Here we go again…at least the other creation-evolution thread finally died off the first page in the apologetics forum.
zoot << You never believe in evolution simply because science proves that evolution is impossible. For example the human eye possesses 130 million light-sensitive rods and cones that convert light into chemical impulses. These signals travel at a rate of a billion per second to the brain. The essential problem for Darwinists is how so many intricate components could have independently evolved to work together perfectly when, if a single component didn’t function perfectly, nothing would work at all. >>
Perhaps hard to explain in Darwin’s day 150 years ago. But not so hard today. Consider these links, I’ve given them before
Evolution of the Eye
Dan-Eric Nilsson and The Lund Vision Group
these folks study the details of the evolution of the eye
Everything else you said about the origin of the universe I agree with.
Tom A<< Atheistic evolution is not compatable with the spiritual realities the Church teaches. >>
Well I would agree that atheistic evolution can’t be reconciled. “Atheistic” evolution certainly denies original sin. Theistic evolution, or “evolutionary creationism” does not. We need to stop positing this either / or dichotomy, learn a little more science and theology. Stop being so darn lazy.
So how do you explain such folks as Kenneth Miller, Keith Miller, Glenn Morton, Darrel Falk, Denis Lamoureux.
I’ve given all their links to their home pages, and their books, oh about 4.5 billion times already in past threads. Spend some time (maybe a year), get their books, read what they have to say…reconcile evolution and creation, and don’t be so lazy.
My unfinished response to Bob Sungenis on evolution and the age of the earth
The science parts 2 and 3 are pretty much done, there are a few theological sources I need to look up. And I need the authoritative source on Grand Canyon Geology by Oxford Univ Press (2002, 2nd edition).
My position is that God indeed is the cause of the universe at the Big Bang, and God initiated first life on earth, but I don’t call either of those “science” since science deals with the natural not the supernatural. Its the difference between methodological naturalism (MN) vs. philosophical naturalism (PN) or “materialism.” Even Christian scientists (who are not creationists) are MN when they do science. Both atheists and Christians do science the same way. And they can come to the same conclusion that the best explanation of the data, the rise or “development” (to use the Catechism term, paragraphs 283-284) of plants, animals, and mankind, is indeed evolution.
JA << But who created god? If you can believe in a eternal god, why not believe in an eternal universe >>
As for who created god, that is a good question that can be debated philosophically and be kept completely separate from the question whether the scientific evidence is in favor of evolution, which is the topic of this thread.
There are a lot of Catholics in here who accept the scientific evidence which I’m thankful for. You do not have to check your brain at the door and deny modern science to be a Christian or Catholic.
We don’t demonstrate or prove God’s existence from the Bible. That is just stupid. Well maybe some Christian apologists do. However, read William Lane Craig and Peter Kreeft.