Evolution vs Creation

[bookwyrm]

To mortify: I totally agree that the intricacy and complexity of all organisms seems to defy evolution. However, while evolution is a theory wtih many holes, there's no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Pointing out what's wrong with evolution doesn't give any more credence to creationism, in my opinion. I'm not denying the role of God in creation - but religion tells us the Why, and science tells us only the How. I don't see why the two should ever be in conflict.

[bookwyrm]

[quote name='Priscilla' date='Apr 17 2005, 01:45 PM'] What I mean is this: if Catholics believe in evolution they are basically saying that death, famine, earthquatkes and disease ARE A PART OF GOD'S CREATIVE PROCESS. Yes? They must be saying that - because that's what TE is (believing that God's creation "evolves" through death and disease etc)

So, what I mean is: why then go AGAINST that "creative process" (through death, disease, famine etc) by donating money to try and prevent such disasters, if they are all such a wonderful process of God's "evolutionary" plan?
[/quote]
Death and disease were brought into the world by sin. Also because of our sin, Jesus Christ came to earth and died for us. He gave us the Eucharist. This is evidence of God's incredible ability to bring good out of all the evil we bring upon ourselves.

[bookwyrm]

OH NO!!!! I KILLED THE THREAD!!!!!!

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='bookwyrm' date='Apr 17 2005, 03:13 PM'] To mortify: I totally agree that the intricacy and complexity of all organisms seems to defy evolution. However, while evolution is a theory wtih many holes, there's no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Pointing out what's wrong with evolution doesn't give any more credence to creationism, in my opinion. I'm not denying the role of God in creation - but religion tells us the Why, and science tells us only the How. I don't see why the two should ever be in conflict. [/quote]
Well said.

[mortify]

bookwyrm

I take the baby out before dumping the water. Genes being passed down and giving rise to different traits is a reality. The difficulty is in accepting a theory which suggests that all "this" arose from billions of beyond-astronomical accidents that just happen to give life to the most intricate systems, such as the human body.

Everyone who cares to learn will marvel at our existence. How delicate our existence is and had not all these pieces come together in certain ways at certain times we would not even be here. The question is, if the difficulties of this theory are apparent why is it so strongly held on to? Why can't it be questioned? Without evolution there is no explanation for our existence, even with massive gaps it must be accepted...otherwise...what is the alternative? And what consequences does that alternative have?

Evolution has a big ground in atheism. It demonstrates the possibility of existence without God. God is not a necessary ingredient, scientists try to factor its reality without the divine included. If a theist accepts the theory, one only needs to ask why he believes God had anything to do with it.

We don't know the how but we have an idea as to the the Why.

[Brother Adam]

"Evolution has a big ground in atheism."

Is it any wonder that athiests encourage and commend Catholics for accepting evolution? When athiests and Catholics walk together hand in hand on the origins of life, that sends up a big red flag

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Apr 18 2005, 10:50 AM'] "Evolution has a big ground in atheism."

Is it any wonder that athiests encourage and commend Catholics for accepting evolution? When athiests and Catholics walk together hand in hand on the origins of life, that sends up a big red flag [/quote]
We also agree murder is wrong. Big red flag go up for you?

[Nicole8223]

I believe that if evolution did occur, then at the moment man came into existence, God infused him with a soul and free will. What's so atheistic about that?

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Nicole8223' date='Apr 18 2005, 12:47 PM'] I believe that if evolution did occur, then at the moment man came into existence, God infused him with a soul and free will. What's so atheistic about that? [/quote]
Exactly. It only interferes if you believe in the literal account of genesis. If you don't. Than evolution implies nothing about a gods existence or non existence.

[Paphnutius]

I have a question for those that want to stick to the exact and verbatim literal acceptance of the creation account in Genesis. When the authors spoke about God streaching out His hand to do this, or that God will take Judah as His commanders staff, do you take those literal as well? There are such things as analogies to express truth. We cannot explain God without an analogy for God is purely spiritual and pure act, so we must say God is like something (like having a hand or taking something as a staff) to express a truth about Him. Is God really a rock? No.

How God created is ultimatley a mystery. Would it be totally mind blowing that the creation account in Genisis, since there were no eye-witnesses, is an analogy to express a truth about God and how He acted to bring the world into exisence rather than a literal word by word account?

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Paphnutius' date='Apr 18 2005, 01:31 PM'] I have a question for those that want to stick to the exact and verbatim literal acceptance of the creation account in Genesis. When the authors spoke about God streaching out His hand to do this, or that God will take Judah as His commanders staff, do you take those literal as well? There are such things as analogies to express truth. We cannot explain God without an analogy for God is purely spiritual and pure act, so we must say God is like something (like having a hand or taking something as a staff) to express a truth about Him. Is God really a rock? No.

How God created is ultimatley a mystery. Would it be totally mind blowing that the creation account in Genisis, since there were no eye-witnesses, is an analogy to express a truth about God and how He acted to bring the world into exisence rather than a literal word by word account? [/quote]
Has brother adam trolled out on yet another good question and point.

[bookwyrm]

[quote name='mortify' date='Apr 18 2005, 11:43 AM'] bookwyrm

I take the baby out before dumping the water. Genes being passed down and giving rise to different traits is a reality. The difficulty is in accepting a theory which suggests that all "this" arose from billions of beyond-astronomical accidents that just happen to give life to the most intricate systems, such as the human body.

Everyone who cares to learn will marvel at our existence. How delicate our existence is and had not all these pieces come together in certain ways at certain times we would not even be here. The question is, if the difficulties of this theory are apparent why is it so strongly held on to? Why can't it be questioned? Without evolution there is no explanation for our existence, even with massive gaps it must be accepted...otherwise...what is the alternative? And what consequences does that alternative have?

Evolution has a big ground in atheism. It demonstrates the possibility of existence without God. God is not a necessary ingredient, scientists try to factor its reality without the divine included. If a theist accepts the theory, one only needs to ask why he believes God had anything to do with it.

We don't know the how but we have an idea as to the the Why. [/quote]
That's where Intelligent Design comes in. Not that I think it has any place as a scientific theory (which means we still have to patch up all those holes as scientists) but as a personal philosophy it helps sooth my qualms about evolution. BTW there's a big party over on the 'poll about creation' thread if anyone's interested.

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='Priscilla' date='Apr 14 2005, 02:12 PM'] 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? [/quote]
i believe that the breath of life was a soul.

[infinitelord1]

[quote name='Priscilla' date='Apr 14 2005, 02:12 PM'] 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? [/quote]
the breathe of life (in my beliefs) is a soul

[infinitelord1]

would somebody please correct me if im wrong.

[cmotherofpirl]

We weren't there so we don't know.

[infinitelord1]

i dont believe evolution goes against creationism at all......i believe they go hand-in-hand. Thats what i think the second creation story does it explains the evolutionary part of mand kind......while the 1st creation story explains it from gods perspective.

[cmotherofpirl]

Genesis tells us why God created the world. Astronomy and Evolution can give us the scientific details.
There are not incompatible and are different aspects of one Truth - God.

[Paphnutius]

Agreed.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Melchisedec' date='Apr 18 2005, 12:43 PM'] We also agree murder is wrong. Big red flag go up for you? [/quote]
No we don't I would seriously doubt that you and I could even arree what murder is.


That being said, I am a science teacher, Evolution is a hot topic in my field, let me say this, anyone who really embraces science is going to tell you evolution ( in the since it is being discussed here) is filled with to many holes to be seriously concidered a viable option. That doesn't mean that evolutionary processes do not occur, but science has not offered really compeling arguements for evolution... there are WAY,too many holes in the fossil record, and I mean way too many.


Now my personal opinion is right around Cmom's so if you want to know what I think just rlook agian at here post but please don't through around Evolutionary theory as if it was a sceintific fact it is not.