E
Edgar
Guest
Almost there- Adam and Eve were created about 7200 years ago.
Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true
- Status
E
Edgar
Guest
“Evolution is the greatest engine of atheism ever invented” - William Provine
B
buffalo
Guest
Absolutely.
E
Edgar
Guest
When it attempts to explain scientific impossibilities with science - abiogenesis and macroevolution, for example.
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
When it is not empirical, it becomes philosophy. Evolution has become a religion.
B
buss0042
Guest
Even though the genealogies from Adam to Abram account for over 10,000 years?
E
Edgar
Guest
If the genealogies imply over 10, 000 years, the Catholic scholars responsible for calculating the date of Christ’s birth (with respect to the creation of Adam), as described in the Martyrology of the CC, would surely have declared it so. But they didn’t - their calculations imply that Adam was created a little over 7200 years ago.
The 10,000+ years claim was invented by the Church’s evolutionists, in accordance with the hoax they’ve been deceived by.
B
buss0042
Guest
No, the 10,000+ years was just calculated by me, when I counted up the years written right in the bible…
So it seems that either Genesis is literal and means over 10,000 years, or that Adam and Eve were 7200 years ago and Genesis writes in non-literalistic terms, but you hold one view from each camp.
Can you see my confusion?
So it seems that either Genesis is literal and means over 10,000 years, or that Adam and Eve were 7200 years ago and Genesis writes in non-literalistic terms, but you hold one view from each camp.
Can you see my confusion?
E
edwest
Guest
On the Hebrew Calendar, it is 5779 right now.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Not Catholic doctrine.rossum:
Almost there- Adam and Eve were created about 7200 years ago.
Don’t care what William Provine says.edwest:
“Evolution is the greatest engine of atheism ever invented” - William Provine
It’s notable that you had to add “imo,” because in my opinion, it doesn’t.
And there you go again, cherry-picking voices that support your view and ignoring the majority of them that do not. As I said originally, that approach is not logical.LeafByNiggle:
Gould (one of the most distinguished paleontologists of the twentieth century) was not alone in his views. And if you look around, you can find evo-scientists who support Gould’s opinion today.
O
o_mlly
Guest
You ask, so what? One doesn’t debunk Darwinism with emotional pleas but logical argument exposing its fallacies. That’s what.
A
Aloysium
Guest
The truth is not decided by a majority vote. That said, a majority opinion does constitute a form of authority. And, it’s good to follow authority. It demonstrates humility, a recognition of one’s limits, as well as the desire to know the truth and do good. And, the ultimate authority, whom we are asked to follow is Christ.
However one interprets Genesis, its main point is the revelation of the Word of God and His personal relationship with us as our Creator. Each of us, it would appear, although sharing in our collective knowledge, understands this in our own way.
Whatever the majority of people believe, through our faith in Jesus Christ, we come to know God. Within that relationship, His Glory is revealed by nature, which He brings into being through an eternal act of Divine will.
There is no serendipity in this; as stated above in a quote from St. Thomas, “whatsoever divine providence ordains to happen infallibly and of necessity happens infallibly and of necessity; and that happens from contingency, which the divine providence conceives to happen from contingency.” There is no randomness in the coming together of the dust; its intrinsic properties are the building blocks and mortar used by God to create the home which is the person, and all creatures for whom we bear a responsibility of care.
As well, the utilitarian aspect of existence, its significance distorted and importance exaggerated by the will to power of the self, aka original sin, conceptualized as natural selection, represents the reality that all that exists does so in relation to what is other to itself, participating within its environment.
It’s all about the interpretation, not the science.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
That is true. That that ultimate authority has not spoken on the question of the theory of evolution.LeafByNiggle:
The truth is not decided by a majority vote. That said, a majority opinion does constitute a form of authority. And, it’s good to follow authority. It demonstrates humility, a recognition of one’s limits, as well as the desire to know the truth and do good. And, the ultimate authority, whom we are asked to follow is Christ.
I have that view of God and His personal relationship with us as Creator, and I also believe the science regarding evolution. No problem.
…understands scripture in his own way. As for science, the rules of that game are very explicit. Having your own personal interpretation of science is like having your own personal interpretation of baseball. I think there should be 8 innings, not 9. It is my personal interpretation.
A
Aloysium
Guest
This is all about creation.
You don’t do science, it is clear.
E
Edgar
Guest
You seem to think Darwinism is important - why?
Of what practical use is Darwinism?
How is Darwin’s “tree of life” concept useful to applied science?
Of what use is Darwinism to a Catholic?
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
That is the wrong question. Science is not the search for practical applications. Science is primarily a search for truth in this physical world, and then from that truth often flows useful applications. But not all the time. And when useful applications do not flow immediately from a scientific discovery, it could be that the time has not yet come for those applications to emerge, or maybe they never will emerge. It does not matter. Science builds a database of understanding.o_mlly:
You seem to think Darwinism is important - why?
Of what practical use is Darwinism?
How is Darwin’s “tree of life” concept useful to applied science?
Of what use is Darwinism to a Catholic?
Asking what use Darwinism is to a Catholic is like asking what use Sudoku is to a Catholic. It it just as useful to a Catholic as it is to a Muslim or a Hindu.
(P.S. There actually are practical applications to Darwinism, but I don’t have the time to get into a long argument about it that will ultimately be rejected or ignored, so I won’t bother.)
E
edwest
Guest
I have never gotten an answer to your first question. What use is evolution to anybody? No one can predict how bacteria will change - that ability is built-in. The same with viruses.
O
o_mlly
Guest
You seem a bit confused.
T
Techno2000
Guest
I think he means that these are just general questions that one should ask.Edgar:
You seem a bit confused.
O
o_mlly
Guest
Let’s hope so. His first question seems to indicate he hasn’t read through the thread. Maybe I’m wrong.
- Status