Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True?


I knew that was your assumption! That is your central error. The fact that there were Saints, priests and millions of faithful Catholics disproves that it is athiest, for no holy person would belong to such a group. You know that the Catholics were among the first to develop modern science, right?

Go and learn what science is because you obviously are completely confusing a group of athiest philosophers who happen to be scientists with the entire scientific community.

To support evolution is not to support the athiest philosophy about God and religion. Once you learn to separate their agenda from science and evolution you can see it makes a lot of sense.

Otherwise you are left with God creating a miracle everytime new species come about. Which seems to diminish his design, like he built it in such a way it couldn’t produce variation and adaptation.


The Fathers are authorities on faith and morals, and whether it was a 24 hour day or not doesn’t seem to fall into that realm. Even the pope has warned that theologians and scientists stick to their own fields of expertise.

An example of scientists overstepping their bounds would be the athiest philosophy you are so obviously railing against.



What is IDvolution?
IDvolution - God “breathed” the super language of DNA into the “kinds” in the creative act.

This accounts for the diversity of life we see. The core makeup shared by all living things have the necessary complex information built in that facilitates rapid and responsive adaptation of features and variation while being able to preserve the “kind” that they began as. Life has been created with the creativity built in ready to respond to triggering events.
Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on Earth have the same core, it is virtually certain that living organisms have been thought of AT ONCE by the One and the same Creator endowed with the super language we know as DNA that switched on the formation of the various kinds, the cattle, the swimming creatures, the flying creatures, etc… in a pristine harmonious state and superb adaptability and responsiveness to their environment for the purpose of populating the earth that became subject to the ravages of corruption by the sin of one man (deleterious mutations).
IDvolution considers the latest science and is consistent with the continuous teaching of the Church.


The Church has been fighting evolution since her beginnings.


The senses of Scripture

115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.

116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83

117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.

  1. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.84

  2. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.85

  3. The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86

118 A medieval couplet summarizes the significance of the four senses:

The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith;
The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.87

119 "It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgment. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgment of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God."88

But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.89


Exactly, the deed of forming man from the dust is a fact, not a method or a detailed description of the process. It doesn’t tell us the exact how or the time frame.

Same with the rib coming from Adam. There is no process, other than open up side, take rib out, and form Eve. If this were a recipe, we would have no idea how to reproduce it. There is no time frame mentioned.


I wonder how long Adam was asleep while this removal took place? Minutes, Hours, Years?


Well, Genesis provides no details. It could have been sleep as in his was tired, or sleep as in a coma, or even something else altogether.

If someone opened my side and took a rib I think I would wake up.


Comment on post # 1127?


Again, God just left the soup on the stove and walked away? For billions of years?


The National Academy of Sciences has only one correct answer for evolution. It is the wrong answer. Science is not a god.


That is wrong. The error that the Church can only comment on faith and morals has been condemned.


That’s philosophy/theology, the theory doesn’t claim that.

God was active for all that time, as He is today. Requiring God to act miraculously in everyday life for Him to be considered active is a stretch.


And what answer is that exactly, please quote it here and we shall see how wrong it is.

I can hardly imagine it claims science is God. That is a straw man argument.


What does the theory claim?


The Church fathers are not the magisterium, and I did not assert the Church can only comment on faith and morals.

According to Pope Leo XIII in Providentissimus Deus 18:

No real disagreement can exist between the theologian and the scientist provided each keeps within his own limits. . . . If nevertheless there is a disagreement . . . it should be remembered that the sacred writers, or more truly ‘the Spirit of God who spoke through them, did not wish to teach men such truths (as the inner structure of visible objects) which do not help anyone to salvation’; and that, for this reason, rather than trying to provide a scientific exposition of nature, they sometimes describe and treat these matters either in a somewhat figurative language or as the common manner of speech those times required, and indeed still requires nowadays in everyday life, even amongst most learned people"


Which theory or comment are you referring to?


This one … ,


Okay, the Theory of Evolution, it doesn’t comment on God, whether God exists or doesn’t. Whether He is active or not. It is simply silent.

It claims that

“All organisms on Earth are descended from a common ancestor or ancestral gene pool”

and that “the genetic composition of a population changes over each generation”

This is caused by “natural selection, inbreeding, hybridization, or mutation.”

God must have certainly been behind these mechanisms, as He is present today in current evolution.


“God must have certainly been…” ? According to science, that statement has no basis in fact.

"We can see this in current biology [B]textbooks[/B]:

[B]“[E]volution works without either plan or purpose — Evolution is random and undirected.”[/B]
([I]Biology[/I], by Kenneth R. Miller & Joseph S. Levine (1st ed., Prentice Hall, 1991), pg. 658; (3rd ed., Prentice Hall, 1995), pg. 658; (4th ed., Prentice Hall, 1998), pg. 658; emphasis in original.)"

“[B]Humans represent just one tiny, largely fortuitous, and late-arising twig[/B] on the enormously arborescent bush of life.”
(Stephen J Gould quoted in Biology, by Peter H Raven & George B Johnson (5th ed., McGraw Hill, 1999), pg 15; (6th ed., McGraw Hill, 2000), pg. 16.)"

“By coupling [B]undirected, purposeless [/B]variation to the [B]blind, uncaring [/B]process of natural selection, [B]Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous[/B].”
([I]Evolutionary Biology[/I], by Douglas J. Futuyma (3rd ed., Sinauer Associates Inc., 1998), p. 5.)"

“Darwin knew that [B]accepting his theory required believing in philosophical materialism[/B], the conviction that [B]matter is the stuff of all existence [/B]and that all mental and spiritual phenomena are its by-products. Darwinian evolution was [B]not only purposeless but also heartless[/B]–a process in which the rigors of nature ruthlessly eliminate the unfit. Suddenly, [B]humanity was reduced to just one more species in a world that cared nothing for us[/B]. The great human mind was no more than a mass of evolving neurons. Worst of all, [B]there was no divine plan to guide us[/B].”
([I]Biology[/I]: Discovering Life by Joseph S. Levine & Kenneth R. Miller (1st ed., D.C. Heath and Co., 1992), pg. 152; (2nd ed… D.C. Heath and Co., 1994), p. 161; emphases in original.)"

“Adopting this view of the world means accepting not only the processes of evolution, but also the view that the living world is constantly evolving, and that [B]evolutionary change occurs without any goals[/B].’ The idea that [B]evolution is not directed [/B]towards a final goal state has been more difficult for many people to accept than the process of evolution itself.”
(Life: The Science of Biology by William K. Purves, David Sadava, Gordon H. Orians, & H. Craig Keller, (6th ed., Sinauer; W.H. Freeman and Co., 2001), pg. 3.)"

“Of course, no species has 'chosen’ a strategy. Rather, its ancestors ‘little by little, generation after generation’ merely wandered into a successful way of life through the action of random evolutionary forces. Once pointed in a certain direction, a line of evolution survives only if the cosmic dice continues to roll in its favor. [B]“[J]ust by chance[/B], a wonderful diversity of life has developed during the billions of years in which organisms have been evolving on earth.
(Biology by Burton S. Guttman (1st ed., McGraw Hill, 1999), pgs. 36-37.)"

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