Dear Carol,
The webpage is incorrect, the Church Fathers were not unanimous. The page itself mentions that Augustine allowed a non-literal interpretation: instantaneous creation. In addition one can cite Justin Martyr:“For as Adam was told that in the day he ate of the tree he would die, we know that he did not complete a thousand years. We have perceived, moreover, that the expression, ‘The day of the Lord is as a thousand years,’ is connected with this subject.”
Science by its own definition can only say so much about the universe. As humans we are limited by our 5 senses. Putting those two together yields a partial view not a complete one. Science only gives us data points which we have to intepret correctly. How do we know we do?Scripture tells us that He created the world
Science tells us how He did it
I’m not sure why this is a such stumbling block for some
Why? So you can pick it apart and tell me hows its more technical than that. Frankly I don’t have the time, or the desire. Actually why isn’t it much easier for you to cite of an example of what mammal became what reptile. I mean there is proof right? Or is it all theory?
Because no mammal has evolved into a reptile. That would be a nice refutation of evolution.
Well, if you don’t have the time or desire to actually discuss the evidence (or as you might put it the supposed evidence), you haven’t made much of an arguement to refute. You have only made a seemingly baseless claim.
Why don’t you believe in 6 24-hr days? That is what Genesis says. Why can you pick and choose that which you take literally and that which you don’t? Why is that different from what you find wrong about my postion?
I missed typed Reptile to Mamal.
I don’t mind discussing evidence I don’t have time to wade through pages and pages of text. I like evidence. But I suppose the way you put it that’s just not possible.
Never said I believe it to be literal. I said I believe its symbolic and written for a reason. I fail to believe even just the first chapter was writen just so we know God had a hand in making everything. I believe there is a reason it is stated the way it is.
talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates_ex2
I agree with you that sometimes, it is hard to go through the evidence. I’m not a biologist, so it takes me longer to get through a biology paper. But I do get through it and usually go back and read it over again so that I feel like I have a decent grasp on the contents. Since that is the way evidence is presented, that is what I have to do.
But you are taking it literally, at least the part about the creation of mankind. This might shock you, but I absolutely believe that God created man. No doubt in my mind. I also believe there is a reason Genesis was written the way it was - to let us know that God is the Creator, not humans or some other god.
Carol Marie,
For the record, I too believe that each creation “day” was not necessarily a 24 hour period since the Bible states that a day to God is like a 1000 years. So a LITERAL 7 day time period? I don’t know… I guess that was the OP’s original question. The Earth could be that young - or God could’ve created it old - or it could be a bit older. Billions of years? No - I don’t believe that.Carol Marie,
I would rather shut my mouth on the matter forever than you leave the Church for such a reason.
But be wary that there are plenty of protestants who believe the same. The view that the earth is young did not come into fashion until the 1920’s with the Ussher Chronology being accepted by Ellen G. White (SDA founder) and spread to small denominational churches around her (my years may be a little off there) and if I remember correctly it got put in to one of the common Bible translation footnotes and exploded into all corners. Before that it was commonly held that the earth was very old. If they could come to peace with the science and Scripture then I believe we can too.
was the posts that said the first 11 books of the Bible are myths - the posts where it was said we came from Apes and at some point God gave one a soul?This is still Catholic teaching.
This is not about an argument necessarily about a young or old earth- because God created how fast, or how slow he wanted to. The argument was about whether there are to be literal interpretations of the events depicted in Genesis- and many other parts in the Bible involving supernatural/miraculous events taking place.None of that got me so worked up - what got me so
I guess the story of Noah & the flood gets tosses aside too since that the 11th chapter of the Myths?
So it’s all just “stories” that tell of God. Similar to the Greek Myths that talk of the powerful Zeus. They aren’t “true” but they contain “truth” so I suppose they are just as good as the Bible That’s what I’m getting from this thread. ?
Geez, I sure missed a lot of this thread when I was driving down the road. Thank you very much Carol Marie though for your kind words. As a former Evangelical I can see how hard it was for you, as it is equally as hard for me now. I believe everything else the Church teaches (Real Presence, veneration of Mary and the Saints, the Papacy, the hierarchy of Church government). I do not believe in sola scriptura or sola fide, as I see them as man-made ideas of the Reformation. However I see so many problems within Catholicism it makes me think twice about joining the Church. Problems like this where people will believe a scientific THEORY that contradicts what all of the early Church fathers believed. Disregarding traditions like this are destroying the Church, just look at how much confusion and controversy they cause on this board were most of the Catholics here are very well catechised. Imagine what your “average Catholic in the pew” thinks about this. The Church has gotten rid of so many of its other traditions in the last 50+ years. Fasting from midnight till Mass turned into one hour. The liturgy in some places resemebles a Pentecostal service. No thank you, but I am not going to leave a protestant Church to join the Catholic Church, which in many ways now resembles protestant Churches. 50 years ago I wouldn’t have thought twice about joining the Catholic Church, but now I am not so sure. I know the Orthodox Church doesn’t interpret Genesis literally either, but at least they have held on to their other traditions. There are only two Churches that believe in the Real Presence right? - Catholic and Orthodox. I also want a liturgical form of worship so it looks like I have at least narrowed it down to these two. What I am looking for is the most Traditional Church I can find, and right now the Orthodox Church seems to fit that description better. There was an interesting quote on another thread that said “Most of the Catholics of 100 years ago and older would be the Orthodox of today”, and I am starting to believe that. I was so sure about joining the Catholic Church a week ago, but know I have come to understand some things very differently. I just don’t know right now.I really should avoid the Evolution threads. Hearing so many Catholics say that we evolved from apes seriously makes me wonder why I ever left the Evangelical Church.
We discount so much of the Bible - to believe it literally is to be thought of as some sort of ignorant fool because it’s so OBVIOUS that science has shown that much of what the Bible claims is ridiculous. I have been told over & over again that Catholics DO NOT take the Bible literally - like the Fundamentalist - it’s symbolic - oh wait… excpet John chapter 6. Then I’m told we need to listen to the Church Fathers - SHAME on those Evangelicals for not paying attention to the Church Fathers - except now our own Church totally ignores what the Church Fathers said about the Creation up until 1950.
To the Southern Baptist who is thinking of becoming Catholic - PLEASE get this issue straight in your mind before you convert. It was a HUGE red flag in my conversion process and it’s never gone away - it just gets worse. I was told that I was free to believe the Creation account just as it’s written in the Bible. That’s true - except that almost no one else believes that including apparently our Pope.
What you believe about Genesis seems to be fine. Here is the issue of the matter though, you are free to interpret Genesis in whatever way you will–literally or literalistically-- as long as your interpretation does not conflict with Magesterial teaching. The bottom line is that the Church is the teaching authority, not our personal interpretation, right? So, if you want to believe that the earth was created in six twenty-four hour periods, or six thousand years or 60 million years that is fine–because it does not conflict with the teaching of the Church.For the record, I too believe that each creation “day” was not necessarily a 24 hour period since the Bible states that a day to God is like a 1000 years. So a LITERAL 7 day time period? I don’t know… I guess that was the OP’s original question. The Earth could be that young - or God could’ve created it old - or it could be a bit older. Billions of years? No - I don’t believe that.
None of that got me so worked up - what got me so
I guess the story of Noah & the flood gets tosses aside too since that the 11th chapter of the Myths?
So it’s all just “stories” that tell of God. Similar to the Greek Myths that talk of the powerful Zeus. They aren’t “true” but they contain “truth” so I suppose they are just as good as the Bible? That’s what I’m getting from this thread. And I don’t believe that. I believe Adam & Eve sinned and were tossed out of Paradise. I believe that God first promises Jesus in Genesis 3:16. He also speaks of Mary’s heart being broken. I believe he sent the Flood to cleanse the earth & gave us a rainbow as His promise that He wouldn’t do that again.
I believe it ALL happened just as the Bible says. And I’m used to being surrounded by likeminded Christians who believe just as I do. But now it seems I’m bombarded by my fellow Catholics who think I’m some stupid fundamentalist - how could I believe such a silly tale when science has shown us it couldn’t have happened that way. None of it. And I feel like when you say, “You are free to believe that…” It’s as if you’re patting me on the head like I pat my children when I say, “Of course you can believe in Santa if you want…”
I once heard a Pastor give a sermon about how important it is that we hold onto the Genesis story with all of our might. He said that if Satan can convince us that the beginning of the story is make-believe - what’s to say that any of it is true. Any of it?
No, it is not considered heretical and in fact is allowed by by the Church.
What is expressly not allowed is atheistic evolution aka Darwinian evolution.
It seems to me the Church hasn’t said anything officially one way or the other.
Thanks for the advice carol marie. I know no Church is perfect, but I see so much division among the one Church that is suppposed to be united. It didn’t even know until the other day that Byzantine Catholics rejected certain “Roman teachings” and that it is allowed by the Church. I see far more liberalism in the Catholic Church than the Church I’ve grown up in, while it should be the opposite as the Catholic Church relies on tradition. It makes me question whether I am doing the right thing. Doctrinally I am far closer to Catholicism than any other Church, with Orthodoxy coming in second. I had a great experience the first time I went to Mass, and then I find out things that question the validity of the Church. Liberal Bishops refuse to listen to the Pope, so many liturgical abuses, etc. Maybe I should take time away from these boards. But then again when I have questions I have nowhere else to go. I don’t know.