What to say if somebody says to me..."How did the kangaroos and koalas get to Australia? "

Status
Not open for further replies.
LittleSoldier said:
No - it does not rule out random mutations and natural selection. God is omniscient. He can use whatever tools He wishes to use to do whatever He wants. What is random to us may not be random to God. Time does not have the same meaning for God. He knows everything through all time. You are placing limits on His power.

Polygenism is not a part of every theistic theory of evolution and I don’t accept it as a valid explanation for the diversity of human beings.
Click to expand...
By definition if God planned Adam to look as he did, then God took non-random steps to achieve this, otherwise Adam would be random. We see body plans ultra-conserved from their beginning. We see features showing up many times. (this is now attempted to be explained by concurrent evolution - but then is this random?) We saw the tree of life fall down. We see 500 or so “immortal” genes present right at the beginining and shared by all organisms. We see the the super powerful language of DNA. We see ATP synthase motors in every cell spinning at 6000 RPM. We see the cell more complex than we imagined even 30 years ago. We saw “junk” DNA disappear and now has function. These are a few things that are shaking the paradigm.

IDvolution is the solution for this. God breathed the language of DNA. The breathing of the language fulfills God’s plan. This is the driver using information God supplied in His breath. It gives purpose to life and fulfills God’s vision for life. IDvolution uses the most modern science, agrees with the constant teaching and understanding of the Church and St Augustine and St Thomas are happy.
 
LittleSoldier said:
Further explanation of my response of:

“Why? Whatcha gonna do if I don’t? :rolleyes:”

Your statement illustrates exactly what I have been trying to get people to understand. We do not have to confront these. A Catholic is not forced to believe in ID, in theistic evolution, in atheistic evolution, in creationism without evolution…

It doesn’t have any bearing on our salvation. A Catholic can look at this thread, think “Well, I’m just not interested” and that is fine.

My main issue is that many Catholics demand that we who accept theistic theories of evolution which meet Church criteria stop accepting those theories because we are not being good Catholics or following Church teaching. And that is wrong. Lay people should not be telling me to not do something the Church gives me permission to do. By doing so they are placing themselves above the Magisterium.

As to your questions, God is omniscient. Of course He knew what Adam would look like, if there was an Adam (and although I’m not sure, I believe the Church teaches we all descended from one man and one woman, although I don’t think we are required to believe the man’s name was actually “Adam”). And of course if Adam existed he looked the way God envisioned him. Why wouldn’t he?

Your third question is not really a question but a task. And at this point I can’t reconcile it. But then I have a mortal human mind and God is well, God. And God is divine. I believe in Him, I believe He did whatever He did and that it was done from love and was good. I don’t believe God pulled a rib out of Adam and formed it into Eve, nor do I believe God made Eve from mud, although He certainly could have done either. Maybe in a year or two I can give a better answer, although I doubt it. But it doesn’t really matter because it has no bearing on my salvation.

I apologize for my slightly uncharitable initial response. I was in a weird mood the day I posted that.
Click to expand...
Yes - we have to confront the truths of Revelation.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=639&pictureid=7084
 
buffalo said:
If God planned Adam to look like he did, then random mutations and natural selection are not a feasable explanation.
Click to expand...
Yes, they are, if God is GOD, HE can use and steer the mutations and the selections to arrive at the desired appearance of the final bodies.

ICXC NIKA.
 
GEddie said:
Yes, they are, if God is GOD, HE can use and steer the mutations and the selections to arrive at the desired appearance of the final bodies.

ICXC NIKA.
Click to expand...
Steering a random mutation? :hmmm:

What is interesting is the new discovery that DNA actually fights mutations and will perform several repair iterations. This makes the mutation argument more implausible. Another point to ponder - mutations are mostly neutral or negative. This does not make a good case for Gods’ creation as He Himself proclaimed it good. So negative mutations would be due to sin not God’s original creation.
 
buffalo said:
Why? This was a question for theistic evo’s.

If God planned Adam to look like he did, then random mutations and natural selection are not a feasable explanation. Adding in Eve coming from Adam points to a supernatural creation of Adam and Eve.

Polygenism is ruled out.
Click to expand...
I think we’re talking at cross-purposes now…(mind you, not Cross-purposes, which would be awesome!). I’ve never thought about the difference between “theistic evolution” and “IDvolution”, so perhaps I’ll sit back and watch.
 
GEddie said:
Yes, Omnipotence means being able to do just that.

ICXC NIKA
Click to expand...
IF God steers them then they are not random by definition.

Catholics understand God as Almighty, that is accomplishing what He sets out to do.

Some things He cannot do:

Lie
Be deceived
Be contrary to His own nature
 
buffalo said:
Steering a random mutation? :hmmm:

What is interesting is the new discovery that DNA actually fights mutations and will perform several repair iterations. This makes the mutation argument more implausible. Another point to ponder - mutations are mostly neutral or negative. This does not make a good case for Gods’ creation as He Himself proclaimed it good. So negative mutations would be due to sin not God’s original creation.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you’re comprehending what I am trying to say. First of all, I should have used the word “omnipotent” instead of “omniscient” in my description of God. There is obviously a huge difference between God (who is divine, omniscient, and omnipotent) and us. What is “random” to us may not be “random” to God. He knew what would happen as He knows past, present, and future.

And He can use any means He wants to accomplish His goals. You are putting limits on His power by using human definitions, written and accepted by humans. Did God set random mutations into motion and then back off to see what happened, like a child with an ant farm? Of course not because He already knew!

If “most” mutations are “neutral or negative” according to present research, that means that some mutations are beneficial. What about these mutations? If they are beneficial to a species or member of a species so that it can pass that mutation on into the gene pool, that mutation will be carried on. If it continues to provide a benefit so that the members of the species who have the mutation keep on reproducing successfully at a higher rate than members without the mutation, the mutation will become more common in the species in that geographical area. As time goes by it may be present in most or all members of that species in that geographical area.

Yes, God said it was “good.” But is it good for humans to have a common tube that leads to both the lungs and the GI tract? To me that is not good. I don’t like choking. But I can only look at it from a human perspective. It may certainly be good from a divine perspective.

Will you please do me a favor and provide links to sites which back up your claims? I don’t mean the ones which are common knowledge but the ones which are not. It would make it easier for me to read up on this. I’ve been out of college for a long time and I know you have already made a hurtful remark about my lack of knowledge. Thank you.
 
buffalo said:
IF God steers them then they are not random by definition.

Catholics understand God as Almighty, that is accomplishing what He sets out to do.

Some things He cannot do:

Lie
Be deceived
Be contrary to His own nature
Click to expand...
Some things He can do:

Be aware of absolutely everything including the effects of what humans called “random” mutations;
Use any method He wants to accomplish whatever He wants to accomplish;
Not be limited by what mere mortal humans can comprehend.
 
LittleSoldier said:
I don’t think you’re comprehending what I am trying to say. First of all, I should have used the word “omnipotent” instead of “omniscient” in my description of God. There is obviously a huge difference between God (who is divine, omniscient, and omnipotent) and us. What is “random” to us may not be “random” to God. He knew what would happen as He knows past, present, and future.

And He can use any means He wants to accomplish His goals. You are putting limits on His power by using human definitions, written and accepted by humans. Did God set random mutations into motion and then back off to see what happened, like a child with an ant farm? Of course not because He already knew!

If “most” mutations are “neutral or negative” according to present research, that means that some mutations are beneficial. What about these mutations? If they are beneficial to a species or member of a species so that it can pass that mutation on into the gene pool, that mutation will be carried on. If it continues to provide a benefit so that the members of the species who have the mutation keep on reproducing successfully at a higher rate than members without the mutation, the mutation will become more common in the species in that geographical area. As time goes by it may be present in most or all members of that species in that geographical area.

Yes, God said it was “good.” But is it good for humans to have a common tube that leads to both the lungs and the GI tract? To me that is not good. I don’t like choking. But I can only look at it from a human perspective. It may certainly be good from a divine perspective.

Will you please do me a favor and provide links to sites which back up your claims? I don’t mean the ones which are common knowledge but the ones which are not. It would make it easier for me to read up on this. I’ve been out of college for a long time and I know you have already made a hurtful remark about my lack of knowledge. Thank you.
Click to expand...
Are you thinking of apparent randomness?
 
buffalo said:
Yes - we have to confront the truths of Revelation.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=639&pictureid=7084
Click to expand...
We are not required to confront the issues you presented. They have no influence on our salvation. Nobody has to pray to Mary and nobody has to accept any theory of evolution, creationism, or ID.

I would add a completely separate circle to your Venn diagram. It would contain the word “Salvation.”

Did you formulate the diagram you presented? Just curious…
 
LittleSoldier said:
We are not required to confront the issues you presented. They have no influence on our salvation. Nobody has to pray to Mary and nobody has to accept any theory of evolution, creationism, or ID.

I would add a completely separate circle to your Venn diagram. It would contain the word “Salvation.”

Did you formulate the diagram you presented? Just curious…
Click to expand...
Yes - I authored the diagram. It developed after years of research and debate/dialogue into both faith and science.

The area labeled IDvolution is not the ID the science (as you may think). IDvolution is the area where faith and reason cannot be opposed. You can also see that a large area of faith and reason do not intersect. The diagram is meant to represent information flow - From God through Revelation to faith. And from God through science to reason.

IDvolution posits something more akin to St Augustine’s idea of potentia.

IDvolution, (not the same as Intelligent Design) based on the latest science makes St Thomas happy, St Augustione happy, and is in conformance with the constant teaching and understanding of the Church.
Code: 
 	 IDvolution - God "breathed" the super  language of DNA into the "kinds" in the creative act.  This accounts  for the diversity of life we see.  The core makeup shared by all living  things have the necessary complex information built in that facilitates  rapid and responsive adaptation of features and variation while being  able to preserve the "kind" that they began as.  Life has been created  with the creativity built in ready to respond to triggering events.
Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on Earth have the same core, it is virtually certain that living organisms have been thought of AT ONCE by the One and the same Creator endowed with the super language we know as DNA that switched on the formation of the various kinds, the cattle, the swimming creatures, the flying creatures, etc… in a pristine harmonious state and superb adaptability and responsiveness to their environment for the purpose of populating the earth that became subject to the ravages of corruption by the sin of one man (deleterious mutations).
 
LittleSoldier said:
As I have never heard that term before and googling it is proving difficult at this time, I can’t answer that question right now.
Click to expand...
By apparent randomness I mean from our point of view as another poster mentioned.
 
Spirithound said:
Does it? Or is it only important that it seem random from our POV?
Click to expand...
From our perspective, is there a discernible difference?

Clearly, any process that is “steered” cannot be truly random, however, the steering can be subtle enough to seem random from the evanescent human perspective.

God Bless and ICXC NIKA.
 
This thread is making me http://bestsmileys.com/clueless/5.gif…
GEddie said:
Wow. This is starting to look like a cat fight in which the cats had evolved prehensile hands, and the use of symbols.🙂
Click to expand...
The thought of my cat with prehensile hands makes me http://bestsmileys.com/panic/3.gifhttp://bestsmileys.com/panic/3.gif
Sailor_Kenshin said:
Just say they flew Quantas and be done with it.
Click to expand...
Good idea.
They flew Quantas. (Or Qantas).
Or maybe they were with Amelia Earhart when she disappeared, proving at last that she crash landed in the Pacific. Probably right in Sydney Harbour, where she was eaten by Killer Wombats Of Doom.http://bestsmileys.com/anxious/3.gifhttp://bestsmileys.com/paranoid/2.gif

I have a http://bestsmileys.com/sick/4.gif.
 
My cat has prehensile paws. Well, she looks like she does. She’s polydactyl with an extra digit that shows and another extra digit in which the bones are inside her wrists with only the nail showing.

The extra digit that actually shows sticks out just like a thumb.

Weird.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top