So God directly created sentient creatures?“Sentience, etc.” is a pretty large step up from the others, which are inherent to all living things.
As a scientist, my stated position is, “We don’t know”. (Needs no demonstration.)I’m afraid I’m going to ask you to demonstrate that “from experience, not speculation”.
No. Sentience is an evolved trait. I was just commenting on how drastic a step you took.So God directly created sentient creatures?
Speculation, not science.No. Sentience is an evolved trait.
That’s fine, but not of course demonstrated from experience. I mean no disrespect, but if asked to determine whether the Catechism was experience or speculation, one would have to say speculation, albeit speculation with a particular authority.As a philosopher and a Catholic, my stated position is, “God directly created all things that could not come into existence as secondary causes.” Philosophy’s first principle PSR and Catholic Catechism #318 as my authority
I’ll consider it enough for now that if you deny the possibility of abiogenesis then to be coherent you must hold that God directly created life.There’s certainly more evidence for it than “God directly made all sentient creatures,” which is a position that has absolutely 0 evidence whatsoever.
Oh, more than a pure appeal to authority, the first principle of philosophy require the same.I mean no disrespect, but if asked to determine whether the Catechism was experience or speculation, one would have to say speculation, albeit speculation with a particular authority.
Please do not speculate There is no evidence for that claim.… some of Freddy’s musings, splendid though they no doubt were.
Ex nihilo. The key word is “created”. Defined correctly, nothing is created except ex nihilo.Created ex nihilo, or created via assembly of existing molecules?
“Let the waters bring forth…” “Let the earth bring forth…” Living organisms were created from pre-existing matter: water and earth.I don’t believe life was created from nothing. Everything that created life was already in existence, assembled by God.
Although some of us don’t believe that, I don’t think anyone has disagreed with it. It would be astonishing if you didn’t take that position: that God is the cause of literally everything. But you have never explained how you think He did it.Capta(name removed by moderator)rudeman:
If not then God must be the first cause of microbial life. And God must be the first cause of plant life. And God must be the first cause of animal life.I don’t believe in abiogenesis, and have never said I have.
So it’s your position that all life in each of its forms was directly created. Something along the lines of the Genesis account. You don’t think that God could have used any other method.…my stated position is, “God directly created all things that could not come into existence as secondary causes.”
Almost all of us agree with this. Although some of us would leave out the divine, I don’t think anyone would think it changes the process itself. Unless…you read the bible literally. In which case there was no process. It was instantaneous.I don’t believe life was created from nothing. Everything that created life was already in existence, assembled by God.
Based on the rivers mentioned in Genesis 2, the consensus seems to be that Eden was located in Iran/Iraq.Based on that, though, it sounds like he maybe lived in Kuwait?
Okay, thanx very much for the links.No need to “work it out”, just read the readily available Church documents that have been referenced multiple times on this very forum. Or you can start with some of the tracts on the parent site
That quote isn’t even from the Bechly article in question (see post 243)!Dr. Bechly says: > Since the average longevity of a single marine invertebrate species is about 5-10 million years (Levinton 2001: 384, table 7.2), this available window of time equals only about two successive species.
I never claimed to “know” we descended from Adam and Eve or to even “know” they existed - it is a matter of faith, not fact. A belief is not a fact.We cannot observe our descent from Adam and Eve, so how on earth can anyone know how it happened?
I don’t deny that birds “evolved” from a reptile - I deny that science can demonstrate how it happened. How does DNA prove that birds evolved from reptiles via a natural process? God could have taken reptile DNA, modified it, and then produced something between a reptile and a bird - no natural selection, etc involved.We can use DNA tests to determine paternity, even without eye-witnesses. We can do the same with reptiles and birds. The fossil evidence also confirms what the DNA tells us. Or are you denying the validity of paternity testing
DNA does no such thing, as far as I’m aware. There are actually studies which have shown genes activating after bodily death in animals. DNA does eventually decompose, but certain materials like bones preserve it pretty well.Fascinating. I thought DNA decomposed rapidly after death, but they have extracted it from Neanderthal remains that are tens of thousands of years old.