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

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
rossum said:
Brahman does not change and does not act. Brahman is. All actions are performed by proxies.
What definition of supremacy are you using? Brahman cannot be the supreme actor because Brahman cannot act.
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, this is your interpretation; and a focus on definitions in this “game” is foolishness. Fact is that most Hindus believe in a supreme Divine Being, worshipping different forms depending on their cultural, familial and personal preference. The many different names that are used to describe Him, reflect the accepted idea of there being a multiplicity of paths to God, who is not merely transcendent, but encompassing everything and also inside each of us, waiting to be discovered. Life’s goal is to cultivate an intimate relationship with Him. In Jesus Christ, it is revealed that He is Love itself, Existence as perfect triune Relationality. Through acts of charity, we carry out His will, an eternal Act of Giving of the Father to the Son, who returns all He is in the Person of the Holy Spirit, who procedes from both. The Ground of Being is One; as individual persons, we all can come to know Him in our own way, which is ultimately one Way. That would be something of my understanding of Hinduism.

According to the Cathechism of the Catholic Church:
27 The desire for God is written in the human heart, because man is created by God and for God; and God never ceases to draw man to himself. Only in God will he find the truth and happiness he never stops searching for:

The dignity of man rests above all on the fact that he is called to communion with God. This invitation to converse with God is addressed to man as soon as he comes into being. For if man exists it is because God has created him through love, and through love continues to hold him in existence. He cannot live fully according to truth unless he freely acknowledges that love and entrusts himself to his creator.

28 In many ways, throughout history down to the present day, men have given expression to their quest for God in their religious beliefs and behaviour: in their prayers, sacrifices, rituals, meditations, and so forth. These forms of religious expression, despite the ambiguities they often bring with them, are so universal that one may well call man a religious being:

From one ancestor (God) made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, so that they would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him - though indeed he is not far from each one of us. For “in him we live and move and have our being.”

29 But this “intimate and vital bond of man to God” can be forgotten, overlooked, or even explicitly rejected by man. Such attitudes can have different causes: revolt against evil in the world; religious ignorance or indifference; the cares and riches of this world; the scandal of bad example on the part of believers; currents of thought hostile to religion; finally, that attitude of sinful man which makes him hide from God out of fear and flee his call.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
Adjustments? Really? Our understanding grows organically in that it gets fuller. We don’t trim the bush or branches.
Click to expand...
But no “bush” was trimmed in the acceptance of the ToE as an option but was actually made “fuller”.
 
buffalo said:
Yet, no magisterial document has been produced showing this. The faithful would need a full and comprehensive explanation of why we got it wrong for so long.
Click to expand...
The Church did not conclude that it was “wrong” to believe a more literalistic interpretation, but what it did do was to open up another option that’s based on overwhelming scientific evidence.

Refuting this massive evidence would be like still believing that lead can be turned to gold and that the Sun rotates around Earth, the latter of which the Church did believe and teach centuries ago-- just ask Galileo.
 
Last edited:
There is no overwhelming scientific evidence. For example, some researchers investigating the regenerative powers of a certain type of worm made some significant discoveries. They identified certain sites that initiated the regeneration process. They had mapped the genome of this worm and found that these sites existed in coding and non-coding (previously ‘junk’) parts of its DNA. It turns out humans have such sites as well.
 
Edgar said:
You say karma is not a living thing - so a dead thing rules the living?
Click to expand...
Gravity is not a living thing. Are you unaffected by gravity because you are alive and it is not?

Your logic escapes me here.
 
rossum said:
40.png
Edgar:
You say karma is not a living thing - so a dead thing rules the living?
Click to expand...
Gravity is not a living thing. Are you unaffected by gravity because you are alive and it is not?

Your logic escapes me here.
Click to expand...
Gravity and karma are way different.
 
Techno2000 said:
Gravity and karma are way different.
Click to expand...
They are both non-living. Or do you think that living things are immune to gravity because gravity is non-living?

Both karma and gravity are non-living. Both karma and gravity affect living things.
 
rossum said:
40.png
Techno2000:
Gravity and karma are way different.
Click to expand...
They are both non-living. Or do you think that living things are immune to gravity because gravity is non-living?

Both karma and gravity are non-living. Both karma and gravity affect living things.
Click to expand...
Gravity doesn’t affect the Supernatural spirit realm.
 
Metis1 said:
That’s a non-sequitur as a narrative interpreted as allegory does not negate the importance and use of scripture as a teaching guide. The Church allows for allegorical interpretations, so do you think the Church throwing the Bible in the trash?
Click to expand...
Consider the genealogy in Luke 3, which begins with Jesus and goes all the way back to Adam. To be logically consistent, if Adam is allegoricial, then so is Jesus. Or if some of the genealogy is allegorical and some of it is literal, what is the point of the author giving us such a confusing mess?
Metis1 said:
Maybe tell the Catholic theologians that
Click to expand...
Are you really that naive and gullilbe? If you have any spiritual radar at all, try turning it on. Some “Catholic theologians” seem hell-bent on undermining the faith with their garbage, modernist ideas; some of them probably aren’t even believers.
And maybe you think that the symbolism used in much of the Psalms, for example, is “baloney” as well? How about the symbolism in Revelation-- is that “baloney” as well?
Click to expand...
The symbolism in the Psalms and Revelation is obvious. Which of the Church Fathers believed Adam and Eve were not real people, but symbolic? Can you nominate even one?
Metis1 said:
Same is true with the creation accounts, namely that what really matters is not the literalistic approach of “Did this really happen?” but much more what is the author really trying to tell us in terms of the morals and values of what’s being said
Click to expand...
  1. The pre-Adam creation account is allegorical because the Scriptures are concerned only with God’s relationship with man. When Adam is created, the Genesis narrative becomes literal, as it’s aim is to accurately record the history of the God-man relationship.
  2. The genealogies in Genesis 4, 5 begins with Adam and end with Noah. If these genealogies are not literal but allegorical, how does one make sense of them according to your “what is the author really trying to tell us” approach?
 
Last edited:
rossum said:
Where are your peer-reviewed observations of angels moving unaffected by gravity?
Click to expand...
Where are your peer-reviewed observations of the existence of a “law of Karma”?

You don’t get to exempt yourself from the standards of proof you establish. If the scientific method is the only one that matters in determining truth, you’d better shows us those peer-reviewed articles on karma or never talk about it anywhere ever until said peer-review research is conducted.
 
Last edited:
rossum said:
Gravity is not a living thing. Are you unaffected by gravity because you are alive and it is not? Your logic escapes me here.
Click to expand...
Your logic escapes me here:
Gravity doesn’t decide what is good and evil - karma does.
Gravity doesn’t judge every human being according to his deeds and then dispense justice in this life or the next - karma does.
Gravity isn’t the judge, jury and executioner of human lives - karma is.

Which leaves us with the bizarre and frankly creepy situation in which a dead, mindless and loveless force (karma) is the master of human lives.
 
Last edited:
Rubee said:
40.png
rossum:
Where are your peer-reviewed observations of angels moving unaffected by gravity?
Click to expand...
Where are your peer-reviewed observations of the existence of a “law of Karma”?

You don’t get to exempt yourself from the standards of proof you establish. If the scientific method is the only one that matters in determining truth, you’d better shows us those peer-reviewed articles on karma or never talk about it anywhere ever until said peer-review research is conducted.
Click to expand...
I was gonna say something similar, but you said it better. 🙂
 
Edgar said:
40.png
rossum:
Gravity is not a living thing. Are you unaffected by gravity because you are alive and it is not? Your logic escapes me here.
Click to expand...
Your logic escapes me here:
Gravity doesn’t decide what is good and evil - karma does.
Gravity doesn’t judge every human being according to his deeds and then dispense justice in this life or the next - karma does.
Gravity isn’t the judge, jury and executioner of human lives - karma is.

Which leaves us with the bizarre and frankly creepy situation in which a dead, mindless and loveless force (karma) is the master of human lives.
Click to expand...
Karma is a half truth use by the Devil.

The whole truth…

Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.

Galatians 6:7
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top