Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True?


I design an amplifier with lots of noise. The observation of design is still there.




Weak analogy, sorry :slight_smile:


That’s the trouble with your analogy. You have set out an arbitrary goal - to find Joseph Smith. But evolution does not work that way. It does not start out saying “I want to make a longer neck to I can reach more leaves.” Maybe a shorter neck is better. Evolution doesn’t know ahead of time what it is trying to make. So when evolution finds a better friend at 12345 than Joseph Smith, it goes with it.


That’s only because I recognize the design as similar to other things I have seen before. But if you showed a microchip to a primitive man, he would not recognize it as something people might have designed, but as just an interesting tiny rock. Don’t get me wrong. I believe in intelligent design. I believe God is that designer. I just don’t think his design process is anywhere near accessible to mere humans. And for whatever reason, He seems to have decided to execute his design in such a manner that is consistent with the laws of nature - which, by the way, He designed too.


My point exactly, thank you @LeafByNiggle ! Forcing God to only work miracles to create Adam and Eve ignores the beauty and design of nature. God normally works through nature, rarely through miracles. It is more reasonable and easier to imagine evolution than to imagine clay suddenly becoming all the compounds and elements a human body contains. Even the Eucharist doesn’t do that.


This part was left out:

“However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith.[11] Some however, rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question.”


It was a real, literal event requiring Jesus Christ to be born, suffer, die and rise bodily from the grave.


Exactly right.



Miracles happen all the time. Eucharistic miracles have occurred, along with transubstantiation -

“(especially in the Roman Catholic Church) the conversion of the substance of the Eucharistic elements into the body and blood of Christ at consecration, only the appearances of bread and wine still remaining.”


I am open to the fact that it may be otherwise, I am not dogmatic about evolution, but the Church prohibits us to be dogmatic against evolution.


Not sure how that is relevant, if you are talking about how some things in the Bible are literal, yes, that literally happened, because we have a teaching about that.

There is a teaching however, that Genesis is figurative, not necessarily literal. It’s in the Catechism I quoted.


They do, that is true, but God prefers to work through existing nature and natural laws in the majority of circumstances.


The word became flesh.


How does the passenger pigeons being out of the gene pool explain how one species can morph into a completely new species ?


It does not allow polygenism.



God created everything “in its whole substance” from nothing (ex nihilo) in the beginning.
(Lateran IV; Vatican Council I)

Genesis does not contain purified myths. (Pontifical Biblical Commission 1909[1])

Genesis contains real history—it gives an account of things that really happened. (Pius XII)

Adam and Eve were real human beings—the first parents of all mankind. (Pius XII)

Polygenism (many “first parents”) contradicts Scripture and Tradition and is condemned. (Pius XII; 1994 Catechism, 360, footnote 226: Tobit 8:6—the “one ancestor” referred to in this Catechism could only be Adam.)

The “beginning” of the world included the creation of all things, the creation of Adam and Eve and the Fall (Jesus Christ [Mark 10:6]; Pope Innocent III; Blessed Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus).

The body of Eve was specially created from a portion of Adam’s body (Leo XIII). She could not have originated via evolution.

Various senses are employed in the Bible, but the literal obvious sense must be believed unless reason dictates or necessity requires (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus).

Adam and Eve were created upon an earthly paradise and would not have known death if they had remained obedient (Pius XII).

Evolution must not be taught as fact, but instead the pros and cons of evolution must be taught. (Pius XII, Humani Generis)


Could you provide a Church document that states this?


Original Sin was not figurative. And that is why man needed a Redeemer after the Fall.


Right, no original sin, no need for Jesus and no Catholic Church.

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