Theistic Evolution and the Sabbath

[Catholic_Johnny]

Now let me ask you theistic evolutionists a question:
What is the origin of the seven day week?

In the Judaic-Christian Tradition, the Sabbath day occupies an enormous revelatory significance. The Shabbat is the 7th day on which Elohim rested from His works; it is the sign of the Covenant between God and Israel; it is in encoded in the 3rd Commandment; Israel observed a complex statutory guideline for keeping the Sabbaths; Israel was commanded to let the land lie fallow on the Sabbath year(s); they were exiles 70 years to remind them of their disobedience to the commandment to observe the Sabbath years; they celebrated the Year of Jubilee on the Sabbath of Sabbath years (every 50 years); Isaiah prophesies about the correct observance of the Sabbath; the Prophet Daniel prophesies about the coming of Meshiach in bundles of ‘sevens’ (literally ‘weeks’); Jesus proclaims that He is Lord of Sabbath and that the Sabbath was ‘made for man, and not man for the Sabbath’.

Your syncretism of pagan monism with Divine Revelation is fraught with many difficult problems not the least of which is the Sabbath Day. A gradually evolving material universe cannot be satisfactorily harmonized with Genesis without doing violence to the text. Evolution dismisses the Sabbath and either consigns it to pre-historic pagan mythology or denies that it has any real meaning at all, a view that our Hebrew brethren would take umbridge with.

You cannot trace the origin of the 7-day week back any further than Genesis. There is no evidence of the 7 day week coming from any other source. The Hebrew people were given these revelations and Covenants by Almighty God. Adam was the first recipient of the 7 day week. And the Hebrew people have complex and intact genealogies dating back to creation week. They were also given a lunar calendar while the pagans observed cycles of the sun. There is a reason Hebrew people observe this as the year 5769. And no other calendar predates it - look high and low, gaze into your carbon dating theories and apemen and missing links - but this is the oldest extant calender on the earth.

God staked His own credibility on the enduring integrity of the Hebrew nation:

35 Thus says the LORD, He who gives the sun to light the day, moon and stars to light the night; Who stirs up the sea till its waves roar, whose name is LORD of hosts:
36 If ever these natural laws give way in spite of me, says the LORD, Then shall the race of Israel cease as a nation before me forever.
37 Thus says the LORD: If the heavens on high can be measured, or the foundations below the earth be sounded, Then will I cast off the whole race of Israel because of all they have done, says the LORD. Jeremiah 31

To do away with the Sabbath, you must do away with Israel, which God says can never happen. Conversely, to attempt to say you have “measured the heavens” or “sounded the foundations below the earth” (claims evolutionists routinely make) one must destroy the system established by Adonai (vs 35 is grounded in Genesis 1).

This is one of the most pernicious threats of so-called theistic evolution: in order for Christians to swallow it, they musn’t look very carefully at Genesis at all. The entire fabric of revelation is woven around God’s orderly establishment of the material universe. The Sabbath is the eternal reminder that man is a creature, and that he was created to worship his Creator. Cardinal Ratzinger treats this at length in Christianity, Islam, Relativism and the West.

If anyone can harmonize evolution with the 7 day week and the Sabbath Day, I’d like to hear it in the Fathers, the Doctors, and the Scriptures as well as contemporary (unproven) theories reliant on disputed methods of dating and antisupernaturalist syllogisms.

 

[Luke65]

Now let me ask you theistic evolutionists a question:
What is the origin of the seven day week?

Interesting angle, Johnny, but I suppose they’ll just say the idea of a seven day week evolved!

This is one of the most pernicious threats of so-called theistic evolution: in order for Christians to swallow it, they musn’t look very carefully at Genesis at all.

Obviously, they haven’t, because I’ve seen nobody else who has noticed what’s missing from Genesis 1 in the NAB (hint: the proof that Evolution is a lie).

If anyone can harmonize evolution with the 7 day week and the Sabbath Day, I’d like to hear it in the Fathers, the Doctors, and the Scriptures as well as contemporary (unproven) theories reliant on disputed methods of dating and antisupernaturalist syllogisms.

It’s nice to see you still have your sense of humor! Methinks you won’t have any takers, but I’ll be watching…

 

[Catholic_Johnny]

Interesting angle, Johnny, but I suppose they’ll just say the idea of a seven day week evolved!

Obviously, they haven’t, because I’ve seen nobody else who has noticed what’s missing from Genesis 1 in the NAB (hint: the proof that Evolution is a lie).

It’s nice to see you still have your sense of humor! Methinks you won’t have any takers, but I’ll be watching…

Luke 65! Your sense of humor tops mine! LOL!

If no one else shows up, we’ll just trade giggles…

 

[Christy_Beth]

Now let me ask you theistic evolutionists a question:
What is the origin of the seven day week?

In the Judaic-Christian Tradition, the Sabbath day occupies an enormous revelatory significance. The Shabbat is the 7th day on which Elohim rested from His works; it is the sign of the Covenant between God and Israel; it is in encoded in the 3rd Commandment; Israel observed a complex statutory guideline for keeping the Sabbaths; Israel was commanded to let the land lie fallow on the Sabbath year(s); they were exiles 70 years to remind them of their disobedience to the commandment to observe the Sabbath years; they celebrated the Year of Jubilee on the Sabbath of Sabbath years (every 50 years); Isaiah prophesies about the correct observance of the Sabbath; the Prophet Daniel prophesies about the coming of Meshiach in bundles of ‘sevens’ (literally ‘weeks’); Jesus proclaims that He is Lord of Sabbath and that the Sabbath was ‘made for man, and not man for the Sabbath’.

Your syncretism of pagan monism with Divine Revelation is fraught with many difficult problems not the least of which is the Sabbath Day. A gradually evolving material universe cannot be satisfactorily harmonized with Genesis without doing violence to the text. Evolution dismisses the Sabbath and either consigns it to pre-historic pagan mythology or denies that it has any real meaning at all, a view that our Hebrew brethren would take umbridge with.

You cannot trace the origin of the 7-day week back any further than Genesis. There is no evidence of the 7 day week coming from any other source. The Hebrew people were given these revelations and Covenants by Almighty God. Adam was the first recipient of the 7 day week. And the Hebrew people have complex and intact genealogies dating back to creation week. They were also given a lunar calendar while the pagans observed cycles of the sun. There is a reason Hebrew people observe this as the year 5769. And no other calendar predates it - look high and low, gaze into your carbon dating theories and apemen and missing links - but this is the oldest extant calender on the earth.

God staked His own credibility on the enduring integrity of the Hebrew nation:

To do away with the Sabbath, you must do away with Israel, which God says can never happen. Conversely, to attempt to say you have “measured the heavens” or “sounded the foundations below the earth” (claims evolutionists routinely make) one must destroy the system established by Adonai (vs 35 is grounded in Genesis 1).

This is one of the most pernicious threats of so-called theistic evolution: in order for Christians to swallow it, they musn’t look very carefully at Genesis at all. The entire fabric of revelation is woven around God’s orderly establishment of the material universe. The Sabbath is the eternal reminder that man is a creature, and that he was created to worship his Creator. Cardinal Ratzinger treats this at length in Christianity, Islam, Relativism and the West.

If anyone can harmonize evolution with the 7 day week and the Sabbath Day, I’d like to hear it in the Fathers, the Doctors, and the Scriptures as well as contemporary (unproven) theories reliant on disputed methods of dating and antisupernaturalist syllogisms.

I tried to get just those last two words in. Obviously it didn’t work. Just goes to show you how lousy I am when dealing with technology.

Anyway, those last two words. They sure are a mouthful. Care to tell me what the mean?

And I had to read your post twice before it sank in. But, hey, it’s only 5am here. My first thought was that you were arguing for the Sabbath on Saturday rather than our current Lord’s day on Sunday. There’s a lady I know who is into that big time. She claims that Catholics purposely changed it knowing they were breaking the commandment to keep holy the Sabbath.

 

[Catholic_Johnny]

I tried to get just those last two words in. Obviously it didn’t work. Just goes to show you how lousy I am when dealing with technology.

Anyway, those last two words. They sure are a mouthful. Care to tell me what the mean?

And I had to read your post twice before it sank in. But, hey, it’s only 5am here. My first thought was that you were arguing for the Sabbath on Saturday rather than our current Lord’s day on Sunday. There’s a lady I know who is into that big time. She claims that Catholics purposely changed it knowing they were breaking the commandment to keep holy the Sabbath.

Christy Beth:
No, I am not arguing for Saturday observance, especially since Christians are not obligated to keep the Law of Moses. I am trying to demonstrate that Catholic Teaching and evolution cannot be syncretized (forced to blend together) without doing great violence to the Genesis account.

Antisupernaturalism: a belief condemned in several Papal Encyclicals (Providentissimus Deus and Lamentibili Sane are easy references - there are many more) that dismisses the miracles of the Bible and the Church era. It is the rationalist (another heresy) belief that all things are explainable by natural methods and means.

Syllogism: a model erected to make an argument from the point of logic.

Antisupernaturalistic syllogism: arguments against the record we have in the Bible, the Early Church Fathers (successors of the Apostles) and the Doctors of the Church (Augustine, Aquinas, etc…) on the basis of so-called recent scientific discovery and mere human reason.

The point being: if evolution is true, then the Sabbath day is robbed of all meaning. If the world evolved through billions of years of death, disease, mutations, and natural selection, then (a) it is still evolving (the heresy of monism) or (b) the Sabbath day is a mere symbol adapted from pagan mythology.

The problem is, no one has any authoritative explanation of the origin of the 7-day week except the Hebrew People. They say it came from God and contains 7 literal days. The whole world follows the 7-day week and always has. Jesus testifies that He is Lord of the Sabbath. The 7 day week is obviously as old as mankind itself. The evolutionists attempt to change the subject to avoid the obvious implications of Scripture and Tradition: the Sabbath observance came from heaven and is non-negotiable in Revelation. That renders a billions-of-years old gradually evolving earth completely incompatible with Divine Revelation.

The Sabbath day is from the Hebrew word yom which literally means a 24-hour day. If the world evolved over billions of years, where does that place Adam and Eve? Our Church has already determined polygenism (belief in many Adams and Eves simultaneously evolving) to be a heresy. So what happens after Adam and Eve are created? Where does the sabbath day fit in theistic evolutionary theory? How does one harmonize the significant place Sabbath holds in Hebraic-Christian thought and Tradition with the claims of an evolving material universe that emerged from millions of deaths and selections-of-nature-in-favor-of-the-fittest? How does God rest from all His works if the universe is still evolving? What possible meaning does the Sabbath day have if evolutionary theory is to be accepted?

As you see in the quote from Jeremiah, the wisdom of the Holy Spirit has set up for failure anyone who attempts to split Israel and its Laws from His Covenant of faithfulness. If the Laws of God in nature can fail (including the Sabbath laws) then God will forsake his chosen people (something He swore on His own sacred name that He would never do).

The theory of evolution and the Divine mystery of the Sabbath day/years cannot be harmonized.

 

[Christy_Beth]

Oh, ok. It’s actually an old argument isn’t it? I mean, those that belive in evolution want to prove creation wrong in order to support their “theory.”

 

[PeterK]

CJ,
Are you advocating a literal 7-24-hour day creation event as the basis for our current 7 day calendar week?

We don’t have to believe the first chapter of Genesis was the first chapter of the Bible written or conceived to be written. Compared to the rest of the material in the Torah, the 7 day creation narrative could be some of the most recent material. If one accepts the narrative’s origins as priestly (document hypothesis) it may have an origin date around the time of King David and his successors. By that time there were many calendar systems in play.

My guess is whatever calendar know-how the early Hebrews had was initially gleaned from their stay with the Egyptians (Joseph was a priest and thus intensly involved with astronomy and the Egyptian ritual calendar) and then possibly modified from there.

Just my thoughts.
Be kind.

Peter

 

[Catholic_Johnny]

CJ,
Are you advocating a literal 7-24-hour day creation event as the basis for our current 7 day calendar week?

We don’t have to believe the first chapter of Genesis was the first chapter of the Bible written or conceived to be written. Compared to the rest of the material in the Torah, the 7 day creation narrative could be some of the most recent material. If one accepts the narrative’s origins as priestly (document hypothesis) it may have an origin date around the time of King David and his successors. By that time there were many calendar systems in play.

My guess is whatever calendar know-how the early Hebrews had was initially gleaned from their stay with the Egyptians (Joseph was a priest and thus intensly involved with astronomy and the Egyptian ritual calendar) and then possibly modified from there.

Just my thoughts.
Be kind.

Peter

Peter:
Yes, seven 24 hour days is obviously what Moses intended in the text and the LORD confirms it in Exodus 16:22-30 and Exodus 20:11 -

In six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them; but on the seventh day he rested. That is why the LORD has blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

I am sorry that someone has poisoned your mind against the Traditional interpretation and epistemology of the Sacred Scriptures with all the confusion about documentary theory. We don’t have to believe Genesis? Are we more enlightened than Jesus who did?

None of the calendars that exist today come close to the advanced age of the Hebrew calendar. Look high and low Peter, there is no calendar that predates the Hebrew calendar and no other civilization has a coherent, traceable explanation of the seven day week other than our Scriptures and the testimony of the Chosen People.

Joseph brought knowledge to the Egyptians concerning revelation - they certainly had none to offer him. Joseph was heir of a line that connects Adam to Noah to Abraham.

Peter (I’m trying to be kind ), one of the problems with redaction criticism is that it begins with the material, rational approach and brings to the Sacred Scripture a priori rules about what the Bible can and can not mean. Our Church does not teach that - the Sacred Scriptures are to be read in the same Spirit in which they are given - not deconstructed like a pagan epic poem or any other piece of ancient literature.

Moses is the author of Genesis. YHWH communicates directly with him on Mt. Sinai and tells him exactly what happened in Eden (although the Tradition was probably not new to Moses as the Hebrews maintained oral traditions from the beginning) and re-emphasized the explicit meaning of the Sabbath when He gives Moses the Ten Commandments.

Documentary theory is a 19th century novelty with zero support in Tradition, the Fathers or the Doctors of the Church.

See: Papal Encyclicals Providentissimus Deus and Divino Afflante Spiritu.

How to Study Holy Scripture
9. We must now, Venerable Brethren, as our purpose demands, impart to you such counsels as seem best suited for carrying on successfully the study of Biblical science.

1. But first it must be clearly understood whom we have to oppose and contend against, and what are their tactics and their arms. In earlier times the contest was chiefly with those who, relying on private judgment and repudiating the divine traditions and teaching office of the Church, held the Scriptures to be the one source of revelation and the final appeal in matters of Faith. Now, we have to meet the Rationalists, true children and inheritors of the older heretics, who, trusting in their turn to their own way of thinking, have rejected even the scraps and remnants of Christian belief which had been handed down to them. They deny that there is any such thing as revelation or inspiration, or Holy Scripture at all; they see, instead, only the forgeries and the falsehoods of men; they set down the Scripture narratives as stupid fables and lying stories: the prophecies and the oracles of God are to them either predictions made up after the event or forecasts formed by the light of nature; the miracles and the wonders of God’s power are not what they are said to be, but the startling effects of natural law, or else mere tricks and myths; and the Apostolic Gospels and writings are not the work of the Apostles at all. These detestable errors, whereby they think they destroy the truth of the divine Books, are obtruded on the world as the peremptory pronouncements of a certain newly-invented “free science;” a science, however, which is so far from final that they are perpetually modifying and supplementing it.

Leo X, Providentissimus Deus

 

[Luke65]

If one accepts the narrative’s origins as priestly (document hypothesis)…

Peter, you know the “documentary hypothesis”, that Moses didn’t write the Torah (the Pentateuch), but that some unknown authors did centuries later? But do you know that there is no actual evidence for this theory? Do you know that the evidence against it is overwhelming? That’s a whole long debate, but here’s all you really need to know:

Jesus Christ: “If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?” (John 5:46-47)

Moses (wrote): “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.” (Exodus 20:11)

St. Augustine: “Seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand.”

God bless you all :bowdown:

 

[Catholic_Johnny]

Peter, you know the “documentary hypothesis”, that Moses didn’t write the Torah (the Pentateuch), but that some unknown authors did centuries later? But do you know that there is no actual evidence for this theory? Do you know that the evidence against it is overwhelming? That’s a whole long debate, but here’s all you really need to know:

Jesus Christ: “If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?” (John 5:46-47)

Moses (wrote): “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.” (Exodus 20:11)

St. Augustine: “Seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand.”

God bless you all :bowdown:

 

[Luke65]

Moses is the author of Genesis. YHWH communicates directly with him on Mt. Sinai and tells him exactly what happened in Eden (although the Tradition was probably not new to Moses as the Hebrews maintained oral traditions from the beginning) and re-emphasized the explicit meaning of the Sabbath when He gives Moses the Ten Commandments.

Johnny, I think you’ll be interested in this article The “Toledoths” of Genesis. The main point is that the Book of Genesis takes the form of ancient writings on stone (or clay) tablets. Also, check out his chiasm from this webpage, which by itself effectively demolishes the documentary hypothesis.

 

[Catholic_Johnny]

Johnny, I think you’ll be interested in this article The “Toledoths” of Genesis. The main point is that the Book of Genesis takes the form of ancient writings on stone (or clay) tablets. Also, check out his chiasm from this webpage, which by itself effectively demolishes the documentary hypothesis.

Luke65:
Thank you so much for the link to the chiastics! That blew me away! May the LORD bless you for encouraging the heart of a fellow pilgrim!
Rejoicing,
Johnny
:extrahappy:

 

[Catholic_Johnny]

Johnny, I think you’ll be interested in this article The “Toledoths” of Genesis. The main point is that the Book of Genesis takes the form of ancient writings on stone (or clay) tablets. Also, check out his chiasm from this webpage, which by itself effectively demolishes the documentary hypothesis.

I’m into the Toledoths of Genesis now, Luke - amazing. Thank you sooooooooo much for these precious links to knowledge!
Johnny

 

[Luke65]

Luke65:
Thank you so much for the link to the chiastics! That blew me away! May the LORD bless you for encouraging the heart of a fellow pilgrim!
Rejoicing,
Johnny
:extrahappy:

Thanks Johnny, I love the fact that these “scholars” put out their little JEPD theory, apparently unaware of this awesome chiasm hidden within.

“Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” (1 Corinthians 1:20)

You have no idea, Paul! (he does )

 

[PeterK]

CJ,
If I may adapt a saying of our Lord to this situation…
*Render to the Natural Scientists and Theistic Evolutionists that which belongs to the Natural Scientists and Theistic Evolutionists. And render to God that which belongs to God. *
Science does not acknowledge the supernatural. This is a self-imposed limitation. It only acknowledges empirical data, that which can be measured by the five senses. *‘They believe because they have seen, blest are they who believe and have not seen.’ *
Actually, the Theistic Evolutionists have rendered a service to the reader of scripture by liberating it from being strictly a ‘how-to’ manual. Something more important than how creation was accomplished is why creation was accomplished.
So what is the 7-day creation narrative telling us if not ‘how’ creation was all accomplished? Here are some thoughts not exhaustive and not in order of importance…

1. I don’t put much stock in the numerological explanation of things, but seven is supposed to have been a ‘perfect’ number for the Hebrews. From this notion the ancient inspired writer could be saying God’s purpose or plan for creation is perfect.
2. It could also mean God is the creator and controller of ‘time’ - a true bit of creation since God is eternal or outside of time; timeless.
3. From this ‘creator of time’ idea flows the notion of that which time is rushing forward to – which is God. All ‘time’ began with God and, eventually, all time will be brought back to or consummated in God - kind of sounds like the 2nd coming, the consummation of all things in Christ.
4. This idea of all things being reborn / remade / made right in Christ, little by little, sabbath by sabbath now, and totally later, is the heart of the Sabbath.
5. The 7 days point to the Sabbath. Our little weekly sabbaths point to the big sabbath promised to occur, when all things will be made right. Maranatha - Come O Lord.

This agrees with the idea of the Sabbath being made for man. God doesn’t *need *to receive worship from men - he doesn’t need anything from men. However, men do indeed need to receive from God - which is what happens when we receive the Eucharist - the very body and blood of Christ. This does nothing for Christ but does everything for us. Admitting that I need God is first act of true worship.

Our Pope as Cardinal wrote “[in the 7-day creation account] Creation is oriented toward the sabbath…", “Creation is designed in such a way that it is oriented to worship.” "Creation exists for the sake of worship. … This is not the expression of an otherworldly piety but a clear and sober translation of the creation account and the message that it bears for our lives.” – my brackets and bold, all from ‘In the beginning… A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall.’ Eerdmans.

With the above in mind, one *might *read the seventh day of the Genesis narrative as not having taken place yet-for us. Instead it is creation’s destination. A promise, maybe the first one in the Bible, that at the “end of time” (indicated by the 7th day of the 7-day creation week) all things will rest in God’s goodness. God will reign supreme. Fittingly, at the “end of year’s time” for our Catholic liturgical year, the last Sabbath of our Catholic liturgical calendar is the celebration of Christ the King!

The final consummation of all things in Christ is one of our greatest Christian hopes if not the greatest hope. So the sabbaths, over time, keep our hope alive and thus our faith, our trust that God is going to help us individually and collectively get where we need to go - back to Him.

So now there can be seen a connection between the 7-day creation account in Genesis and our Catholic liturgy. And please notice, evolution, paleontology, the fossil record, carbon dating, hominids, genomes and the like, were never mentioned. Science could never reach any of the conclusions given above.

Science only tells us that the seven day creation narrative is not scientific – that’s it. And I’m fine with that.

The Bible - It’s about God.

Peter

 

[Luke65]

And God bless you too, Johnny, and all Truth seekers! :clapping:

 

[PeterK]

CJ,

We don’t have to believe Genesis? Are we more enlightened than Jesus who did?
You grossly misquote me. I said…
We don’t have to believe the first chapter of Genesis was the first chapter of the Bible written or conceived to be written.
Quite a different notion.

*None of the calendars that exist today come close to the advanced age of the Hebrew calendar. *
A reference to a seven day week does not a calendar make. Calendars are generally associated with the entire cycle of a year.

Did Moses then write about his own death? It’s not redaction criticism or contrary to tradition to hold that the writings of Moses may have been added to or expanded upon by the Holy Spirit working in the faithful.

To back this up I again quote our current Pope from the same source earlier cited,* “The moment when creation became a dominant theme occurred during the Babylonian Exile. It was then that the account that we have just heard* [Gen1:1-19]* - based to be sure on very ancient traditions - assumed its present form.”* my brackets and bold.

Notice he’s referring to the first chapter of Genesis and not the entire book nor the entire Torah.

Peter

 

[Catholic_Johnny]

CJ,
If I may adapt a saying of our Lord to this situation…
*Render to the Natural Scientists and Theistic Evolutionists that which belongs to the Natural Scientists and Theistic Evolutionists. And render to God that which belongs to God. *
Science only tells us that the seven day creation narrative is not scientific – that’s it. And I’m fine with that.

The Bible - It’s about God.

Peter

Peter,
I rejoice in reading your faith-filled words, your theistic evolutionism notwithstanding. So glad to hear you believe in the True Presence. I agree that we are all longing for the coming of the Kingdom of God and for Jesus’ soon return.

A few responses to your thoughtful post:

1. The number 8 symbolizes eternity - not 7. This is one explanation of why Christians worship on Sunday - as the ‘8th’, not the first day of the week.
2. Theistic evolution can do no service to the Church. I don’t know who the people are who needed to be liberated from approaching Genesis as a “how” book - but TE is problematic on several levels - the Sabbath being just one. The problem of an evolving world over billions of years does not/cannot fit with the Genesis account of creation week. And we have no right to diminish the words of Scripture or weaken their obvious meanings. They can mean things beyond what the words say, but they must mean at least what the words say. They cannot be mistaken as gibberish or mythology.
3. Excellent quotation from Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger! I have read In the Beginning twice - and may read it again now that we are having this discussion. Notice the Cardinal Ratzinger says

“[in the 7-day creation account] Creation is oriented toward the sabbath…", "Creation is designed in such a way that it is oriented to worship.” "Creation exists for the sake of worship. …

So what do we lose if we ‘demythologize’ the Sabbath (what TE does to the 7 day creation week)? We lose our identity as creatures worshipping our Benevolent Creator.

This is the argument Cardinal Ratzinger makes in the book - the the West (Europe in particular) has lost its identity as creatures and see themselves instead as producers. The churches in Europe are empty and the birth rates are plummeting. Why? Because 70 years ago the Churches in Europe embraced TE and then they just dumped the T part. Everywhere TE is taught the faith dies.

The Sabbath has taken place - and does take place in our present day lives - that’s the point of CR’s quote. The Sabbath is based on the LORD resting from His works on the literal, actual 7th day. We cannot syncretize evolutionary theory and Genesis without doing significant violence to Genesis and adulterating the Sacred Scripture.

The day you are alluding to as not having come yet is the ‘8th day’ - eternity. the sabbath is the sign between God and Man that man is a creature who worships his Creator. TE mars, disfigures and adulterates this principle. TE weakens the clear meaning of Genesis regarding our identity as creatures.

You said well below:

This agrees with the idea of the Sabbath being made for man. God doesn’t *need *to receive worship from men - he doesn’t need anything from men. However, men do indeed need to receive from God - which is what happens when we receive the Eucharist - the very body and blood of Christ. This does nothing for Christ but does everything for us. Admitting that I need God is first act of true worship.

So then, you would agree that whatsoever dimishes the Sabbath diminishes man in his relation to God? Because that is the thesis I have offered in the OP. TE scoffs at the 7 day week, and ignores the prophetic significance of the Sabbath Day, which disfigures man’s image, darkens his understanding of himself as a creature, weakens his observance of the Sabbath Principle, and eventually weans him away from worship altogether. Hence, the empty European churches.

I hope I don’t come off too strident, Peter. Your comments seem very sincere and I know mine come off as self-certain - not what I intend to send across the internet.

Shalom,
Johnny

 

[Catholic_Johnny]

CJ,

We don’t have to believe Genesis? Are we more enlightened than Jesus who did?
You grossly misquote me. I said…
We don’t have to believe the first chapter of Genesis was the first chapter of the Bible written or conceived to be written.
Quite a different notion.

*None of the calendars that exist today come close to the advanced age of the Hebrew calendar. *
A reference to a seven day week does not a calendar make. Calendars are generally associated with the entire cycle of a year.

Did Moses then write about his own death? It’s not redaction criticism or contrary to tradition to hold that the writings of Moses may have been added to or expanded upon by the Holy Spirit working in the faithful.

To back this up I again quote our current Pope from the same source earlier cited,* “The moment when creation became a dominant theme occurred during the Babylonian Exile. It was then that the account that we have just heard* [Gen1:1-19]* - based to be sure on very ancient traditions - assumed its present form.*” my brackets and bold.

Notice he’s referring to the first chapter of Genesis and not the entire book nor the entire Torah.

Peter

Sorry to misquote you, Peter. Please forgive me. In my opinion, Cardinal Ratzinger’s statement is far more disturbing than yours. What is important to remember is that Tradition ascribes authorship to Moses, and this is corroborated in Ex. 20:11.

Also, Cardinal Ratzinger’s comments need clarification. What does he mean by present form? And if this ‘ancient tradition’ is venerable, why is it missing from the writings of the Fathers? Of course its easy to conjecture that during the exile when the Jews in Babylon are exposed to all manner of bizarre pagan myths about creation that there would be some Hebrew priest-scholars scrambling for a return to orthodoxy. That is not necessarily a profound insight. If “in its present form” means the Great Synagogue’s canon (collected during the diaspora), then that does not necessitate any kind of edit or rewrite, simply a packaging of the sacred writings that were lost (in part or in sum) as late as the period of the reign of Josiah (7th century BC).

In the interest of full disclosure, I may find myself on the opposite end of the argument with CR on this one if the meaning of the passage is what you say it is. I would venture to say that he would never suggest such things in an Encyclical - he would plainly contradict Humani Generis and other Encyclicals - and yet as a Cardinal can state such things freely as editorial or commentary.

I see we are not going to be able to discuss the fullness of my calender/week/creation/Sabbath line of reasoning, so I’ll leave off that.

Shalom,
CJ

 

[Catholic_Johnny]

To back this up I again quote our current Pope from the same source earlier cited,* “The moment when creation became a dominant theme occurred during the Babylonian Exile. It was then that the account that we have just heard* [Gen1:1-19]* - based to be sure on very ancient traditions - assumed its present form.*” my brackets and bold.

Peter:
I concede. You are correct in interpreting this quote as to CR’s intent. He clearly follows the JPED documentary theory:

Implicit here is the fact that the classic creation account is not the only creation text of sacred Scripture. Immediately after it there follows another one composed earlier and containing other imagery. [page 14]

It is sad that he very discreetly departs from the Church Fathers and Doctors here, most notably St. Basil who without hesitation ascribes authorship to Moses alone in his brilliant Hexaemeron (commentary on the 6 days of Creation, below a comment on Genesis 1:1):

But before weighing the justice of these remarks, before examining all the sense contained in these few words, let us see who addresses them to us. Because, if the weakness of our intelligence does not allow us to penetrate the depth of the thoughts of the writer, yet we shall be involuntarily drawn to give faith to his words by the force of his authority. Now it is Moses who has composed this history;

…Moses, finally, who, at the age of eighty, saw God, as far as it is possible for man to see Him; or rather as it had not previously been granted to man to see Him, according to the testimony of God Himself, If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house, with him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently and not in dark speeches. It is this man, whom God judged worthy to behold Him, face to face, like the angels, who imparts to us ***what he has learned from ***God.

While the members of this online community will no doubt accuse me of parting ways with the esteemed Cardinal, it is he who has departed from 19 centuries of Sacred Tradition if indeed he stands by these remarks today as Supreme Pontiff.

Moses’ authorship was only challenged when the documentary hypothesis was inroduced into Catholic scholarship in the early parts of the last century. Now its demonic cancer has invaded the entire body of the Catholic Church (except in those lands where the faith is growing, such as in Africa). The Lord Jesus gave Moses full credit for the Pentateuch; as did the Apostles - and the Fathers of the Church. In fact, Moses appeared to Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration about which St. Peter tells us,

We did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming 9 of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father 10 when that unique declaration came to him from the majestic glory, “This is my Son, my beloved, with whom I am well pleased.” 18 We 11 ourselves heard this voice come from heaven while we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 Moreover, we possess the prophetic message that is altogether reliable. You will do well to be attentive to it, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. (2 Peter 1)

In the text, Peter clearly recognizes Moses and Elijah; and then Peter affirms that these are NOT made up stories. As our brother poster Luke65 pointed out, it is upon Moses that Jesus stakes His claims:

Jesus Christ: “If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?” (John 5:46-47)

So, while I am saddened by Cardinal Ratzinger’s passive and disturbingly discreet endorsement of documentary theory, I am not disturbed in my faith, as the Holy Spirit, the Saints and Holy Angels bear abundant witness to the Eternal, unchanging Word of the Living God to all who seek the Truth with sincerity and in faith.