Evolution Vs. Creationism Who is Right?


#1

There are many catholics that don’t believe in all of the creation details. Earth in 7 days, Men were made before Women, God took a nap, Universe is only ~10,000 years old. Likewise there are many evolutionists that don’t believe that all life on earth came from a single cell, that life formed from muck, people evolved direcltly from monkeys, etc.

When do you, and do you not, believe in evolution/creationism?

Why?


#2

Hello Zootjeff, good topic.

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. “The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the Eternal has made them both.” Proverbs 20:12

When to believe creation is after you have proven its validity. Genesis 1:1-2 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth ***became ***formless and void…" In the KJV and most translations that word I put in as “became” is translated to “was”. “Was” is a wrong translation. the original word is “hayah” Strongs 1961 Heb. This same word is translated to “became” in Genesis 2:7, as in man “became” a living being, or soul. This word is also translated to “came to pass” in Genesis 22:1. The Bible only goes back approximately 6000 years. This is provable just by following the geneologies from Adam on down, then into the kings up until the time of Christ. It is tedious but really not that difficult if you want to spend the time. Anyway what I’m getting at is that the earth existed long long before the Creation of the pre-flood world of Adam. Something happened to destroy the life that was on the earth at that time, I personally think it was when God cast Satan back to the earth for his rebellion, Isaiah 14:12- 14, Ezekiel 28:16.

I hope this was helpful to you, GED


#3

Evolution is a science. Creationism requires faith, which cannot be proven. But they dont contradict each other, you can believe in both.


#4

Hello Ja3712, I hope you are well.

I saw your post and thought I would comment and ask a question - you need not answer - its more of a question to ponder within yourself. Q.) Dont you think it takes more blind faith to believe that the universe just happened to happen out of nothingness, with no Creator? Think about it, science has proven that the universe DID NOT always exist. That would mean that if evolution is correct, then everything just happened out of nothing - out of thin air, or non-air, out of the void! That is scientificly impossible - there has to be a cause for the effect because we live in a cause and effect universe. Look at the awesome size of the universe, and incredible amount of galaxies and stars and on and on it goes. The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament shows His handiwork. Psalm19:1

The comment I would add is that God commands us to prove that He is real, Malachi 3:10, He commands us to prove all things, 1 Thessalonians 5:21. Fulfilled prophecy is another way to*** prove*** that God is real. Behold, the Great God says, “Remember the former things of old, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancoent times things that are not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand and I will do all My pleasure’” Isaiah 46:9-10. Read Isaiah 53, which was written around 700 B.C. it is a prophecy pertaning to Jesus Christ, that prophecy was fufilled when Christ came to the earth and lived and died as the Son of Man. Faith can be proven! You can prove that the Bible is real, that it is the very real Word of the Great God. Faith is proven when you prove that God is real, that His Word stands without fail.

Hebrews 11:1,6, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not yet seen. 6 …without faith it is impossible to please (God), for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” We come to believe that He is by proving that He is real as He commands. I will say though that faith is a gift of God, one of the fruits of His Holy Spirit. It is the most precious gift to know God.

At any rate I’ve rambled enough, I hope this was helpful to you.
Take care GED


#5

[quote=ja3712]Evolution is a science. Creationism requires faith, which cannot be proven. But they dont contradict each other, you can believe in both.
[/quote]

Believing two ideas which contradict each other?

Atheistic evolution is not compatable with the spiritual realities the Church teaches.

I) We are the natural descendants of apes who were the natural descendants of monkeys…shrews…reptiles…fish…pond scum…space dust…there is no original sin, only our animal nature.

II) We are children of God descended from Adam and Eve. Original sin entered the world through their choices.

Sure believe both…


#6

One thing that many evolutionists use to help reinforce their “faith in evolution” is that Chimps have 98% of the same genes as people do. If you look at the skeletal structure of a chimp, it looks almost exactly like a small human. The main difference in that it has a tail. If you look a human, you notice the tailbone just stopping, but being there. Chimps have all the same building blocks as people without as big of a brain. They even have the same kinds of reproductive organs.

Another one is that Whales have all the bones tucked to their sides to form arms and legs. While they don’t actually have arms and legs the bones suggest that they once did.

If God did create these features, he certainly shouldn’t be surprised that some people started believing in evolution.

-Jeff


#7

[quote=Tom of Assisi]Believing two ideas which contradict each other?

[/quote]

They only contradict each other if you take genesis literally instead of as a parable.

For the poster above who mistakenly believes an eye can’t evolve, perhaps you should read up on the eyespots planarian worms have. They are exactly that, crude eye structures that work quite well.


#8

[quote=Glenamyaglen]Hello Ja3712, I hope you are well.

I saw your post and thought I would comment and ask a question - you need not answer - its more of a question to ponder within yourself. Q.) Dont you think it takes more blind faith to believe that the universe just happened to happen out of nothingness, with no Creator? Think about it, science has proven that the universe DID NOT always exist. That would mean that if evolution is correct, then everything just happened out of nothing - out of thin air, or non-air, out of the void! That is scientificly impossible - there has to be a cause for the effect because we live in a cause and effect universe. Look at the awesome size of the universe, and incredible amount of galaxies and stars and on and on it goes. The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament shows His handiwork. Psalm19:1

The comment I would add is that God commands us to prove that He is real, Malachi 3:10, He commands us to prove all things, 1 Thessalonians 5:21. Fulfilled prophecy is another way to*** prove*** that God is real. Behold, the Great God says, “Remember the former things of old, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancoent times things that are not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand and I will do all My pleasure’” Isaiah 46:9-10. Read Isaiah 53, which was written around 700 B.C. it is a prophecy pertaning to Jesus Christ, that prophecy was fufilled when Christ came to the earth and lived and died as the Son of Man. Faith can be proven! You can prove that the Bible is real, that it is the very real Word of the Great God. Faith is proven when you prove that God is real, that His Word stands without fail.

Hebrews 11:1,6, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not yet seen. 6 …without faith it is impossible to please (God), for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” We come to believe that He is by proving that He is real as He commands. I will say though that faith is a gift of God, one of the fruits of His Holy Spirit. It is the most precious gift to know God.

At any rate I’ve rambled enough, I hope this was helpful to you.
Take care GED
[/quote]

But who created god? If you can believe in a eternal god, why not believe in an eternal universe, or a eternal oscillating universe to be more correct. Both takes equal amount of faith i suppose.

To try to prove god exists with 2000 year old writings is awwfully unscientific. One of my favorite quotes- “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”


#9

Here we go again…at least the other creation-evolution thread finally died off the first page in the apologetics forum. :cool:

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. :smiley: You do not have to check your brain at the door and deny modern science to be a Christian or Catholic. :thumbsup:

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.

Phil P


#10

wdcs.org/dan/publishing.nsf/allweb/724E9ECC96A4B71E80256DB8002F5CC5


#11

[quote=Glenamyaglen] Think about it, science has proven that the universe DID NOT always exist.
[/quote]

Yes, the Big Bang Theory is generally accepted among scientists but that doesn’t necessarily mean that nothing existed before the Big Bang.

[quote=Glenamyaglen]That would mean that if evolution is correct, then everything just happened out of nothing - out of thin air, or non-air, out of the void! That is scientificly impossible - there has to be a cause for the effect because we live in a cause and effect universe.
[/quote]

If you can believe that God can exist without a cause then why can’t you believe the universe can exist without a cause?


#12

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. >>

  That is the same problem that semiconductor fabs have. 

Why didn’t the Human eye get the sensitivity of a cat’s eye, or the detail of an eagle’s eye. Or the wavelength resolution to see more infarred and UV? When God created us to be the superior race, why do we have mediocre eyesight compared to a lot of other animals? It would have been so easy to give us really cool eye-sight. God is perfect; he wouldn’t create a half-a$$ human eye design when he has all these better ones that he stuck in all the other animals. Why do some people have a genetic history of needing glasses? There are lots of problems with the eye and we see that every day.

Also, monkeys have 10 times the mussel strength that humans have. The Human body is a Geo Metro with a Ferrari engine in it

 -Jeff

#13

I messed up my post above. Meant to quote glen << >> who seems to deny evolution and uses the Bible to prove God’s existence. Very bad move in my opinion.

Zoot however accepts evolution. Good I got that straight now. :smiley:

Here’s to another 10 page 1000-post thread on creation-evolution. :cool:

Phil P


#14

[quote=PhilVaz]I messed up my post above. Meant to quote glen << >> who seems to deny evolution and uses the Bible to prove God’s existence. Very bad move in my opinion.

Zoot however accepts evolution. Good I got that straight now. :smiley:

Here’s to another 10 page 1000-post thread on creation-evolution. :cool:

Phil P
[/quote]

I wouldn’t say that I accept it, there are still a lot of unanswered questions about it. I’m just trying to formulate an opinion. I probably have more questions about creationism, but I still have unanswered questions. I think it might be a combonation of both, but I’m not sure where to draw the line.

Evolution is very vague, and can mean that one virus changes to another virus to resist antibiotics. It can also mean that a 400 foot tree came from a single cell.


#15

zoot << I’m just trying to formulate an opinion. I probably have more questions about creationism, but I still have unanswered questions. I think it might be a combonation of both, but I’m not sure where to draw the line. >>

Here’s how I formulated my opinion. Spend 3 months reading all the articles on this site.

TalkOrigins

Spend about a week reading all the articles on this site

Answers in Genesis

You will conclude all the scientific evidence is on the side of evolution, and the creationist side mainly uses the Bible, in particular a very literal interpretation of Genesis, to deny all the scientific evidence. Not very scientific in my opinion.

Then spend another 3 months, reading the articles of this site, and reading the books of Ken Miller, Keith Miller, Glenn Morton, Darrel Falk, Denis Lamoureux, etc

ASA3 Creation-Evolution page

Then spend a week or two reading (and listening to) these sites

Catholic Answers
Dave Armstrong
PhilVaz

And you will conclude (A) God exists, (B) evolution is the best explanation for the development of life, and © Catholicism is the most historic, most logical and best expression of orthodox Christianity.

Congratulations, welcome home. :thumbsup:

Phil P


#16

[quote=PhilVaz]zoot << I’m just trying to formulate an opinion. I probably have more questions about creationism, but I still have unanswered questions. I think it might be a combonation of both, but I’m not sure where to draw the line. >>

Here’s how I formulated my opinion. Spend 3 months reading all the articles on this site.

TalkOrigins

Spend about a week reading all the articles on this site

Answers in Genesis

You will conclude all the scientific evidence is on the side of evolution, and the creationist side mainly uses the Bible, in particular a very literal interpretation of Genesis, to deny all the scientific evidence. Not very scientific in my opinion.

Then spend another 3 months, reading the articles of this site, and reading the books of Ken Miller, Keith Miller, Glenn Morton, Darrel Falk, Denis Lamoureux, etc

ASA3 Creation-Evolution page

Then spend a week or two reading (and listening to) these sites

Catholic Answers
Dave Armstrong
PhilVaz

And you will conclude (A) God exists, (B) evolution is the best explanation for the development of life, and © Catholicism is the most historic, most logical and best expression of orthodox Christianity.

Congratulations, welcome home. :thumbsup:

Phil P
[/quote]

Phil,

I know that you may not know the answer to this, but why doesn’t the Magisterium just interpret whether the word “day” in Genesis is literal or figurative? They are supposed to be there to interpret the Bible so that their is not so much division, conflict, and confusion.

It is a matter of interpretation that has implications on science, but it is not a matter of science.

It seems that Catholics are just as confused and divided over this issue as anyone else. Does the Magisterium know the interpretation of “day” in Genesis? It is part of the deposit of tradition?

If not, why don’t they know this? It would be great to have them state clearly about this matter. Why haven’t they?

Thanks Phil,

Michael


#17

mike << I know that you may not know the answer to this, but why doesn’t the Magisterium just interpret whether the word “day” in Genesis is literal or figurative? >>

Why would that answer any questions. The Church does not claim to be infallible in science. Only faith and morals.

Okay fine, let’s say God created everything in six days, and the Church infallibly interpreted “day in Genesis 1 means 24 hours.” But maybe He created everything in six days 4.5 billion years ago. How about that huh? :smiley: I guess the Church would then have to infallibly interpret all the geneologies of Genesis 5 and Genesis 11, and come up with a date for Adam/Eve infallibly, too, huh huh? :smiley:

What I want to know from the young-earthers is where is the exact verse in Genesis or anywhere that says the earth or universe is 6000 or 10000 years old? Luckily, the Bible does not say that, and the Church therefore doesn’t have to worry about “contradicting the Bible” when scientists have demonstrated since at least the 1950s that the earth is precisely 4.5 - 4.6 billion years old, and geologists knew the earth was very old well before Darwin.

Interpreting the Bible one way or another does not answer any scientific questions. Science (modern geology, biology, astronomy, paleontology, etc) answers the scientific questions, while the Church claims to be infallible in faith and morals only. Look into Stephen Jay Gould’s NOMA principle, I find the Catechism of the Catholic Church agrees (see paragraphs, 159, 283-284).

Here’s another question I have that drives me up a wall in these forums. Why do people insist on quoting someone’s else entire post. You just did that with mine. Remove that option, just quote what you need, we can see my post right above yours. Just a little pet peeve, but I am flattered when people do quote back my entire post, its just totally unnecessary and wastes space and bandwidth. I am a web guy so I worry about these things. :smiley:

Phil P


#18

Mike << It seems that Catholics are just as confused and divided over this issue as anyone else >>

There are two reasons some Catholics are confused on this issue.

(1) they have been influenced by the bogus science and bad theology of Protestant fundamentalist “classic” creationists (young earth ones)

(2) they, and the public in general, are totally ignorant of science.

Learn modern science, and with a little fancy footwork the theology can be straightened out. I don’t claim to know a lot, but I’ve read enough to see creationism (especially the classic young-earth variety) is totally bogus science, and bad theology as well.

And “intelligent design” (some call it the “new creationism”) still has to make its case to the scientific community, but even there many intelligent designers accept macroevolution, including human evolution (like Mike Behe).

Phil P


#19

[quote=PhilVaz]mike << I know that you may not know the answer to this, but why doesn’t the Magisterium just interpret whether the word “day” in Genesis is literal or figurative? >>

Why would that answer any questions. The Church does not claim to be infallible in science. Only faith and morals.

Phil P
[/quote]

But the meaning of the word “day” is an issue of interpretation that need not invove science (although it will have implications on science just like the meaning of “in the beginning God created . . .”). Therefore, can’t the Magisterium interpret the meaning of the word “day” in Gen 1. If not, why? It is an interpretive issue that divides the Church.


#20

bible.ca/tracks/dp-age-bible.htm


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.