Evolution vs Creation

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Apr 14 2005, 07:26 AM'] First I think everyone needs to define their working definition of creationism and evolution or a better explanation of what they beleive etc.

Me:
God created everything. The fossil records say it took millions and billions then fine, because scienctific truth and God's truth are one and the same. Genesis never claims to be a scientific account of the beginnings. So God took his time and did it right. Do some species change? Of course. Do they do everything the evolutionists claim. Probably not without help. Only God could invent a platypus.

At some point God added human souls to the mix: whether He started a new species or altered one already here that doesn't matter either. We are here.
This is where our faith history starts in Genesis. This part matters
So the teaching stories in Genesis down to Abraham tell us our faith history. Abraham down the line tells us our family history. [/quote]
Its good to see the catholic point of view is far more rational than the literalist view. A guided evolution can be plausible. To disregard all evidence as propaganda, is simply a denial.

[philothea]

FWIW, I belive the same as you, cmotherofpirl. (Not that my opinion matters!) I don't know what exactly to call this belief. It's not Darwinism, and it's not Creationism. Guided evolution?

[cmotherofpirl]

To me its reality.
God is in charge, and His ways are wonderful and far more interesting than anything we can think up.

God is a God of logic and truth and beauty.
Catholicism is a very logical religion.

Edited April 14, 2005 by cmotherofpirl

[Priscilla]

[quote name='philothea' date='Apr 14 2005, 05:30 AM'] I'm curious.

How do those of you who are creationists explain fossil history? [/quote]
I think there are two explanations (and I am happy with either):

1) There is no time specified between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. There could be millions of years in between those two verses (there could even have been a pre-Adamic race: who knows?) - whatever, the earth was without form and void.

2) The flood was so cataclysmic that it has aged the earth: I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that the earth is only 6000 years old, but it seems as if its 6 billion years old. That's just how God works sometimes!!

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Priscilla' date='Apr 14 2005, 09:54 AM']
2) The flood was so cataclysmic that it has aged the earth: I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that the earth is only 6000 years old, but it seems as if its 6 billion years old. That's just how God works sometimes!! [/quote]
Your second statement is illogical. We have human artifacts and bones older than 6000 years. God does not play games and just throw logic and reason out the window just to play mind games and confuse us.
He is logic and reason, not silliness and contradiction.

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Priscilla' date='Apr 14 2005, 07:54 AM'] 2) The flood was so cataclysmic that it has aged the earth: I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that the earth is only 6000 years old, but it seems as if its 6 billion years old. That's just how God works sometimes!! [/quote]
There is no evidence for a flood that covered the earth. In fact there is overwhelming evidence against it. The current theories for those who still hold to the flood myth is that , [i]as the Ice Age ended and glaciers melted, a wall of seawater surged from the Mediterranean into the Black Sea.[/i] The study of this theory was chronicled by National Geographic.

[url="http://www.nationalgeographic.com/blacksea/ax/frame.html"]Black Sea Expedition[/url]

[Priscilla]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Apr 14 2005, 08:28 AM'] There is no evidence for a flood that covered the earth. In fact there is overwhelming evidence against it. The current theories for those who still hold to the flood myth is that , [i]as the Ice Age ended and glaciers melted, a wall of seawater surged from the Mediterranean into the Black Sea.[/i] The study of this theory was chronicled by National Geographic.

[url="http://www.nationalgeographic.com/blacksea/ax/frame.html"]Black Sea Expedition[/url] [/quote]
Well they can blind me with all the science they like and I'll still believe there was a flood. I believe the Bible means what it says, and says what it means. Period.

Not that Scripture does not use figures of speech or metaphores or allegories: but in the case of the flood, I believe it was literal.

But it's no big issue: I'm sure God won't condemn anyone to eternal torment if they believe either way.

[Priscilla]

I must say cmotherofpirl I like your signatures - but the one from Pope John Paul II in 1987 is very relevant to this thread is it not? I think it's a very good quote and there's a lot of truth in it.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Priscilla' date='Apr 14 2005, 10:55 AM'] Well they can blind me with all the science they like and I'll still believe there was a flood. I believe the Bible means what it says, and says what it means. Period.

Not that Scripture does not use figures of speech or metaphores or allegories: but in the case of the flood, I believe it was literal.

But it's no big issue: I'm sure God won't condemn anyone to eternal torment if they believe either way. [/quote]
The sacred writers were reporting on the world that they knew. So any flood that covered their world to them would be a global flood.
Who is to say that a flood happened to all parts of the world at the same time?

[infinitelord1]

I dont see any problems with evolution....i am no bible scholar.....but i think there are holes in the creation story that leave room for evolution......for instance......after the 6th day god rested. Since time is not a factor for god it may have been billions of years before he came back and made his final touches (the 7th day). Not to mention the second creation story in the bible which says god formed man from clay. I think that is reference to evolution. The fact is we have too much scientific evidence that says there was evolution (or that the earth is billions of years old).

[infinitelord1]

Actually melchisdic,

there is evidence that a flood occured.......they think they have found noahs ark in a mountain in turkey. This boat frame fits the exact measurements that the bible says noahs ark is. Also, it makes since that a boat would end up in a mountain if there were such a flood.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='infinitelord1' date='Apr 14 2005, 12:09 PM'] Actually melchisdic,

there is evidence that a flood occured.......they think they have found noahs ark in a mountain in turkey. This boat frame fits the exact measurements that the bible says noahs ark is. Also, it makes since that a boat would end up in a mountain if there were such a flood. [/quote]
I believe it was the National Inquirer that first pointed it out.

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='infinitelord1' date='Apr 14 2005, 11:09 AM'] Actually melchisdic,

there is evidence that a flood occured.......they think they have found noahs ark in a mountain in turkey. This boat frame fits the exact measurements that the bible says noahs ark is. Also, it makes since that a boat would end up in a mountain if there were such a flood. [/quote]
The supposed ark on mount ararat has been easily explained as ice. Since mount ararat is covered by glaciers, the movement of the ice would have pushed the ark from the top long ago.

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Apr 13 2005, 10:17 PM'] I don't fear athiesm. Athiesm is a position of the fear of the unknown. Faith scares you because you can't understand it. [/quote]
How incredibly ignorant.

[quote]All you are capable of believing in is what is in front of your nose. [/quote]

That shows what you know.

[quote]The idea that creationism is spawned out of evolution is debunkable by a lesson in history a second grader could do.[/quote]

Creationism is spawned out of evolution? How does that even make sense?

[quote]And that URL is a lame excuse for evidence in macro-evolution.[/quote]

It's really easy to just dismiss evidence when it doesn't say what you want it to say, isn't it?

[quote]Here is some basic exploration for your study on both sides of the issue:

[url="http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum&f=36&DaysPrune=1000&submit=Go"]http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultima...=1000&submit=Go[/url][/quote]

Baptisboard...doesn't make me want to visit that site very much.

[point5]

I know of starfish fossils that exist on the ceilings of caves in Arkansas

[Priscilla]

[quote name='infinitelord1' date='Apr 14 2005, 11:05 AM'] I dont see any problems with evolution....i am no bible scholar.....but i think there are holes in the creation story that leave room for evolution......for instance......after the 6th day god rested. Since time is not a factor for god it may have been billions of years before he came back and made his final touches (the 7th day). Not to mention the second creation story in the bible which says god formed man from clay. I think that is reference to evolution. The fact is we have too much scientific evidence that says there was evolution (or that the earth is billions of years old). [/quote]
That's just evolutionary spin.

You'd make a good politician Infintelord !

No seriously: : let's assume then that you are right up to Gen 2:6 - let's assume that God created everything through the process of death and evolution over billions of years - even up to Gen 2:7a "And the Lord God FORMED man of the dust of the groud" - let's assume you are right and these words "formed man" mean that the soil God created turned into plankton, plankton turned into fish, fish turned into birds, birds turned into apes and apes turned into man in this process of God "forming man" out of the dust of the earth (more or less) such as Darwin said.

Why would God then breath into his nostrils the breath of life? (Gen 2:7b)

Do you interpret 'breath' as not really being 'breath' - or is it something super-spiritual?

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Priscilla' date='Apr 14 2005, 02:12 PM'] That's just evolutionary spin.
[/quote]
More like creationist denial.

[Dudette]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Apr 13 2005, 08:59 PM']

How so?



Explain please?

Nice shoes btw [/quote]
May I list all the evidence *I* have against Evolution? Uh, the post might be just a [i]tad[/i] long. It'll explain why I think that evolution is not logical and horrible philosophy.

Yessssssssssss, someone who finally likes my shoes! Thank you!

[philothea]

[quote name='Dudette' date='Apr 14 2005, 03:05 PM'] May I list all the evidence *I* have against Evolution? Uh, the post might be just a [i]tad[/i] long. It'll explain why I think that evolution is not logical and horrible philosophy.
[/quote]
I'd be interested to hear even just a couple examples of your best evidence against evolution.

[Edited to add: my definition of "evolution" is the theory that life on earth shares a common ancestry.]

Edited April 14, 2005 by philothea

[kateri05]

bro. adam, i like you more and more every day

just FYI, while the Church doesn't believe that Genesis is a scientific history of the world's creation. HOWEVER, it is a true account of how man came to be (because the Bible is ALL true, thank you Scott Hahn and Dei Vierbum for explaining that ) and as such there are certain things that we ARE inquired to believe, most of which have been stated already. Here are a few:
1. God did it all. end of story (thanks cmom ) the hows, to quote someone else, who cares, but God DID do it AND it was good.

2. there are TWO original parents, we did not come from monkeys, but at some point, God made a man and a woman to live in perfect harmony with him. without two, original sin makes no sense (if your parents weren't adam and eve, but sue and bob, you wouldn't have original sin!)

3. original sin entered the world by man and through an act of free will (ie. it wasn't an accident, it wasn't a punishment, it was because man freely chose).

and there might be a few more, i can't remember, but listen to Scott Hahn's lecture series on Truth in Scripture, its amazing.

sorry to cut in, just wanted to add that!

Edited April 14, 2005 by kateri05