Evolution


#1

What do you believe - Creationism or Evolution? Here are some quotes by Pope Benedict concerning the Church’s views:

We cannot say: creation or evolution, inasmuch as these two things respond to two different realities. The story of the dust of the earth and the breath of God, which we just heard, does not in fact explain how human persons come to be but rather what they are. It explains their inmost origin and casts light on the project that they are. And, vice versa, the theory of evolution seeks to understand and describe biological developments. But in so doing it cannot explain where the ‘project’ of human persons comes from, nor their inner origin, nor their particular nature. To that extent we are faced here with two complementary – rather than mutually exclusive – realities.

– Cardinal Ratzinger, In the Beginning: A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall [Eerdmans, 1986, 1995], see especially pages 41-58)[page # needed]

In a book released in 2008, his comments prior to becoming Pope were recorded as:

The clay became man at the moment in which a being for the first time was capable of forming, however dimly, the thought of “God.” The first Thou that–however stammeringly–was said by human lips to God marks the moment in which the spirit arose in the world. Here the Rubicon of anthropogenesis was crossed. For it is not the use of weapons or fire, not new methods of cruelty or of useful activity, that constitute man, but rather his ability to be immediately in relation to God. This holds fast to the doctrine of the special creation of man . . . herein . . . lies the reason why the moment of anthropogenesis cannot possibly be determined by paleontology: anthropogenesis is the rise of the spirit, which cannot be excavated with a shovel. The theory of evolution does not invalidate the faith, nor does it corroborate it. But it does challenge the faith to understand itself more profoundly and thus to help man to understand himself and to become increasingly what he is: the being who is supposed to say Thou to God in eternity.

– Joseph Ratzinger[11]


#2

With 4.5 billion creation-evolution threads, you just had to start another one… :stuck_out_tongue:

I agree with the Pope, he is definitely “theistic evolution” of some sort. That quote from Wikipedia is there because I put it there. But I guess they want a specific page number. I’ll have to provide that too.

To be fair, the Pope had questions about evolutionary science in the past, and has some “intelligent design” ideas (see especially same book, near the end). For his (and the Church’s) latest views see the 2008 book Creation and Evolution based on his 2006 “student circle” meetings on the topic.

Phil P


#3

Thank you! Since you seem to know so much, I am confused on the Pope’s (or the Catholic Church’s) view of Adam. Does he think that humans evolved to a certain point and that Adam was the first to recognized God? Or that mankind was the same from mankind’s creation? Evolution doesn’t make much sense to me when I really think about it.


#4

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :clapping:

Oh Lord I needed that laugh today!


#5

I believe in evolution because of all the evidence, much of it provided by Phil directly and indirectly, and others here who are geologists and so on.

I put together an article here, some have referred to it as “Dreck”, others were stimulated to look further. ( the answers as to why are found in the first paragraph) Unfortunately, the list of references didn’t make it into the article, so if you have any questions on that I can get them for you.

Peace

John


#6

Thanks. This is a quote from your article from Scienceray.com:

“However, man seems to have suddenly appeared on the scene from out of the blue. There is no physical evidence to support the Theory of Evolution for man from animal. Although man does appear to have evolved into a more complex being, that is called “static” evolution and is separate from the general theory. This fits with Genesis 2:7, just as the description of the rest of the earth in vs. 2-6 fits the primordial vision of the earth in keeping with the evolutionary development of early life forms from amino acids. Mans creation is special; man was created with a soul, separate from the rest of creation, meaning man was created in the Image of God.”

Hmmm, this doesn’t quite flow with the rest of the article, about how evolution just happened out of nothing. I still don’t get it.


#7

i do not believe in evolution, if man evolved from ape, then how were Adam and Eve made? how did they get their souls? animals do not have souls as we do, perhaps they have material souls, but we have spiritual souls which live forever,
scientists may think they have evidence for evolution, but ultimately, how can it truly be proven without actually going back and seeing it?
and don’t forget, scientists tests can also be flawed,

God created the earth, the animals, and man, to create is to make from nothing,
the definition of create is -
to cause to come into being, as something unique that would not naturally evolve or that is not made by ordinary processes.

God can do all things, and i do not find it hard at all to believe we were created,
and to me, it’s much easier then to believe in evolution, the design of the earth and of man and animals and plants are much to complex to be random,
and unless there is some good reason for God to waste His time waiting millions of years for man to evolve, well, i don’t see why He would do that,

but the church doctrine is, The first Man, body and soul, was created by God, to believe otherwise is heresy, and evolution contradicts that doctrine.


#8

Well, it’s not all dreck, but some of it is, to wit:

In truth, both sides have valid points.

‘Creationism’ has NO valid points, and all one has to do is meander through the dozens of similar discussions, on these forums and elsewhere, to see that. We are, of course, referring here to ‘creationism’ claimed as FACT. Taking the Biblical creation tales as matters of religious allegory is a different thing entirely.

  1. However, man seems to have suddenly appeared on the scene from out of the blue. There is no physical evidence to support the Theory of Evolution for man from animal.
  1. Mans creation is special; man was created with a soul, separate from the rest of creation, meaning man was created in the Image of God.
  1. That’s not true at all, unless you call millions of years ‘suddenly’.

  2. That again is a matter of religious faith, completely unsupported by science. Comparison of DNA from various primates, including humans, hardly indicate a ‘separate’ creation.

But as the second poster said, why start the ball rolling all over again - it’s pointless.

Species will continue to evolve, ignorance will remain ignorance, hope is not the only thing that springs eternal.


#9

Children should be taught about creationism in school, top scientist says

Professor Reiss, a Church of England minister and former biology teacher, said he strongly believed in teaching the theory of evolution to children.

But rather than dismiss creationism as wrong or stupid, teachers should be prepared to discuss it as another ‘worldview’.

‘It arises from my time as a biology teacher in schools when I realise that simply banging on about evolution didn’t lead some pupils to change their views at all,’ he said.

'I had previously been rather evangelical about teaching evolution, trying to change pupil’s minds.

‘Now I would be rather more content simply for them to understand it as one way of understanding the universe.’


#10

If ‘as another worldview’ means ‘as religious allegory rather than scientific fact’, then I have no problem with that at all; in fact, that is pretty much what I was taught in 11 years of Catholic education.

In the USA, however, such cannot be taught in public schools as it is clearly religion - SECTARIAN religion - and therefore blatantly unconstitutional.

In England, being an establishment country, the regulations might be different.


#11

That’s the point really. Man didn’t evolve from nothing. Man evolved separately, from his (our?) creation, rather than as a consequence of some previous evolution - such as Apes. Although, as one poster above pointed out, we do share certain DNA - but then so do several species of animals and plants. Although they are, in fact, of separate species. This is what constitutes the vast bio-diversity we call Earth.

Just because we share certain DNA - it doesn’t necessarily follow we came from them. DNA does what DNA does. It would seem that God chooses to use what is natural, whenever possible, to fulfill His Will. Man’s ignorance of that fact notwithstanding.


#12

First - my article was pointing out that Evolution and Creation can find common ground.

Second - I believe my statements concerning Genesis as an allegory opposed to the typical Creation story I.E. 6 literal days and 6,000 years - spoke to that.

Third - taking the side that the Creation story has no valid points, and using similar threads as points to uphold your claim of ‘No Validity’ would seem to point to the fact you weren’t paying attention. Staunch defenders of the Faith, the Catholic Faith, will say the exact same things I am, including the posts on this same thread by others.

I believe I said that man DID evolve - ‘static’ evolution however, as opposed to general. The timeline is still up for debate - I believe on both sides of the issue.

see my post # 11

for which we are eternally grateful

Peace

John


#13

No one should believe in evolution. It is not an article of faith. It is a scientific theory that should be considered with a wide open intellect. It should be evaluated on its merits only.

It is the best explanation we have of how this world came to be populated so far. There could be a better theory out there, but it hasn’ t been formulated yet.

Religion does not enter into this, and has nothing to contribute to the debate. The fact that we do not fully understand how life developed on Earth does not mean that we can insert the supernatural intervention of a divine being into the discussion.


#14

I suggest that you listen to this recording of Catholic Answers Live.


#15
  1. I didn’t say nor attempt to imply that the creation STORY - and by the way, as you well know, there are two separate and contradictory creation stories in Genesis, as well as SCORES of others from different cultures - has no valid points. I was responding to this statement:

Creationists will tell you there is no scientific basis for Evolution, and that Atheistic scientists only want to disprove the Bible.

Scientists will tell you that Evolution supports itself through the facts, and Creationists have their heads in the sand.

In truth, both sides have valid points.

I see no validity to either of the claims in the first sentence quoted. If you can provide some, please do so.

  1. Can you provide any scientific support, with no underlying religious agenda, that humans did NOT evolve from lower primates? I’m not saying that there is none, I’m just asking. I don’t know of any. I don’t see the ‘both sides’ to which you refer, unless, of course, you are alluding to matters of religious faith, in which case we are back to square one.

#16

On this forum, it needs to be pointed out that religion, in the form of divine revelation, has everything to say about the origin, dignity and purpose of the human being. Catholics do not believe that science is the only way of knowing. The Catholic Church teaches that through natural reason, man can discover God.

Science is not the answer, the worship of science is idolatry.

The “we” referred to above does not and cannot include those who believe, both by faith and by history, that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life. Science has a narrow focus and Christians should never forget that. If we do, we will fall into an atheistic worship of the mind of man.

God bless,
Ed


#17

Well, I don’t have the patience to sit through 55 minutes of halting, poorly enunciated, heavily accented English. But that is as much my own shortcoming as the Card’s.

I struggled through the first few minutes and his main point seems to be that faith rather than science has the answer to life’s purpose, and I agree with him. I tell atheists that all the time.

But the Card goes seriously astray by asserting that science claims (falsely) to have the entire answer to life’s purpose; on the contrary, science does not address that at all.


#18

I do not know anyone who worships science.

I have never heard of anyone who worships science.

I seriously doubt that anyone in the world worships science.

I’d say that whether or not such worship constitutes idolatry is a moot point.


#19

Evolution is not an article of faith, but a lot of people believe in it and toss God out of the equation. They think it explains everything.

However, as GK Chesterton said, “It is absurd for the Evolutionist to complain that it is unthinkable for an admittedly unthinkable God to make everything out of nothing, and then pretend that it is more thinkable that nothing should turn itself into everything.”

God created this world, but of course I don’t think he did it in 7 normal days. I think this world is incredibly ancient, and it changed over time, but don’t think the theory of evolution really makes sense that a species could change into another species. Just because there are similarities between living beings, doesn’t make evolution a reasonable theory. Just because evolution supposedly happened very slowly, doesn’t make it more credible.


#20

I don’t “believe” in evolution; however, I do think it’s the most likely explanation for the origin of species we have available at this time.

See how easy that was? :slight_smile:


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.