Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

This should be an interesting series of essays.
1 posted on 02/22/2012 10:03:24 PM PST by Salvation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: nickcarraway; NYer; ELS; Pyro7480; livius; ArrogantBustard; Catholicguy; RobbyS; marshmallow; ...

Essays for Lent Ping.


2 posted on 02/22/2012 10:06:39 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
"... the simple will never produce the complex... "

In that case, for God to be able to do all the wondrous things God does, God must be complex and intelligent. Who designed God? How can God's complexity arise from nothing?

If God is eternal, how does God choose a moment to begin Creation? The Infinite Regress becomes a problem, if it truly is a problem.

If God is outside Time, then how could God produce a change in the circumstances, given that change requires Time to pre-exist and elapse, in order to allow the change in the circumstances? If Time were a "created" thing, then the situation changes from one without Time to one with Time operating it. How can a demarcation exist to separate the two situations, if Time were yet to be "created"? In other words, without Time, the situation without Time and the situation with Time running in it would be super-imposed, in other words, the two situations would be simultaneous, which is a self-contradiction. You cannot do something and not do the same thing, simultaneously. Likewise.

Points to ponder, no doubt.

3 posted on 02/22/2012 10:42:44 PM PST by James C. Bennett (An Australian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
Evolutionists reject the idea of a Creator because they claim that facts must be observable by the senses. Thus, this would exclude God. However, it would also exclude radio waves.

Creation idiots. Radios are sensing radio waves. The theory for electromagnetism is understood and intact, and it allows engineers to arrange and size components to SENSE the f'n radio waves. Why this crap again. If the creationists think sensing God is equivalent, what is the theory that permits Muslims? How do you calculate it?

4 posted on 02/23/2012 12:10:30 AM PST by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The meek shall not inherit the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
Pope: Creation vs. evolution clash an ‘absurdity’

Benedict XVI also says humans must listen to ‘the voice of the Earth’

-snip-

“They are presented as alternatives that exclude each other,” the pope said. “This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19956961/ns/world_news-europe/t/pope-creation-vs-evolution-clash-absurdity/

6 posted on 02/23/2012 12:51:50 AM PST by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
Oy.

The argument about transitional forms is not an argument against evolution per se, it is an argument against gradualism. If evolution proceeded (as Gould and Lewonton argued) by long periods of stasis and short bursts of rapid change--punctuated equilibria--then it stands to reason we'd see very little in the way of transitional fossils.

Microvilli, which line the intestines, are microscopic bristles that somewhat resemble the bristles of a hairbrush. The spaces between the bristles are wide enough to allow nutrients to pass through to be absorbed and digested. However, the spaces are narrow enough to block the passage of bacteria, bacteria that would kill you if they were allowed to pass. This in itself refutes the theory of evolution, which contends that when a need presents itself, the body adapts by gradually changing (evolving) over millions of years. In this case millions of years would be too long. As soon as the deadly bacteria appeared, the body would have minutes to hours to design and evolve a system to block them. Failure to do so would result in immediate extinction. Our continued existence rules out the evolutionary premise.

Not at all. Any sexually reproducing species has a measure of genetic variability in the population to begin with. That's the point of sexual reproduction. So, in this model, when this bacteria struck, it would wipe out a large proportion of the population except those individuals who had the correct distance between microvilli.

Some propose the idea of theistic evolution. The idea that God created everything in a primitive state and then evolution took over.

Look, here's what we know. We know that the geologic strata contain what looks to be a succession of living things deposited at different times. Living things, I might add, which are different from the ones alive today. Now if our author here rejects evolution, then he must be willing to posit a *miraculous* special creation for every single one of those organisms. That's of course possible. But responsible theologians remind us that if we start positing miracles as an explanation for anomalous data we have just destroyed the scientific method. Miracles can occur, but they are not the ordinary means of God's operation. The ordinary means of God's operation is nature.

People need to stop thinking about it in terms of "creation OR evolution", and need to consider whether this is a case of "creation BY evolution". We know God created. That is a fact. What no one has really been able to explain is exactly how. In my opinion, evolutionary theory offers us, for the first time, a glimpse into *how* God actually put together different organisms from the slime of the earth.

7 posted on 02/23/2012 1:06:55 AM PST by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation

For my part, I don’t need to know whether the universe just happened or was created. I know that there is an objective reality independent of me. I base my morals and ethics on reason based on that reality. Yes I believe in a creator, but it would not change anything morally or ethnically either way. There are natural laws governing man according to his nature and they are not difficult to reason out.

I don’t need to know if there is life after death either. I just want to live every minute of my life as a gift and I know that some day I will find out as we all will what happens next.


11 posted on 02/23/2012 7:06:19 AM PST by albionin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
This website is misleadingly called 'staycatholic' while the essay is NOT consistent with Catholic teaching on the subject of creation and evolution.. it is more in line with young earth creationists who still insist the earth is 6,000 years old. Wonder what God has to say about lying or misrepresentation?

It is particularly funny to see the 'big bang theory' derided, and this claiming to be consistent with Catholic teaching, when it was proposed by a Catholic priest in the first place; Monsignor Georges Lemaitre.

Some excerpts for a summary of true Catholic standing on the issue...

What is the Catholic position concerning belief or unbelief in evolution? The question may never be finally settled, but there are definite parameters to what is acceptable Catholic belief.

Concerning cosmological evolution, the Church has infallibly defined that the universe was specially created out of nothing. Vatican I solemnly defined that everyone must "confess the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, as regards their whole substance, have been produced by God from nothing" (Canons on God the Creator of All Things, canon 5).

The Church does not have an official position on whether the stars, nebulae, and planets we see today were created at that time or whether they developed over time (for example, in the aftermath of the Big Bang that modern cosmologists discuss). However, the Church would maintain that, if the stars and planets did develop over time, this still ultimately must be attributed to God and his plan, for Scripture records: "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all their host [stars, nebulae, planets] by the breath of his mouth" (Ps. 33:6).

Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.

Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "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 . . . 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—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.

While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution.

Source

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution
12 posted on 02/23/2012 7:10:17 AM PST by battousai (Conservatives are racist? YES, I hate stupid white liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation

14 posted on 02/23/2012 7:22:02 AM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
It seems the rest of the site is consistent with Catholicism so I will take back what I said about the name, however this essay does not belong there I fear.

Another interesting link for those interested in the true stance of the Church with respect to current cosomology, etc..

http://www.youtube.com/user/EWTN#p/search/0/ETBssDRsM74

Fr. Elliot Spitzer discussing his book on the subject on EWTN, he also has a show on Friday evenings, but they don't have those up on youtube yet; "The Heavens Proclaim the Glory of God".
16 posted on 02/23/2012 7:24:39 AM PST by battousai (Conservatives are racist? YES, I hate stupid white liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
The two are not mutually exclusive. God created it, I believe and acknowledge, but there is just too much evidence of millions of years and thousands of life forms to deny evolution.

Transitional forms are not important to evolution - transitional forms are evolution. No transitional forms means no evolution!

There are transitional forms. Two examples are the horse and the elephant. The predecessor of the horse, Eohippus was a toed animal but the transition to hoofed had begun. A couple of others (names forgotten, no time to look 'em up) retained the remnants of toes until the earliest modern horse which lacked them.

There are animals which were clearly pre-elephants and elephants in the fossil record that no longer exist, but there are no modern elephant fossils found at the same age levels. That seems to indicate a transition.

God created all, but it is presumptuous of us to put Him on a 6000 year timetable. If we accept His Son's sacrifice we will see Him someday, and I'm sure He will answer our questions.

22 posted on 02/23/2012 8:07:24 AM PST by JimRed (Excising a cancer before it kills us waters the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
Yet another exercise in false dichotomy. It must not be considered that God created life with the ability to evolve.

You must choose between evolution and divine creation and be left with inextricable conclusion that if evolution happened, there is no God.

27 posted on 02/24/2012 4:50:46 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson