Evolution Must Go
(11-30-2012, 06:32 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(11-30-2012, 02:41 PM)Hanno Wrote: No.  But that doesn't answer the question at all.  First off, Christianity is a universal religion, and Genesis was "originally written" for everyone in every age, otherwise it's just a mythical Hebrew folk tale.  We're Catholics, so we can't take that view.  Secondly, why do you suppose the sacred author was obligated to set the story in a locale familiar to the people who first heard it?  The ancient Jews knew what north, south, east, and west meant.  Instead of identifying the Tigris and the Euphrates, the text (if evolution is true) could've said "in a distant land far to the south, south beyond the lands of the Egyptians, the Nubians, and the Ethiopians."  It would've given an orientation to the Jews that they could just as easily appreciate as the Tigris and the Euphrates.  It also would've been in concert with Darwin's discovery.  So why isn't it?

Genesis most certainly was written for people in a particular location.  This isn't an either/or equation.  It can be written for both a particular group and for all people.  But it was primarily written for the Jews, in their cultural context, just as the rest of the OT was, particular the history books which really have no importance outside a Jewish historical context.  So, I don't think the author was obligated to set it in a particular locale, any more than he was obligated to recount explicit historical fact.  This is our primal religion.

You didn't answer my question, Melkite.  Please try again.  Even if it was written for the ancient Jews, why didn't it at least get the geography correct?  The Jews were not stupid.  They knew what north, south, east, and west meant; those terms are even used in Genesis.  So if the fall took place in East Africa, why couldn't the sacred author have indicated that instead of setting the action in Babylon?  That way, when evolutionary theory and DNA modeling put the progenitor of humanity in Africa, the Bible wouldn't appear so blatantly wrong on the matter.  God is omniscient.  If evolution were true, he would've foreseen the controversy and made the story harmonize with what evolutionists claim are the facts.  I, at least, am alleging Satan as the trickster in this scenario.  You seem to be suggesting it's God.  Good grief ...

(11-30-2012, 06:32 PM)Melkite Wrote: I'm not so naive as to believe thousands of years of Jews and pre-Jews were granted an infallible game of telephone prior to Moses writing it down.  Unless of course you have some infallible Church teaching to suggest that?  I'll wait....

I am just about done playing these games with you, where you come dangerously close to denying Church teaching and then at the last  minute claim I misunderstood you.  Are you doubting that scripture is inspired by God?  (I guess it's "naive" of me to believe that).

:eyeroll:
Reply
(11-30-2012, 06:47 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(11-30-2012, 05:55 PM)Hanno Wrote: On a different thread, for example, a poster mentioned that Y-Chromosomal Adam was (at an early stage in the modeling) projected to have lived 60,000 years ago, and then a better analysis put him at 140,000 years ago.  And that's fine.  The same goes for bottlenecking: no scientist is running around out there thumping his chest and loudly proclaiming that a more accurate number than 1,200 won't be modeled later on.  The 1,200 number is presently simply their best estimate, but remember, it's considered the minimum: scientists don't think it could realistically go much lower than that without totally confounding the diversity found in genome sequences from different ethnicities.  Statistically, the chances of it being found to be 2 are about the same as Y-Chromosomal Adam being found to have lived in the 12th century!

Oh, is that all?  Congratulations!  You've discovered the main character flaw of scientists - an inability to see the forest for the trees.  You've gotten yourself all worked up about a supposed satanic deception, when if this latest post of yours is accurate, scientists don't actually have proof of a minimum of 1200 original humans, they just can't conceive of a likelier hypothesis to explain it that fits within their current tunnel-vision.  Smdh.

At this point I wonder if you're even reading my posts at all before you respond.  As I said, scientists claim that the 1200 number is damn near the bare minimum required in order to account for the diversity found in genome sequences.  Anything drastically less than that would mean that DNA is basically unreliable, and 75% of the evidence for evolution would have to go in the trash bin.  If you're willing to suppose that the DNA evidence is actually fraudulent, then you really ought to consider creationism, my friend.  Really.

:asianbow:
Reply
(11-30-2012, 09:07 PM)Hanno Wrote: I am just about done playing these games with you, where you come dangerously close to denying Church teaching and then at the last  minute claim I misunderstood you.  Are you doubting that scripture is inspired by God?  (I guess it's "naive" of me to believe that).

Melkite is dealing with some extremely serious spiritual issues and this discussion is almost insignificant in comparison.  I'm not sure that trying to have an intellectual discussion with him is a good thing to do right now. 
Reply
The more I think about this the more I see this is just the protty catholic debate. Its not about the truth...but who says what the evidence shows.  As I see it the scientific evidence points to a special creation geo centric universe.......and this is what the Church finds, at least according to all She wrote on the matter...but the so called scientific community (who the hell is that anyway- the same folks that tout global warming---and population control) says it shows something that fits its worldview. Evolution was created to DISPLACE the creator....and those who try to shoe horn it back to simply a different way that God used to create everything are straining logic and common sense to do so.
Reply
(11-30-2012, 09:16 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(11-30-2012, 09:07 PM)Hanno Wrote: I am just about done playing these games with you, where you come dangerously close to denying Church teaching and then at the last  minute claim I misunderstood you.  Are you doubting that scripture is inspired by God?  (I guess it's "naive" of me to believe that).

Melkite is dealing with some extremely serious spiritual issues and this discussion is almost insignificant in comparison.  I'm not sure that trying to have an intellectual discussion with him is a good thing to do right now. 
I agree...hes been compelling and interesting and calm. I think hes failed miserably to make his case but he did so with aplomb and intelligence.
Reply
(11-30-2012, 09:16 PM)JayneK Wrote: Melkite is dealing with some extremely serious spiritual issues and this discussion is almost insignificant in comparison.  I'm not sure that trying to have an intellectual discussion with him is a good thing to do right now. 
(11-30-2012, 09:19 PM)JoeVoxxPop Wrote: I agree...hes been compelling and interesting and calm. I think hes failed miserably to make his case but he did so with aplomb and intelligence.

The two of you are absolutely right.

Melkite, I'm done.  This has been a spirited and invigorating debate.  May God be with you on your spiritual journey.
Reply
I apologize to Melkite and Axona for the snarky and sneering tone I aimed at them throughout this thread simply for disagreeing with me on this matter.  It's something I feel passionately about.  I believe the Church is taking the absolute wrong tack on this issue, however it's ultimately beyond my control, and I guess that's what frustrates me.  But frustrated is no way to be, especially if it hinders a civil interaction with people.  Jayne has a pretty good point after all; we just have to be patient and humble and trust in God.  I am bowing out of this thread.
Reply
(12-01-2012, 01:20 AM)Hanno Wrote: I apologize to Melkite and Axona for the snarky and sneering tone I aimed at them throughout this thread simply for disagreeing with me on this matter.  It's something I feel passionately about.  I believe the Church is taking the absolute wrong tack on this issue, however it's ultimately beyond my control, and I guess that's what frustrates me.  But frustrated is no way to be, especially if it hinders a civil interaction with people.  Jayne has a pretty good point after all; we just have to be patient and humble and trust in God.  I am bowing out of this thread.
Your doing it wrong...you dont bow out...you do what you did...make your gracious apology...(which you did) then you try to flesh out the frustration about the topic without making it personal. Your OP actually uncovered a great truth.....there is no 3rd way. What I mean is... I realized when looking for evidence for melkite of geocentism the frustrating part was when I saw that all the evidence I had was the same evidence the heliocentrists had. In other words the evidence for how man was created...and other scientific questions that cross into theology like geocentrism and evolution  break down into 2 fundamental lines (even though the fence sitters want a 3rd line) How the Church (which Catholics believe to be the voice of God on earth) interprets the scientific findings...and how the materialists athiests interprets the findings. No one disputes that scientific truths are found...but the conclusions and resulting policy/laws/education that they  give birth to are used to justify actions in society. Evolution and heliocentrism as interpreted by the materialists lead directly to abortion and nazi gas chambers/communist massacres. And that is why as concepts they need to be suppressed UNTIL clarified by Heaven...not earth. As the Church actually restricted the use of the Bible in the past for the same reason...as St Peter said...2nd peter-20 Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation........ 12:But these men, as irrational beasts, naturally tending to the snare and to destruction, blaspheming those things which they know not, shall perish in their corruption,........These are fountains without water, and clouds tossed with whirlwinds, to whom the mist of darkness is reserved.
18 For, speaking proud words of vanity, they allure by the desires of fleshly riotousness, those who for a little while escape, such as converse in error:
19 Promising them liberty, whereas they themselves are the slaves of corruption. For by whom a man is overcome, of the same also he is the slave.
.........3 Knowing this first, that in the last days there shall come deceitful scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 Saying: Where is his promise or his coming? for since the time that the fathers slept, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they are wilfully ignorant of, that the heavens were before, and the earth out of water, and through water, consisting by the word of God.

16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

This is the crux of the matter. And as to the accusations of the materialists that if we Catholics dispute evolution and heliocentrism then we must also dispute medical science and technology, or others.......BULL biscuts! We only dispute any so called science that undercuts or enters into the theological questions...and we do not dispute it to destroy or suppress truth...but we only want to be sure that the scientific "truths" put forward are understood in the Christian worldview. There is no christian world view as far as I can see that can contain the materialists theory of evolution and origin of the species.
Reply
Fr Barron NAILS IT!....yes I know hes a liberal NO Priest...who CARES THIS VIDEO SAYS IT ALL....very very good!

"The Claim that "the sciences" can adjudicate the question of God...is of itself ludicrious."
Reply
[Image: 85.gif]
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)