What Is Your View On Creation?

[cmotherofpirl]

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism[/url]

[Selah]

[quote]See, I wouldn't go that far.
Maybe an allegory, but not a story like a fairy tale.
Even most non-Thesists/Christians would agree that that is more or less the order in which things happened, so I'm not sure I'd discount it quite that much.[/quote]

Well, I didn't mean that it was a fairy tale in the sense that it was made up and nonsensical. I do believe God created the universe, but I believe He did this through the process of evolution.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Selah

[Hassan]

[quote name='Selah' post='1920920' date='Jul 15 2009, 05:37 PM']I'm a Theistic evolutionist. I believe that the story in Genesis is just that-a story. A story written by the ancients to explain how they believe the earth was created and how sin entered into the world. It's a story, but a facinating one nonetheless. I always say that the Bible is not a science book, but a book written to describe God's way of reaching out to us through Jesus.[/quote]


Have you read the book by Francis C. Collins?

[Mapache]

[quote name='Selah' post='1920920' date='Jul 15 2009, 05:37 PM']I'm a Theistic evolutionist. I believe that the story in Genesis is just that-a story. A story written by the ancients to explain how they believe the earth was created and how sin entered into the world. It's a story, but a facinating one nonetheless. I always say that the Bible is not a science book, but a book written to describe God's way of reaching out to us through Jesus.[/quote]


I have a hard time believing that it's "just a story". The Bible is the God-Breathed...His inerrant word. If the Creation is just a story, then Moses parting the Red sea is just a story and David and Goliath is just a story and Jesus' life, death and resurrection is all just a story.

[Selah]

[quote]I have a hard time believing that it's "just a story". The Bible is the God-Breathed...His inerrant word. If the Creation is just a story, then Moses parting the Red sea is just a story and David and Goliath is just a story and Jesus' life, death and resurrection is all just a story.[/quote]

I believe the Bible to be divinely inspired as well, but I don't believe that everything is to be taken literally.

Think about it this way: What is the central theme of the creation story? That God loved us and longed for us, and so here we are!

What is the story of Moses and the Red Sea about? God's love and protection for His own.

What is the story of David and Goliath about? It's about God using the smallest and what seems the most insignificant of people to accomplish His purpose!

To me, the meaning behind the story is more important than proving that it actually, literally happened.

Does that make any sense?


[quote]Have you read the book by Francis C. Collins?[/quote]

No, I have not

Edited July 15, 2009 by Selah

[Mapache]

[quote name='Selah' post='1920944' date='Jul 15 2009, 05:47 PM']I believe the Bible to be divinely inspired as well, but I don't believe that everything is to be taken literally.

Think about it this way: What is the central theme of the creation story? That God loved us and longed for us, and so here we are!

What is the story of Moses and the Red Sea about? God's love and protection for His own.

What is the story of David and Goliath about? It's about God using the smallest and what seems the most insignificant of people to accomplish His purpose!

To me, the meaning behind the story is more important than proving that it actually, literally happened.

Does that make any sense? [/quote]

I do see where you're coming from. But are you saying that Moses, David, Elijah, etc, could just be characters instead of people who actually lived?

[Paddington]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1920908' date='Jul 15 2009, 07:32 PM']The number 6000 was arrived at by a protestant minister named Mr Darby in Scotland in the 1800s, so its an invented tradition of men.[/quote]



St.Basil: "Thus were created the evening and the morning. Scripture means the space of a day and a night...If it therefore says 'one day,' it is from a wish to determine the measure of day and night, and to combine the time that they contain. Now twenty-four hours fills up the space of one day - we mean of a day and of a night" (Hexameron 2, 8).


There are many more.

[Selah]

[quote]I do see where you're coming from. But are you saying that Moses, David, Elijah, etc, could just be characters instead of people who actually lived?[/quote]

No, not necesarily. I believe they lived. But I also believe that there are legends and stories told about them as well. That doesn't mean that I don't believe Moses didn't free the Israelites or that David really wasn't a courageous lad who stood up for what he believed in. (I personally love David, by the way. I almost made him my Patron Saint )

Edited July 15, 2009 by Selah

[Hassan]

[quote name='Selah' post='1920944' date='Jul 15 2009, 05:47 PM']No, I have not [/quote]


He's the geneticist who led the genome project.

His book, I think "The Language of God" is the title, discusses his reason's for believing in Theistic Evolution. You may like it.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Paddington' post='1920960' date='Jul 15 2009, 07:57 PM']St.Basil: "Thus were created the evening and the morning. Scripture means the space of a day and a night...If it therefore says 'one day,' it is from a wish to determine the measure of day and night, and to combine the time that they contain. Now twenty-four hours fills up the space of one day - we mean of a day and of a night" (Hexameron 2, 8).


There are many more.[/quote]
There are other saints who disagree, and none are infalliable.
The beginning of Genesis are teaching stories of our origins, and CNN was not there taking notes, so you are not required to read it as if you are reading a newspaper account or a science book.


"Science can purify religion from error and superstition.
Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes" 1987
Pope John Paul II

[Resurrexi]

This should probably help to explain what views Catholics are free to hold (though I'm sure that many here have already read this):

"For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faithful. Some however rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question.

"When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which through generation is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own." (Pope Pius XII, [i]Humani Generis[/i], 36-37)


I personally feel that the body of the first man probably did come from pre-existent and living matter.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Resurrexi

[CatherineM]

I can't imagine a better way for an ancient scribe to describe the Big Bang than to say, "and God said let there be light."

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1920908' date='Jul 15 2009, 05:32 PM']I have Clovis and Cumberland point arrowheads older than 6000 years. The number 6000 was arrived at by a protestant minister named Mr Darby in Scotland in the 1800s, so its an invented tradition of men.[/quote]

In the [i]Roman Martyrology[/i] entry for Christmas (read at Prime on Christmas Eve), it is stated that "In the 5199th year of the creation of the world, from the time when in the beginning God created heaven and earth, [. . .] Jesus Christ [. . .] was born in Bethlehem of Juda of the Virgin Mary [. . .]."

I tend to think of this number as being more mystical than anything, but I could see why someone would interpret this as an historical number.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Apotheoun]

The Hexameron is a complex text, and one should not isolate out quotations in order to try and prove a modern idea, i.e., that creation took six twenty-four hour days. In fact, just after the cited text the author speaks of the eighth eternal day, which hardly fits with the idea that a day must be twenty-four hours long in every case. One must always bear in mind that the scriptural texts are polyvalent.

[Paddington]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1921002' date='Jul 15 2009, 08:39 PM']The Hexameron is a complex text, and one should not isolate out quotations in order to try and prove a modern idea, i.e., that creation took six twenty-four hour days. In fact, just after the cited text the author speaks of the eighth eternal day, which hardly fits with the idea that a day must be twenty-four hours long in every case. One must always bear in mind that the scriptural texts are polyvalent.[/quote]

I don't imagine that he said 24 hours when describing the eighth eternal day, but if you think that is still significant, then you're probably right.

My point, which could've been proven much better was that Darby didn't invent the idea. He wasn't the first Protestant to believe it, and I don't think Protestants were the first to believe it.

Actually, I think it was a normal belief for a long time.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Paddington

[Apotheoun]

I just think that you are reading something into the Hexameron that is not there, i.e., that St. Basil is claiming that the "days of creation" are twenty-four hours long. All he is saying is that the comments in scripture about "one day" rather than calling it the "first day" are establishing the concept of time for man. There is nothing in the text that would indicate that the "days of creation" are themselves twenty-four hours long.

[dairygirl4u2c]

"The first proposition, that the sun is the centre and does not revolve about the earth, is foolish, absurd, false in theology, and heretical, because expressly contrary to Holy Scripture... [and]... the second proposition, that the earth is not the centre but revolves about the sun, is absurd, false in philosophy, and, from a theological point of view at least, opposed to the true faith."
- Judgment of the Inquisition of Galileo Galilei, 1616


just sayin... cause some of the biblical folk on these sorta issues seem to sound a lot like that guy who was obviously wrong

[dairygirl4u2c]

not creationism, but evolution

this thread got me lookin at my archives here
[quote]look at chapter 6 and five, especially chapter six. there's chromosomal proof too, for evolution.
[url="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html#ch05"]http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html#ch05[/url]


links for things on traisitional fossils

[url="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part2a.html"]http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part2a.html[/url]

[url="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/d2700.html"]http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/d2700.html[/url]

[url="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/"]http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/[/url]

[url="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/"]http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/[/url]

[url="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html#ch05"]http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html#ch05[/url]

[url="http://news.softpedia.com/news/Top-10-Exti...ans-62131.shtml"]http://news.softpedia.com/news/Top-10-Exti...ans-62131.shtml[/url]

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution[/url][/quote]

[goldenchild17]

I believe in the literal genesis story, and also believe there is a lot in Scripture that is not meant to be literal, but for me this is not one of them. But then again, I also believe in geocentrism and disbelieve in any form of macro-evolution and probably believe in a 6000 year earth lifespan. So I'm not one to trust on scientific issues - I understand that and don't try to convince others on these things, its just what I personally believe.

[Vasilius Konstantinos]

For the OP: I dunno. I was not there. I have no clue what happened. Al I am certain of is that God was there in His uncreated glory and spoke into existence creation from His uncreated energies, the Breath of Life. Therefore I am a Creationist, as that meaning God made it. How he did it? By His voice. How long ago? I don't know, don't care.