Posted on 03/20/2009 7:59:40 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
In a recent book review, Jerry Coyne, professor of ecology and evolution at the University of Chicago, admitted that the secular worldview of macroevolution (the development of complex life from “simpler” forms) is at odds with Christian faith...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
Evolution is a Religious Faith.
*You literalists*? As in that being directed towards me?
And why are you accusing me of attacking the Pope? Show me where I have ever done that.
I am sorry if I directed a response to the wrong person.
It looks like I might have done so.
I agree
How? When God says that He took the dust of the earth to form man and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, it precludes using animals.
Animals are already alive, so there wouldn’t be the need to breath the breath of life into man.
Evos ask if God didn’t use evolution, why didn’t He say so. Well, He did. Evos just aren’t listening.
For your reading enjoyment, DG.
http://www.plim.org/PrayerDeb.htm
http://www.sciencecases.org/prayer/prayer_notes.asp
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12082681/
It's the same argument used by the EVOS. We hold all the truth, and you just can't understand unless...
When you get finished with the New Testament, get back to me. I base my faith on God, not church. The Scriptures are only open when the Holy Spirit gives inspiration (breathes into it). They are not the property of Rome (though Rome does own some pricey real estate).
You mean the pre-Reformation Wycliffe translation, for which John Wycliffe, an Oxford educated theologian, was branded a heretic?
He’s presupposing soil consisting of decayed animal matter, forgetting that corruption, decay and death did not enter into Creation until the Fall.
Niels Bohr: “Any sentence I utter is but a question.”
Many want to be dictators, including Al Gore.
The “Bohr atom” has been fully discredited and yet, is still taught because it is so useful.
True scientific inquiry has little to do with dogma. However, spirited defense of current theory is common and welcomed.
Those with political agendas use any justification for their power plays over others, religious, scientific or whatever.
>>He took the dust of the earth to form man
>>and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life
He did - over millions of years.
You yourself have articulated the notion that much of the Bible isn’t meant to be interpreted literally.
God-directed mutation and macro-evolution does not contradict the illustration of Dust and Nostrils - rather these models simply enable us to see the workings of the process from a modern perspective, in the context of Scientific knowledge.
You are too proud to give credit where credit is due.
I suggest you read this, in its entirety:
http://www.geocities.com/catholic_profide/wbible.htm
It was written over 100 years ago by a Presbyterian Bishop who converted to the Catholic Church.
Many of your false ideas will be destroyed.
It is not my point to diminish any other faith, in these threads, but I will fight against false hoods directed towards the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church created the FIRST BIBLE. Before that time, the various Books were all separate, degrading parchments in various stages of decay.
It took the work of dedicated Catholic Monks in monasteries to hand copy the various Scriptures over and over again, through the ages, as no method of printing or preserving the original hand written Scriptures had been developed.
With out the organized, dedicated effort of the Catholic Church there would be NO Bible of any kind at all.
Every Bible in existence today owes its very existence to the Catholic Church, inspired by God to protect the original manuscripts and parchments and scriptures, Inspired by God to organize, edit and publish those works as one BOOK, and inspired by God to insert Chapter and Verse notations in each of the Scriptures, where NONE had existed in the original.
While the specifics of how aren’t addressed, it does give the materials used, dust of the earth being one. It was used first to create the animals and in Gen 2:7 it specifically says that God formed man from the dust of the earth and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.
As far as kinds, even today, when someone asks what kind of animal something is, the answer usually refers as far back as to order or family, as in, it’s the cat family, primates, or Rodentia, for example.
Considering that many animals are now found to be able to breed further back than species, to the genus level at least, and that the reason is mostly preference, it does lend to the classifications in Scripture being on the family or order scale.
What do you suppose would be the result if a creature were created that contained all the DNA for all the variations of the kind with no mutations yet existing? What do you think would happen if those animals became isolated from each other? Would it not be possible that, depending on conditions, certain characteristics could be lost, allowing others to be expressed? If different characteristics were lost in the different groups, then they would LOOK different, would they not?
Some time ago, a couple years IIRC, an evo made a comment to the effect that of the big cats, their skeletons were all identical and that the only reason that we know now that they are different species is because we can see them. Which made me wonder if they were really different species at all. If they are skeletally identical, why label them different species based on size or fur patterns? You might as well consider the different categories of human different species based on skin color, hair type, or size.
You wish to credit Rome with preserving what a handful of monks in merciful, Irish seclusion should rightfully be credited with, alone. The church itself was in utter turmoil at the time.
A psychological or even health survey about people who pray is quite different than a scientific study of prayer itself.
Just as a study that indicates Mormons or Seventh Day Adventists live longer lives than the general population, it’s a study of the effects of behaviors, not the actual religion.
And who cares who funded it?
>>He’s presupposing soil consisting of decayed animal matter
Maybe you are. Put your words in your own mouth.
Did Adam and Eve defecate before the fall?
Why should any tree bear fruit if it’s going to live forever?
Further, how long would have “be fruitful and multiply” have gone on before the population reached the biological carrying capacity of the garden?
The Monks in Ireland were Catholic, were they not?
Again, read this:
http://www.geocities.com/catholic_profide/wbible.htm
I have read your screeds, but have yet to get anything but "we did it, and everybody else sucked eggs" (or something along those lines) in response.
Your allegiance to the Romans is nice, I hope and pray it is equaled by your zeal toward Jesus, and His Spirit. I think they may have had something to do with the Inspiration, the recording, and the preservation. While the Roman Church may have been instrumental is certainly a given. BUT, they were definitely not the only track God Chose. He made many.
He gave us a few simple things for eternity. He gave us Jesus. He gives us the faith to believe in His resurrection, and the hope to come. He gave us brothers and sisters to help "keep the faith".
This life is temporal. We get one chance. There is no purgatory, just as there is no way to buy your way out with indulgences. Nobody can pray you into heaven. They don't exist in Scripture. They are NOT options, within the realm of God.
God gave us this earth by Creation. He gave us this life, and a hope for eternity. He made it very simple.
****
Acts 7:44ff- "Our forefathers had the tabernacle of the Testimony with them in the desert. It had been made as God directed Moses, according to the pattern he had seen. 45Having received the tabernacle, our fathers under Joshua brought it with them when they took the land from the nations God drove out before them. It remained in the land until the time of David, 46who enjoyed God's favor and asked that he might provide a dwelling place for the God of Jacob.[k] 47But it was Solomon who built the house for him.
48"However, the Most High does not live in houses made by men. As the prophet says:
49" 'Heaven is my throne,
and the earth is my footstool.
What kind of house will you build for me? says the Lord.
Or where will my resting place be?
50Has not my hand made all these things?'[l]
51"You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— 53you who have received the law that was put into effect through angels but have not obeyed it..."
I’ve often thought, for the science to work as it does, some very basic assumption must be in error, in order for truth not to contradict truth, borrowing from John Paul II. Macroevolution presumes what? Interspecial common descent. What also explains such apparent connectedness? Similarities can have other implications, outside of descent. Common architecture would be one. Economy of design, build it once, use it many times, for another. I’d equate it with modular computer programming, myself. But, I lack the vocabulary to express it.
*****Furthermore, the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church are the custodians of virtually ALL of the currently available ancient manuscripts. Any translation which claims to refer back to the original Aramaic or Hebrew or Greek would HAVE to use manuscripts under the ownership and control of the Catholic Church. Without the Roman Catholic Church, there would be NO Bible.*****
Those statements are patently false...You need to get out from under the unbrella of your church and look at the real history...
http://www.hissheep.org/kjv/the_great_uncials.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.