Is Genesis True


#21

Deconi << Until someone can point to two different species and show me its one or various “intermediaries” also walking around >>

See this wolf-like creature? Yeah the one near the top of this picture? :smiley:

OK, now see this bottom one, yeah the one that looks most like a whale? There you go. :thumbsup: Wolf to Whale in 50 million years.

Deconi << and say, “See that dog? It’s on it way to becoming that horse” then I might reconsider the No.2 >>

Errrrr, see that little doggy-like horse with the 4 toes front, 3 behind? Yeah, the one at the bottom of this picture. :smiley: What is that again?

It is: Hyracotherium (early Eocene, about 55 Ma, previously “Eohippus”) – The famous “dawn horse,” a small, doggish perissodactyl, with an arched back, short neck, omnivore teeth, and short snout, 4 toes in front and 3 behind.

Its on its way to becoming a much bigger modern one-toed horse. There you go. :thumbsup: Eohippus (Hyracotherium) to Equus in 50 million years or…

The line that eventually produced Equus developed as follows: M. primus, M. sejunctus, M. isonesus (these last two still had a mix of primitive, hipparion, and equine features), M. intermontanus, M. stylodontus, M. carrizoensis. These last two looked quite horsey, with quite small side toes, and gave rise to a set of larger three-toed and one-toed horses known as the “true equines.”

You are soooo welcome. :newidea:

Phil P


#22

I believe Genesis to be true.
I do not be in the theory of evolution.

I’ll not place my faith into something that could very well be proven wrong. I like to deal with fact. At present, evolution is mere theory.

Prove it, and I’ll believe in it.


#23

According to evolutionists, these are your relatives:

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1935558.stm

The Church rejects polygenism (Humani Generis).

God bless,
Ed


#24

I was surprised to read this in the article:

It also suggests that continental drift played a role in how primates evolved in different parts of the world. **It even has implications for our own descent - the first humans may have appeared about eight rather than five million years ago. **


#25

The Church rejects polygenism.

God bless,
Ed


#26

Correct.

The Church rejects polygenism (Humani Generis).

You don’t understand either evolution OR polygenism if you really mean what you wrote.

Peace

Tim


#27

To my fellow Catholics, here is the information you need.

catholic.com/library/adam_eve_and_evolution.asp

Allow me to highlight a few parts by quoting them:

It is impossible to dismiss the events of Genesis I as a mere legend. They are accounts of real history even if they are told in a style of historical writing that Westerners do not typically use.

It is equally impermissable to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2-3) as a fiction.

The acount of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.

This is bedrock Church teaching, not to be ignored. Also see, Humani Generis.

God bless,
Ed


#28

#29

Explain "In the Beginning…"
Explain “Theology of the Body”


#30

Explain this:

cardinalschonborn.com/2006_08_01_archive.html

Vatican Dumps Darwinist-Boosting Astronomer

God bless,
Ed


#31
  1. When Christ, referring to the “beginning,” directed his questioners to the words written in Genesis 2:24, he ordered them, in a certain sense, to go beyond the boundary which, in the Yahwist text of Genesis, runs between the first and second situation of man. He did not approve what Moses had permitted “for their hardness of heart.” He appealed to the words of the first divine regulation, which in this text is expressly linked to man’s state of original innocence. This means that this regulation has not lost its force, even though man has lost his primitive innocence.

Christ’s reply is decisive


#32

What exactly would you like explained, Ed? Fr. Coyne was 73 and, I believe, having serious health problems. How do you explain that his replacement is very much a supporter of science (read - one of those heretical evolutionists!!!).

So what is your point, Ed?

Peace

Tim


#33

My point:

“Fr. Coyne was writing against Christoph Cardinal Schonborn, a principl author of the Catholic catechism, who said that an ‘unplanned process of random variation and natural selection,’ both important parts of evolutionary thinking, are incompatible with Catholic belief in God’s ordering and guiding of creation.”

God bless,
Ed


#34

Thank you for clarifying that.

Now back to my post where I cited Cardinal Ratzinger. What say you about that?

Peace

Tim


#35

#36

HA HA HA HA…:smiley: :smiley:

That’s funny Phil. I really wish I had the time engage you in a bit of ‘fencing’ regarding your nice pictures, but I’m not sure if you’re serious…and I’m in the middle of 'varsity EXAMS for the year!

I spent a portion of my life in science ‘fencing’ creationists until science itself smacked me in the face!! Even astrophysics and cosmolory couldn’t help me! I’ve even dabled in genetics but the examinations of human innards part just doesn’t do it for me.

I may be back later.

Sorry I haven’t read all your referred sites, but will get to it.

Those pictures and a stack like them ALWAYS make me laugh for days!! HA HA HA…:thumbsup:

:cool:


#37

Just as an aside note, I hold with The Church.

Science is a ‘truth’ and is a legitimate tool for us to use. There’s nothing wrong with the Evolution Theory. It’s actually quite plausible on some of it’s tennets. It’s just that I know when people are ‘doctoring’ facts, or postulating probable projections from subjective basis…and a comedy of errors doesn’t begin to describe what I see.

As I say, I may be back after the exams.

This stuff ‘kills’ me…:smiley:

:cool:


#38

lol…I love the attack with no evidence, make fun of the poster and promise someday to have some real evidence.


#39

sorry I cannot bring up the post as its all quoted within. but the reference to “In the beginning…” and Theology of the Body refer to writings by Benedict and JPII respectively…you were errrr…adrift of the conversation. :smiley:


#40

deconi << Sorry I haven’t read all your referred sites, but will get to it. Those pictures and a stack like them ALWAYS make me laugh for days!! HA HA HA… >>

Well I haven’t even gotten to my funny transitionals yet. Those are here:

How do you explain these??? Especially the last one! :thumbsup: :smiley: :smiley:

Phil P


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.