Evolution


#1

I work in a dentist office and while assisting the doctor who is lutheran from the Wisconsin senate she proceeded to tell the patient that the catholic church has said that ti beleives in evolution. I wanted some kind of correct response to this besides no they don’t. Could you help me with this?


#2

Sorry Bev, I wish I could give you the exact statement from Rome, I can’t. But Rome did say about 4 years ago that God could have done anything he wanted to diversify the various species. In short, Rome said God could have allowed evolution. About the same time Rome agreed that there may be life on other planets. These things do not change our Catholic Faith.

One has to be careful. Many people do not know what evolution really is. Evolution DOES NOT account for the ORIGIN of LIFE. On other threads it has been pointed out that evolution is still only a theory. We can show that some changes in a species has occured.
The BIG question is - how was LIFE First originated? Evolution does NOT answer this question.


#3

bev << I wanted some kind of correct response to this besides no they don’t. Could you help me with this? >>

The Catholic Church accepts modern science, evolution is the best modern scientific theory and explanation we have today for the diversity of life. So the Church therefore accepts evolution, within limits of course. See the Catechism paragraphs 159, 283-284. God is still the Creator however He chose to do it.

Also this article by Jimmy Akin from Jan 2004 This Rock is quite good. Are there theological problems? Sure, we need to continue to work those out. I always point people to this God and Evolution FAQ from TalkOrigins.

And I agree with Exporter, origin of life is a separate topic, as well as origin of the universe.

Phil P


#4

[quote=PhilVaz]The Catholic Church accepts modern science, evolution is the best modern scientific theory and explanation we have today for the diversity of life. So the Church therefore accepts evolution, within limits of course.
[/quote]

Ha :smiley: I’d hardly call evolution the ‘best’ scientific theory, even calling it a theory at this point in scientific discovery is being too generous. Evolution (well macro-evolution) has been under immense attack from within and outside for years. The universe is simply too complex and current established scientific laws say “nay…” Frankly scientists today, many of whom are atheists (though most of the best ones aren’t :wink: ) would find it much easier to just consider that it is only possible if God used evolution. However, being committed atheists with naturalism as their religion, if you take God out of the picture, then natural explanation is the only way to try and solve it, but that’s just circular reasoning… Though even then evolution is a theory in crisis, they seem unable to give it up and simply find another natural explanation. The main reason is that it has become more than a theory, it has become belief, an imposed standard dogma. It is the same with Creationists, but who you gonna trust more? That of men whom we know pulled this stuff out of a hat? Or that of the Word of God, whom we can at least give the benefit of the doubt to. :slight_smile:

Seems evolutionists have gone to the trouble of even considering that life originated in another part of the universe with better circumstances, and was transported here, probably by aliens. But this is nothing whatsoever but faith, which one has in the absence of evidence. I feel it’s time evolution should go the way of a flat earth, but you know how dogmas and beliefs can be…

People are lobbying to get ‘Intelligent Design’ taught in schools in the US. One that shows the evidence that only an intelligent designer, a God could create the universe, though they’ll keep any specific references to any religion out, rightfully so… however the evolutionist community is in an uproar taking schools to court simply for minor things like putting stickers on books saying ‘Evolution is only a theory.’ However whatever arguments they’re using in court, I guarantee you they wont be arguing the scientific evidence, just more Church State seperation nonsense. The Evolution committees have even issued statements encouraging their memebrs not to participate in public debates with Creationists because they found that the majority of the audience going in usually went in believing in evolution, but always left siding with the creationists.

There are lots of things you can find online about this issue. I’d recommend taking a look at some of the many non-Catholic sites if you wish. Those sola-scripturists are good for something and a remarkable job they’ve done :smiley: They’ve got lots of great info. I recommend this one www.answersingenesis.org and www.icr.org

Also concerning the Church’s position, there was some confusion over the translation and meaning of teh pope’s words, but he might have dodged the question. Instead it would be more accurate to say, the Church has no real stand on the issue and admit that God COULD have used evolution. Your belief in the theory is not detrimental to your salvation, however taking God at His word is certainly more enlightening and fits the bill much better than evolution which WAS by the way begun by naturalists (not Darwin, but the Greeks! Darwin only popularized the theory while of course adding his own observations). When Paul preached to them he didn’t start off with the Gospels, but went straight to Genesis to lay the foundation. Peter openly began preaching the gospels to the Jews (because the Jews already believed their scriptures). Believe it or not, closer study shows that if Genesis is simply myth or symbolic, then this makes a sham of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. It’s alright if you didn’t know, but people may come along and challenge your faith based on these things, and you ought to be prepared to ‘give reason for the faith you believe in.’


#5

jdnation << I’d hardly call evolution the ‘best’ scientific theory, even calling it a theory at this point in scientific discovery is being too generous. Evolution (well macro-evolution) has been under immense attack from within and outside for years. >>

Nope, evolution is the best scientific theory, in fact, its the only scientific theory today that explains natural history. Unless you’re going to tell me that creationism, especially the young-earth variety you seem to accept, is scientific. It is not, and the creationists themselves have said so. I’ve quoted them before, I can do it again. I’ll summarize:

Duane Gish: "Creationism is not a scientific theory."
Henry Morris: “Creationism is not a scientific theory.”

jdnation << Though even then evolution is a theory in crisis… >>

BTW, the man who wrote that book (Evolution: A Theory in Crisis) has since accepted evolution. It seems it is not a theory in crisis anymore.

Michael Denton is now an evolutionist

jdnation << It is the same with Creationists, but who you gonna trust more? That of men whom we know pulled this stuff out of a hat? Or that of the Word of God, whom we can at least give the benefit of the doubt to. >>

Thanks, I’ll go with the science, and leave the Word of God out of the science classroom.

jdnation << Seems evolutionists have gone to the trouble of even considering that life originated in another part of the universe with better circumstances, and was transported here, probably by aliens. >>

Who are they? Name them. Steve Spielberg is not a biologist, and hasn’t signed on Project Steve just yet.

jdnation << I feel it’s time evolution should go the way of a flat earth, but you know how dogmas and beliefs can be… >>

Sorry dude, biology is not going anywhere. Consider the 500+ Steve’s who signed this statement:

“Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to “intelligent design,” to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation’s public schools.” (Project Steve statement)

The flat earth belief is much more akin to the young earth belief, sorry to inform you.

jdnation << however the evolutionist community is in an uproar taking schools to court simply for minor things like putting stickers on books saying ‘Evolution is only a theory.’ However whatever arguments they’re using in court, I guarantee you they wont be arguing the scientific evidence, just more Church State seperation nonsense. >>

The scientific evidence was already argued in court. Sorry the classic young-earth creationists lost big time.

Here is the statement of Judge Overton from Jan 1982. Read it and weep.

CONTINUED…


#6

jdnation << The Evolution committees have even issued statements encouraging their memebrs not to participate in public debates with Creationists because they found that the majority of the audience going in usually went in believing in evolution, but always left siding with the creationists. >>

Sounds like typical Duane Gish nonsense, however there is one creation-evolution debate you should listen to, and it might change your mind in favor of evolution. I transcribed it myself, and put the Real Audio online. The infamous Firing Line Dec 1997 debate.

bringyou.to/apologetics/p45.htm

jdnation << There are lots of things you can find online about this issue. >>

Yes there are. The best site is TalkOrigins.org of course.

jdnation << I’d recommend taking a look at some of the many non-Catholic sites if you wish. Those sola-scripturists are good for something and a remarkable job they’ve done They’ve got lots of great info. I recommend this one www.answersingenesis.org and www.icr.org >>

My opinion? You don’t want my opinion of those since the curse words always get deleted anyway. :o I’ll point you to this site:

home.austarnet.com.au/stear/default.htm

The people who recommend ICR and AIG for science, are just like the folks who recommend Jack Chick comics for Christian theology and information on Catholicism. Just as reliable.

jdnation << Also concerning the Church’s position, there was some confusion over the translation and meaning of the pope’s words, but he might have dodged the question. Instead it would be more accurate to say, the Church has no real stand on the issue and admit that God COULD have used evolution. >>

Not really, the Catechism is pretty clear evolution is probably true (Catechism paragraphs 159, 283-284), and so was John Paul II in his statement to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. Here we go again…

Now you can admit the following: I, “jdnation” have never read a single book on evolution, and I, “jdnation” have never read a single TalkOrigins article rebutting the nonsense of ICR or AIG. Begin your study soon. :thumbsup:

Phil P


#7

jdnation << then this makes a sham of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. It’s alright if you didn’t know, but people may come along and challenge your faith based on these things, and you ought to be prepared to ‘give reason for the faith you believe in.’ >>

What are you going to do when you find out that evolution is very probably true? Are you going to give up Christianity? I hope not.

Study the science, and come on back after a few months. Three books:

The Age of the Earth by Dalrymple
What Evolution Is by Ernst Mayr
Finding Darwin’s God by Ken Miller

and a fourth one I recently found is very good

Coming to Peace with Science: Bridging the Worlds Between Faith and Biology by Darrel Falk

All of these guys are either Ph.D.'s in biology or experts in their fields. If you wanna learn about evolution, these are the books to get.

Phil P


#8

Ah you again Mr. P :smiley:

Nope, evolution is the best scientific theory, in fact, its the only scientific theory today that explains natural history. Unless you’re going to tell me that creationism, especially the young-earth variety you seem to accept, is scientific. It is not, and the creationists themselves have said so. I’ve quoted them before, I can do it again. I’ll summarize:

Duane Gish: "Creationism is not a scientific theory."
Henry Morris: “Creationism is not a scientific theory.”<<

Well of course, it IS the best scientific theory that explains NATURAL history. But this is assuming history from the viewpoint of naturalism. It is the same with creationism, no denying that. Creationists are biased, interpreting evidence based on dogma, you don’t seem to realize that evolutionists do the same. I’ll say evolution is as well non scientific because like creationists. I believe it was one of your celebrated own, Nobel Prize winner Dr. Harold Urey who admitted, “We believe as an article of faith that life evolved from dead matter on this planet. It is just that its complexity is so great, it is hard for us to imagine that it did.”

Additionally there is one Michael Shermer who also glories in the fact who I’ll quote:

"Scientism is a scientific worldview that encompasses natural explanations for all phenomena, eschews supernatural and paranormal speculations, and embraces empiricism and reason as the twin pillars of a philosophy of life appropriate for an age of Science. . . . cosmology and evolutionary theory ask the ultimate origin questions that have traditionally been the province of religion and theology.

We follow . . . the dictates of our shamans; . . . it is scientism’s shamans who command our veneration. . . . with scientism as the foundational stratum of our story and scientists as the premier mythmakers of our time."

BTW, the man who wrote that book (Evolution: A Theory in Crisis) has since accepted evolution. It seems it is not a theory in crisis anymore.<<

Ah very interesting, but not unusual, happens on both sides… heard of him but never did read his book. But I wouldn’t go so far as to assume that on the basis of one convert the problem is solved… though the article on the new discovery in the DNA bringing the complexity down some is intriguing, let’s see where it goes…

Thanks, I’ll go with the science, and leave the Word of God out of the science classroom.<<

I agree, wouldn’t want to promote any particular religion. Ought to let those ID fellows give it a try, don’t know if they’ll get through, but well it’s the same old…

Who are they? Name them<<

The peeps who speculate extraterrestrial hand? Well the idea is quite fantastic I don’t know how popular it is within evolutionary circles today but two I’ve heard were revered biologist Sir Fred Hoyle and one Dr. Frances Crick.

Project Steve<<

The old joke at creationists expense… well this tells me what exactly? The large consensus of scientists believes in evolution? So this proves what, other than saying something already known? As if majority opinion has greater value than scientific fact…

Judge Overton’s statement<<

:crying: Boo hoo… we lost because we were too closely tied to a particular religion… how… predictable…


#9

Sounds like typical Duane Gish nonsense<<

I believe it was Dr. Eugenie Scott, the director of the National Centre for Science Education who is reported to have warned “Avoid debates. If your local campus Christian fellowship asks you to ‘defend evolution,’ please decline… you will probably get beaten.” I’ll give the link a listen, is it your site? Did you see the little one that took place on CNN recently, would hardly call it much but that’s the last one I heard of…

No answers in genesis<<

Ah I’ve been there before, a site that says much without saying anything at all… the conclusions drawn in some areas are… what’s the nicest way to put it… remarkable…? Smirk… :rolleyes:

The Cathechism<<

It says nothing about evolution, but that science and reason will be in accord with God. Lets emphasize where it says “provided it is carried out in a true scientific manner…”

As for the pope, bless him, supposing he did, what does that make him? An authorative voice in the scientific community? There is no real danger to ones salvation to believe in evolution and carry on following the Gospels. Though this would apply to people unconcerned by the entire thing, which is the vast majority I think really, I’ve met people who don’t take Genesis literally, and find evolution equally absurd. But like I said, it does break up the structure of the Bible as a whole…

Now you can admit the following: I, “jdnation” have never read a single book on evolution, and I, “jdnation” have never read a single TalkOrigins article rebutting the nonsense of ICR or AIG. Begin your study soon.<<

Well I’ll admit I haven’t gone into any in depth evolutionary mechanism books aside from the general ones, you know those teaching about dinosaurs or the universe and the general theories behind them, the basic ideas you’d find in encyclopedias, and of course I can already hear you telling me how bad those are… but do I really need incentive to read idle speculation? As educated as the sources are, that’s all they amount to in the end. I have been to TalkOrigins often, they’re still pro-evolution, but I’d consider them the least bigoted source if that’s a compliment. At least they try to be nice and approach things without ridicule, at least from what I’ve seen…


#10

What are you going to do when you find out that evolution is very probably true? Are you going to give up Christianity? I hope not.<<

No, Christianity still has a lot going for it, though I would be very confused about some things, I wouldn’t have a strong enough case to convince people about moral issues (perhaps even I just might take an issue, horrors…) as well I’d see my faith as being a bit more blinder… but as C.S. Lewis says, if it fell, then my faith would have always been nothing more than a house of cards. If evolution is true, then obviously in some way it would have to measure in with the truth, guess we’ll have to ask God when we meet Him. Thanks for the recommendations, I take a look, hopefully it won’t cost me money… that’s always such a deterrent…


#11

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.