Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true

[edwest]

Here it is again. Science, which cannot study the supernatural, is being used as an explanation for supernatural events. It won’t work. It’s contradictory. And there are no peer reviewed papers titled “Analysis of the Book of Genesis in the Christian Bible.”

There are people with Neanderthal DNA. Neanderthals were fully human. A look at skull shapes from around the world will show there are people alive today among a wide variation. Science cannot study or comment on souls.

 

[guanophore]

The quote you took from Edgar specifically dealt with souled humans mating with soulless humans. Hence I was wondering what examples of that you were thinking of in the modern day.

I have looked into the eyes of some people, and wonder if they are soulless, but since the Church teaches that God infuses a soul into every human person, I am not prepared to say otherwise.

In the context of the discussion on evolution, I pointed out that there is scientific evidence of many different hominids, several apparently living during the same time periods, that could have intermingled with one another.

I don’t think that science considers these ancestral hominids "humans’ in the sense that we do homo sapiens sapiens. This is the modern human that the Church considers ensouled.

It’s all quite interesting to me.

And we are not going to get any help from Genesis! Unless…

“When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown. The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” — Genesis 6:1-5

the daughters of men were not ensouled humans…

 

[edwest]

The last line has no scientific support. It’s speculation.

 

[guanophore]

Here it is again. Science, which cannot study the supernatural,

What makes you say that? I agree that science has limitations in this area, but that does not mean it cannot attempt.

Science cannot study or comment on souls.

Well, it happens, especially in psychology, which literally translates “the study of the soul”. At the center of the human soul is the very stamp of God’s nature, so anyone who looks deeply enough into the soul will encounter the supernatural.

But I do agree, the soul is more appropriately the study of art and poetry, and the soul speaks through these languages, not so much scientific language.

 

[mVitus]

I don’t think that science considers these ancestral hominids "humans’ in the sense that we do homo sapiens sapiens. This is the modern human that the Church considers ensouled.

Has the Church definitively declared homo sapiens as the only species to ever have immortal souls? I ask since if we take Genesis for example, it was written well before the modern classifications.

the daughters of men were not ensouled humans…

It is an interesting take for sure. Not to mention the question of who the other people were at Cain’s time. Though I’ve also read that the ECFs had a view of the Nephilim being the descendents of Cain and the sons of God being Seth’s. In other words, that the passage refers overall to that good people were being corrupted by those who were sinners. Just to share a little.

Though going back to possible physical inspirations, it is quite interesting.

 

[mVitus]

What makes you say that? I agree that science has limitations in this area, but that does not mean it cannot attempt.

Science by definition studies the natural world. The supernatural by definiton is beyond that field.

In regards to the soul, it’s immaterial and you’d never be able to make a Soul-Detect-O-Meter for example.

Side note: I’m a little shocked to be defending something Ed said. Even if I disgree with the latter parts of his post.

 

[guanophore]

Has the Church definitively declared homo sapiens as the only species to ever have immortal souls? I ask since if we take Genesis for example, it was written well before the modern classifications.

Not that I am aware. Just that Adam and Eve were actual persons, created and ensouled by God, and that human beings descended from them. The language is theological, not scientific.

Science by definition studies the natural world. The supernatural by definition is beyond that field.

Hence the limitations. But I think that science also uses the tools of the natural world as the means of study, and these tools fall short of studying the supernatural, and even the philosophical.

But if it is true that the heavens declare the glory of God, and the earth speaks His praise, and that human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, a scientist cannot help but encounter the supernatural at some point.

In regards to the soul, it’s immaterial

It is certainly “material” from a theological point of view! I guess you mean from the point of view of the Natural-Evolution of species.

I’m a little shocked to be defending something Ed said.

CAF is definitely a venue where one can stretch one’s wings.

 

[mVitus]

But if it is true that the heavens declare the glory of God, and the earth speaks His praise, and that human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, a scientist cannot help but encounter the supernatural at some point.

So if I’m understanding you correctly, you’re not saying something (abd I exagerrate) like that science will be able to develop mathematical formulas modelling to soul-body interaction, but more that by studying God’s handiwork they should be able to see the philosophical evidence for God, right?

It is certainly “material” from a theological point of view! I guess you mean from the point of view of the Natural-Evolution of species.

Of course. By immaterial I’m referring to physically immaterial. Not that it’s unimportant.

 

[guanophore]

by studying God’s handiwork they should be able to see the philosophical evidence for God, right?

It is dumbfounding to me that they do not, but I approach science already having faith.

In fact, I don’t even usually engage in apologetics with atheists because of this perceptual gap.

 

[Aloysium]

edwest:

Here it is again. Science, which cannot study the supernatural,

What makes you say that? I agree that science has limitations in this area, but that does not mean it cannot attempt.

Science cannot study or comment on souls.

Well, it happens, especially in psychology, which literally translates “the study of the soul”. At the center of the human soul is the very stamp of God’s nature, so anyone who looks deeply enough into the soul will encounter the supernatural.

But I do agree, the soul is more appropriately the study of art and poetry, and the soul speaks through these languages, not so much scientific language.

What you are suggesting would no longer be science. The realm of the supernatural contains science itself, our capacity to know and piece together information into coherent ideas about how things work. Empiricism is made possible because we know there exists a structure to reality that can be deconstructed, known and acted upon. The study of the soul belongs to philosophy, metaphysics and theology. People are so used to hearing science overstep its boundaries, having evolutionary theories pushed on them from the time they are able to think of the larger world, that what you say is generally believed.

The way I see it, everything is supernatural, the natural being the simplest of existential (relational) structures, studied through scientific disciplines of physics, chemistry, biology and medicine. Science cannot study that which cannot be isolated, measured and manipulated.

Psychology is not the study of the soul but of the mind, which like matter rests on an existential foundation in union with the body, where it is represented as patterns of neuronal excitation. The psyche has a structure involving perceptions, feelings and emotions, words and other symbols along with the capacity to act. This is true of animals as well as human beings, who grounded in eternity, can know and act with a free will, beyond the instinctive that we share with them.

I would agree that beauty, as well as truth and goodness are the languages spoken by the human soul. I would disagree with what you say about the true language of science which understood correctly, seen through the lens that is Jesus Christ, reveals the beauty and truth of God’s creation. That said, holding the images that science presents as equal, let alone superior to those which speak of God, is to engage in a dystopic fantasy, if not idolitry by many, rather than knowing what is ultimately a universal ocean of God’s compassion.

 

[Aloysium]

soul-body interaction

There is no interaction between the spirit and the body. The spirit may be said to contain the body as it does the mind whose physical manifestation within the unity of the person, you and I here engaged in a discussion, is the anatomy and processes of the brain participating in a psychophysical universe.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

There is no interaction between the spirit and the body. The spirit may be said to contain the body as it does the mind whose physical manifestation within the unity of the person, you and I here engaged in a discussion, is the anatomy and processes of the brain participating in a psychophysical universe.

I don’t think that’s in line with Church teaching. The soul and body are a composite, and each are clearly influenced by the actions of the other. When we sin with our bodies, it damages our soul, and when we, with our souls, turn back to go, we must act physically to seek reconciliation.

 

[Edgar]

“The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown” - Genesis 6

Jude 6-7 suggests the Nephilim were the result of fallen angels who mated with human women (“strange flesh”):
“And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion.”

 

[Edgar]

What makes you say that? I agree that science has limitations in this area, but that does not mean it cannot attempt.

Where do you suggest we start?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Ermm… Jude 6-7 don’t event remotely suggest that the Nephilim were fallen angels… There’s absolutely no reference to the Nephilim in that passage. All is says is that the fallen angels were bound, and that Sodom and Gomorrah were wiped out for their evils.

 

[edwest]

Science has limitations in this area. As far as souls are concerned, they don’t exist.

Psychology
“the scientific study of the human mind and its functions, especially those affecting behavior in a given context.”

 

[Edgar]

Though I’ve also read that the ECFs had a view of the Nephilim being the descendents of Cain and the sons of God being Seth’s.

This same interpretation is shared by a Catholics Answers article. But I wouldn’t put too much faith in their opinion - for the same article claims,
“angels do not have bodies, which are needed for the procreation of human children—barring a miracle—and given that in heaven human beings live like angels and thus do not get married (Matt. 22:30), the identity of the “sons of God” points to mere humans.”

Angels don’t have bodies? Tell that to the three angels who had a meal with Abraham and whom later the wicked men of Sodom wanted to have sex with.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Angel don’t have bodies naturally. They are non-corporeal beings, pure spirit.

In those instances, God gave them bodies to perform the work necessary, but those bodies are not their natural state.

From the Catechism:

328
The existence of the spiritual, non-corporeal beings that Sacred Scripture usually calls “angels” is a truth of faith. The witness of Scripture is as clear as the unanimity of Tradition.

330
As purely spiritual creatures angels have intelligence and will: they are personal and immortal creatures, surpassing in perfection all visible creatures, as the splendor of their glory bears witness.

 

[Edgar]

Angel don’t have bodies naturally. They are non-corporeal beings, pure spirit. In those instances, God gave them bodies to perform the work necessary, but those bodies are not their natural state.

A temporary body that consumes food is a body, nevertheless.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Yes, but a body is not inherent to their nature like it is to humans.