a choice?
if youre going to say the bible is the infallible word of god, you have to understand that that then makes it a living EVOLVING thing… maybe the words he gave to write the bible are exactly as he said them, in a way that was comprehensible to the writers and the readers of the time? a time when science was a notion and magic was a belief…

evolution is a true thing, you dont need proof to know it, and it doesnt discredit god in any way…
hell, god wants us to know him, and maybe this is the way, who are we to question?
we move forward, and we face the consequences, be they good or bad, and if needed, we atone…

 

[jmcrae]

no, i dont “get it”…
im not doing this for the sake of being argumentative, but i dont understand why everything has to be one or the other?

Because they are mutually contradictory.

why cant i believe that theres one god, who created and governs the universe, and at the same time, a personal god who cares for me intimately, and protects me?

There is no contradiction here.

why cant i believe that every life is precious, and yet the choice to bring a life into the world should be a choice?

Because it’s either God who creates life, in which case, leave it alone, or else it’s you who creates life, in which case it’s your choice whether to create it or not. But you can’t have it both ways - either God creates all human beings on purpose, or else life just happens by accident, and it’s okay to get rid of it when the accident is inconvenient. But not both. If God created you on purpose, then God also purposely created the person that you would like to get rid of.

hell, god wants us to know him, and maybe this is the way, who are we to question?

God gave us the Church and the Bible; not the theory of evolution.

 

[iamme]

Because they are mutually contradictory.

and the bible never contradicts itself

Because it’s either God who creates life, in which case, leave it alone, or else it’s you who creates life, in which case it’s your choice whether to create it or not. But you can’t have it both ways - either God creates all human beings on purpose, or else life just happens by accident, and it’s okay to get rid of it when the accident is inconvenient. But not both. If God created you on purpose, then God also purposely created the person that you would like to get rid of.

or, by YOUR assertion, god created adam and eve, with the ability to procreate, and then gave them free will, to do what they wished to do… what if they had chosen never to engage in intercourse?

god doesnt create EVERY life, in your opinion, only those two, and this is where its gotten us…

God gave us the Church and the Bible; not the theory of evolution.

actually, god just gave us faith, the bible itself and the church and sacraments were inventions of man…

 

[jmcrae]

and the bible never contradicts itself

or, by YOUR assertion, god created adam and eve, with the ability to procreate, and then gave them free will, to do what they wished to do… what if they had chosen never to engage in intercourse?

god doesnt create EVERY life, in your opinion, only those two, and this is where its gotten us…

actually, god just gave us faith, the bible itself and the church and sacraments were inventions of man…

I have to assume that you aren’t a Catholic. If you are, then may I suggest a remedial Catechism course. I mean that in the kindest possible way.

Good night!

 

[iamme]

I have to assume that you aren’t a Catholic. If you are, then may I suggest a remedial Catechism course. I mean that in the kindest possible way.

Good night!

practicing gay catholic, actually, i just believe what i believe,…
i have to assume that youre one of the pretentious, self-righteous catholics who make me embarrassed to admit im one…

 

[Abbadon]

god created everything god created evil? (or the possibility of evil). I think he did but i don’t think its a bad thing, i think we need evil in order to appreciate and understand what good is. “light without darkness is blindness”

Also i noted around page two that why don’t we see this evidence of wolves bringing forth something else. Then the example of wolf to dog was given over the span of 1400 years or more.

There is another more closer example. Bird flu, it evolved from bird to bird to have the ability to go bird to human and now what they fear is soon it will evolve to go human to human. That is what evolution is. And because virus’ have quick breeding cycles we can observe in them what would take hundreds of years in dogs.

 

[Orogeny]

My fellow Catholics, please read point 390 and 399:

vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p7.htm

God bless,
Ed

So you do know how to give at least a link if not a citation. OK, I’ll settle for a link to corroborate your claim that evolution, as written in textbooks, says that God was not involved in any way, shape or form.

I’ll be waiting quite a while, I’m sure. I guess you can continue to ignore this request to either correct a mistake or to continue to knowingly spout false information. Your call.

Peace

Tim

 

[buffalo]

Ed, the church, from time to time, corrects what it teaches. Cosmos, taught that the world was flat and this became church teaching. St. Isadore of Saville, disagreed. So did the Venerable Bede who described the world like a playground ball. Eventually, the church taught otherwise. Adam and Eve, as many Catholic scholars are certain, were probably not real people.

It is not essential doctrine to believe that Adam and Eve were real people, nor Noah, nor perhaps many others. These stories were written much later. They are useful, meaningful legends as far as I am concerned.

The church teaches this or that is just to easy an answer.

Dan

The Myth of the Flat Earth

 

[buffalo]

Eventually, the church taught otherwise. Adam and Eve, as many Catholic scholars are certain, were probably not real people.

It is not essential doctrine to believe that Adam and Eve were real people,

Uh No! It is dogma.

1. 
   *] The first man was created by God. (De fide.)
   *] The whole human race stems from one single human pair. (Sent. certa.)
   *] Man consists of two essential parts–a material body and a spiritual soul. (De fide.)
   
   *] The rational soul is per se the essential form of the body. (De fide.)
   
   *] Every human being possesses an individual soul. (De fide.)
   
   *] Every individual soul was immediately created out of nothing by God. (Sent. Certa.)
   
   *] A creature has the capacity to receive supernatural gifts. (Sent. communis.)
   
   *] The Supernatural presupposes Nature. (Sent communis.)
   
   *] God has conferred on man a supernatural Destiny. (De fide.)
   
   *] Our first parents, before the Fall, were endowed with sanctifying grace. (De fide.)
   
   *] The donum rectitudinis or integritatis in the narrower sense, i.e., the freedom from irregular desire. (Sent. fidei proxima.)
   
   *] The donum immortalitatis, i.e., bodily immortality. (De fide.)
   
   *] The donum impassibilitatis, i.e., the freedom from suffering. (Sent. communis.)
   
   *] The donum scientiae, i.e., a knowledge of natural and supernatural truths infused by God. (Sent. communis.)
   
   *] Adam received sanctifying grace not merely for himself, but for all his posterity. (Sent. certa.)
   
   *] Our first parents in paradise sinned grievously through transgression of the Divine probationary commandment. (De fide.)
   
   *] Through the sin our first parents lost sanctifying grace and provoked the anger and the indignation of God. (De fide.)
   
   *] Our first parents became subject to death and to the dominion of the Devil. (De fide.) D788.
   
   *] Adam’s sin is transmitted to his posterity, not by imitation, but by descent. (De fide.)

 

[jmcrae]

god created everything god created evil? (or the possibility of evil). I think he did but i don’t think its a bad thing, i think we need evil in order to appreciate and understand what good is. “light without darkness is blindness”

Also i noted around page two that why don’t we see this evidence of wolves bringing forth something else. Then the example of wolf to dog was given over the span of 1400 years or more.

Yes, except then later, it turns out that dogs are actually a kind of wolf - they aren’t a different species in the way that a cat would be.

There is another more closer example. Bird flu, it evolved from bird to bird to have the ability to go bird to human and now what they fear is soon it will evolve to go human to human. That is what evolution is. And because virus’ have quick breeding cycles we can observe in them what would take hundreds of years in dogs.

And again, what we have are just different kinds of viruses. They didn’t grow legs or discover fire.

If “that’s what evolution is,” (meaning, a different kind of the same thing developing over time, but not actually changing into something completely unrelated) then evolution is still not the reason that there are completely different kinds of animals around, and there is still no evidence to suggest a chain of development from the amoebae to the human being.

 

[jmcrae]

So you do know how to give at least a link if not a citation. OK, I’ll settle for a link to corroborate your claim that evolution, as written in textbooks, says that God was not involved in any way, shape or form.

I’ll be waiting quite a while, I’m sure. I guess you can continue to ignore this request to either correct a mistake or to continue to knowingly spout false information. Your call.

Peace

Tim

Secular text books don’t mention God at all, as I’m sure you’re perfectly well aware. They simply give the overall impression that there is no God, and that everything happens either by means of mechanics or by means of chemistry.

 

[Orogeny]

Secular text books don’t mention God at all, as I’m sure you’re perfectly well aware. They simply give the overall impression that there is no God, and that everything happens either by means of mechanics or by means of chemistry.

Same thing with math, accounting, geography and computer programming books. None of them mention God. As far as them giving an overall impression that there is no God, that is only an impression you personally have. I never got that from any textbook I ever used.

Besides, that isn’t even the point. Ed made a claim that I have asked him repeatedly to either back up or retract. He will do neither because a) he can’t back up, and b) it’s his mantra whether it’s true or not. I do find his silence very telling but, sadly, not surprising.

Peace

Tim

 

[jmcrae]

Same thing with math, accounting, geography and computer programming books. None of them mention God.

None of them discuss the Creation, either, as far as I know.

As far as them giving an overall impression that there is no God, that is only an impression you personally have. I never got that from any textbook I ever used.

In my case, it was the teachers who made the point that God does not exist because there is no mention of God in the text book. If science can’t find God in the Creation, then obviously, God does not exist, was their reasoning. I don’t know what Ed’s experience was, but I expect that it was probably similar.

 

[Orogeny]

None of them discuss the Creation, either, as far as I know.

Doesn’t change the point.

In my case, it was the teachers who made the point that God does not exist because there is no mention of God in the text book.

Really? It was because it wasn’t in the textbook, not because that was a personal belief of the teacher?

If science can’t find God in the Creation, then obviously, God does not exist, was their reasoning. I don’t know what Ed’s experience was, but I expect that it was probably similar.

Well, that doesn’t make much sense. The textbooks don’t say that science can’t find God in the Creation because the textbooks say nothing about God at all. Isn’t that what you meant when you said that secular text books don’t mention God at all.

There are plenty of athiests and agnostics teaching science, just as there are a lot of athiests and agnostics driving busses and performing surgery. That doesn’t make Ed’s claim accurate.

How hard is it to back up a claim? If it is true, it should be very easy (I only asked for a citation). If it is not, man up and admit it.

Peace

Tim

 

[buffalo]

Same thing with math, accounting, geography and computer programming books. None of them mention God. As far as them giving an overall impression that there is no God, that is only an impression you personally have. I never got that from any textbook I ever used.

Besides, that isn’t even the point. Ed made a claim that I have asked him repeatedly to either back up or retract. He will do neither because a) he can’t back up, and b) it’s his mantra whether it’s true or not. I do find his silence very telling but, sadly, not surprising.

Peace

Tim

You have to admit that the end result is scientism.

When you isolate God and religion from science it creates a divide. Say for example in a Catholic School that teaches a religion class and then science and math in a secular way. It pits them against one another. They are complementary.

When you eliminate God from a public school again the message to children is He is not important enough to be taught here, but science is.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Right now, all of the media are criticizing Christians. It’s not just a few vocal atheist authors. The basic message? Religion: bad, very bad. Science, which is used interchangeably here with evolution: Good, very good.

The way many people read those two messages is religion is evil, science is good, so there is no God, only Science. And the same people who fear a Theocracy are waiting with bated breath for the Technocracy. All hail genetics and the scientific priesthood.

**The real problem here Ed is that you are just mad because not everyone believes as you do. So you like to say “all” “every” etc. Just because you view the media as being against Christians, (which I very much don’t think they are. It appears that way because they do show us the evangelical right which appears silly in their beliefs)…That still gives you no license to mistate the Church’s position in some noble attempt to rectify the wrong you see. You continually try to claim that its science or God, and of course its not about that, and rational people know that. In another post you said that’s why people homeschool. These kids are gonna be in for a sad awakening when they flunk their first science courses. **