I Dont Have Enough Faith to be an Evolutionist - Skepticism of Evolution
#31
(05-02-2019, 10:41 AM)Melkite Wrote:
(05-02-2019, 06:56 AM)Paver Wrote: In fact, evolution is a rather controversial phenomenon. Since even if we consider the opinion that humans evolved from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys and they have not become humans? This is a very controversial issue. If, however, to make changes in the genetic background of monkeys by scientific experiments and at the same time they will look like people, then this is a mutation, not an evolution. When I was studying in Canada, one of my favorite teachers shared very interesting information from the view site, where many interesting and convincing thoughts were described. I needed this information to write my assignment, with which the best online service helped me. And this stuff made me think seriously.

Nobody thinks humans evolved from monkeys.  Not a single evolutionist.  The only people who think that is an argument are the disingenuous creationists who keep hoisting that strawman onto their processional staff as if it's some kind of smoking gun, marching like the knights of Byzantium on their crusade against evolution.

NO ONE who subscribes to evolution is of the opinion that humans evolved from monkeys.

of course not, they evolved [if you go back enough] from a fish, and before that dirt and slime that washed on a beach, before that rocks, before that chemicals from some explosion of gasses that are tasteless odorless and cant be seen, before that from nothing.  We know this because secular atheist told us, whoops sorry, because the fathers believed it and the bible teaches it.
Reply
#32
[-] The following 1 user Likes cassini's post:
  • Tolkien RRJ
Reply
#33
I'm no Darwinist (I reject Darwinism as totally unproven), and I preface this this way, because I'm sure to be accused of defending Darwinism by mere objection to the above.

It's a bit odd to be posting heretical Protestant theology professors' video on a Catholic forum as suggestions of Catholic doctrine.

McMurtry is called "Doctor" here and "ex-evolutionist." He is a Doctor, but a Doctor of Divinity, though in this and his other writings, he's always very careful not to explicitly point out he's not a Geologist, Biologist, Paleontologist or any other Doctor in a field of natural sciences. He studied Forestry, and then eventually went to a Baptist seminary. He's not a Catholic.

He's just another heretic who has an opinion. And calling himself "Doctor" and then giving a talk on Geology, suggests he is a trained and expert Geologist. He's not.

He starts out saying that there are bare claims of "millions or billions of years" which is not accurate. He then gets into Geology, and again, makes terribly false claims.

Typical Protestant jabberwocky, this. Nothing Catholic in this video at all.

Taking what is know about natural processes for which very detailed data exists and running them backward shows a very old universe. The only way to get around this is to reject uniformitarianism, and if this is done, then any scientific study also does. If the processes are not uniform, then there are no Natural Laws, and this undermines any possible study of nature at all.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • Melkite
Reply
#34
Antediluvian giants, metal libraries, and dinosaurs hold great appeal for Mormons, (and me), what I find telling is the condescending attitude towards Father Crespi as if if Mormons were in charge these poor deluded natives wouldn't have to...well watch and see (42 minutes)

 

As far as that other video goes, I think most people can separate the wheat from the chaff all on their own.
Oh, where are the snows of yesteryear!
Reply
#35
(06-03-2019, 10:53 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: I'm no Darwinist (I reject Darwinism as totally unproven), and I preface this this way, because I'm sure to be accused of defending Darwinism by mere objection to the above.

It's a bit odd to be posting heretical Protestant theology professors' video on a Catholic forum as suggestions of Catholic doctrine.

McMurtry is called "Doctor" here and "ex-evolutionist." He is a Doctor, but a Doctor of Divinity, though in this and his other writings, he's always very careful not to explicitly point out he's not a Geologist, Biologist, Paleontologist or any other Doctor in a field of natural sciences. He studied Forestry, and then eventually went to a Baptist seminary. He's not a Catholic.

He's just another heretic who has an opinion. And calling himself "Doctor" and then giving a talk on Geology, suggests he is a trained and expert Geologist. He's not.

He starts out saying that there are bare claims of "millions or billions of years" which is not accurate. He then gets into Geology, and again, makes terribly false claims.

Typical Protestant jabberwocky, this. Nothing Catholic in this video at all.

Taking what is know about natural processes for which very detailed data exists and running them backward shows a very old universe. The only way to get around this is to reject uniformitarianism, and if this is done, then any scientific study also does. If the processes are not uniform, then there are no Natural Laws, and this undermines any possible study of nature at all.

Ah yes, the old ad hominem ploy, attack the person in the hope that what he said will not be taken seriously. Well I for one Magister am capable of discerning the credibility of this man's arguments on their merit alone.

As for his Protestantism, well the history of 'faith and science' shows us that were it not for Protestants few would know the truth. Catholicism championed all the false sciences as they emerged even though it was their duty to protect the flock from false philosophy.

 ‘See to it that no one deceives you by philosophy and vain deceit, according to human traditions, according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ.’ ---- Colossians Chap. 2:8.
 
‘O Timothy, guard the trust and keep free from profane novelties in speech and the contradictions of so-called knowledge, which some have professed and have fallen away from the faith.’ --- I Timothy 6:20.
 
First it was the 1835 papal capitulation to heliocentrism that had been defined as formal heresy. This rejected the geocentrism of Scripture held by all the Fathers. When long-ages contradicted the ages of Genesis, and Charles Darwin's Origin of Species asserted the evolution of species contrary to immediate creation held by all in the Church since its beginning, the Catholic Church, rendered dumb and redundant by their 1835 rejection of geocentrism, did not even put Darwin's book on the Idex.

Protestants in the meantime were defending direct creation held by the Fathers. In 1860, a Protestant Professor Schoeppfer wrote a book The Earth Stands Fast  defending the position of the Catholic Church in 1616 and 1633, a position rejected by Pius VII in 1835. By the end of the century science had shown that the Earth does not orbit the sun. In 1905 Einstein confirmed the geocentrism of the Scrioptures was NEVER PROVEN FALSE.

As regards evolution, well long ages was accommodated by the biblical commission in 1909 whereas Protestants held to Genesis's immediate creation spread out in six days. In 1950 Pope Pius XII in his Humani Generis actually allowed the evolution of Adam from 'pre-existing living matter' be considered. Genesis states Adam waas created from inanimate prer-existing matter (CLAY). So Humanis Generis allows Adam from a monkey be 'discussed.'
Oh, the following year, Pius XII told the Pontifical Academy of science:

'With the same clear and critical look with which it examines and passes judgment on facts, it perceives and recognizes the work of creative omnipotence, whose power, set in motion by the mighty “Fiat” pronounced billions of years ago by the Creating Spirit, spread out over the universe, calling into existence with a gesture of generous love matter bursting with energy. In fact, it would seem that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to that primordial “Fiat lux” uttered at the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies.’

Yes, it all started with the Big Bang. Since Pius XII, all popes promoted heliocentrism, long ages and evolution. Protestants on the other hand are faithful to God ex nihilo creation, once a dogma of the Catholic Church. Oh yes there were/are Catholic creationists but when their popes are all heliocentrists, long agers and evolutionists, few listen to them.

And some wonder why Catholicism is a dying religion on Earth. When Scripture is made comply with human reason, faith goes out the window. As it has.
[-] The following 1 user Likes cassini's post:
  • Tolkien RRJ
Reply
#36
(06-03-2019, 10:53 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: I'm no Darwinist (I reject Darwinism as totally unproven), and I preface this this way, because I'm sure to be accused of defending Darwinism by mere objection to the above.

It's a bit odd to be posting heretical Protestant theology professors' video on a Catholic forum as suggestions of Catholic doctrine.

McMurtry is called "Doctor" here and "ex-evolutionist." He is a Doctor, but a Doctor of Divinity, though in this and his other writings, he's always very careful not to explicitly point out he's not a Geologist, Biologist, Paleontologist or any other Doctor in a field of natural sciences. He studied Forestry, and then eventually went to a Baptist seminary. He's not a Catholic.

He's just another heretic who has an opinion. And calling himself "Doctor" and then giving a talk on Geology, suggests he is a trained and expert Geologist. He's not.

He starts out saying that there are bare claims of "millions or billions of years" which is not accurate. He then gets into Geology, and again, makes terribly false claims.

Typical Protestant jabberwocky, this. Nothing Catholic in this video at all.

Taking what is know about natural processes for which very detailed data exists and running them backward shows a very old universe. The only way to get around this is to reject uniformitarianism, and if this is done, then any scientific study also does. If the processes are not uniform, then there are no Natural Laws, and this undermines any possible study of nature at all.

Not true at all.  uniformitarianism is the unbiblical belief that todays processes have always happened at the same rate.   



Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation. But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 
2 Peter 3 



Uniformity of nature is that all things behave the same way in the same circumstances. Besides, those assumptions used by the uniformtanist, not only is based on faith, but can by observation, be shown false.
Reply
#37
(06-04-2019, 12:38 PM)cassini Wrote:
(06-03-2019, 10:53 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: I'm no Darwinist (I reject Darwinism as totally unproven), and I preface this this way, because I'm sure to be accused of defending Darwinism by mere objection to the above.

It's a bit odd to be posting heretical Protestant theology professors' video on a Catholic forum as suggestions of Catholic doctrine.

McMurtry is called "Doctor" here and "ex-evolutionist." He is a Doctor, but a Doctor of Divinity, though in this and his other writings, he's always very careful not to explicitly point out he's not a Geologist, Biologist, Paleontologist or any other Doctor in a field of natural sciences. He studied Forestry, and then eventually went to a Baptist seminary. He's not a Catholic.

He's just another heretic who has an opinion. And calling himself "Doctor" and then giving a talk on Geology, suggests he is a trained and expert Geologist. He's not.

He starts out saying that there are bare claims of "millions or billions of years" which is not accurate. He then gets into Geology, and again, makes terribly false claims.

Typical Protestant jabberwocky, this. Nothing Catholic in this video at all.

Taking what is know about natural processes for which very detailed data exists and running them backward shows a very old universe. The only way to get around this is to reject uniformitarianism, and if this is done, then any scientific study also does. If the processes are not uniform, then there are no Natural Laws, and this undermines any possible study of nature at all.

Ah yes, the old ad hominem ploy, attack the person in the hope that what he said will not be taken seriously. Well I for one Magister am capable of discerning the credibility of this man's arguments on their merit alone.

As for his Protestantism, well the history of 'faith and science' shows us that were it not for Protestants few would know the truth. Catholicism championed all the false sciences as they emerged even though it was their duty to protect the flock from false philosophy.

 ‘See to it that no one deceives you by philosophy and vain deceit, according to human traditions, according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ.’ ---- Colossians Chap. 2:8.
 
‘O Timothy, guard the trust and keep free from profane novelties in speech and the contradictions of so-called knowledge, which some have professed and have fallen away from the faith.’ --- I Timothy 6:20.
 
First it was the 1835 papal capitulation to heliocentrism that had been defined as formal heresy. This rejected the geocentrism of Scripture held by all the Fathers. When long-ages contradicted the ages of Genesis, and Charles Darwin's Origin of Species asserted the evolution of species contrary to immediate creation held by all in the Church since its beginning, the Catholic Church, rendered dumb and redundant by their 1835 rejection of geocentrism, did not even put Darwin's book on the Idex.

Protestants in the meantime were defending direct creation held by the Fathers. In 1860, a Protestant Professor Schoeppfer wrote a book The Earth Stands Fast  defending the position of the Catholic Church in 1616 and 1633, a position rejected by Pius VII in 1835. By the end of the century science had shown that the Earth does not orbit the sun. In 1905 Einstein confirmed the geocentrism of the Scrioptures was NEVER PROVEN FALSE.

As regards evolution, well long ages was accommodated by the biblical commission in 1909 whereas Protestants held to Genesis's immediate creation spread out in six days. In 1950 Pope Pius XII in his Humani Generis actually allowed the evolution of Adam from 'pre-existing living matter' be considered. Genesis states Adam waas created from inanimate prer-existing matter (CLAY). So Humanis Generis allows Adam from a monkey be 'discussed.'
Oh, the following year, Pius XII told the Pontifical Academy of science:

'With the same clear and critical look with which it examines and passes judgment on facts, it perceives and recognizes the work of creative omnipotence, whose power, set in motion by the mighty “Fiat” pronounced billions of years ago by the Creating Spirit, spread out over the universe, calling into existence with a gesture of generous love matter bursting with energy. In fact, it would seem that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to that primordial “Fiat lux” uttered at the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies.’

Yes, it all started with the Big Bang. Since Pius XII, all popes promoted heliocentrism, long ages and evolution. Protestants on the other hand are faithful to God ex nihilo creation, once a dogma of the Catholic Church. Oh yes there were/are Catholic creationists but when their popes are all heliocentrists, long agers and evolutionists, few listen to them.

And some wonder why Catholicism is a dying religion on Earth. When Scripture is made comply with human reason, faith goes out the window. As it has.



Great post. I have tried to convince myself of Catholicism [I would love if it were true] but things like what the CCC says on evolution just make me think it cannot be the biblical position and thus Catholicism cannot be infallible if it cant pass such an easy test.
Reply
#38
(06-04-2019, 12:38 PM)cassini Wrote: Ah yes, the old ad hominem ploy, attack the person in the hope that what he said will not be taken seriously. Well I for one Magister am capable of discerning the credibility of this man's arguments on their merit alone.

An ad hominem is a valid argumentation when the person puts forth personal qualifications to give an expert opinion. Otherwise in courts any John Doe could give an expert opinion about anything.

And ad hominem is a false rebuttal when it has nothing to do with the argument or opinion presented.

It's quite different to say, "that guy calling himself 'Doctor' and giving a lecture about medical ethics in neurosurgery is a Doctor of Musicology, and has no mnedical qualification" than to hear an argument and retort, "Oh, yeah, well you're ugly."

The first is a valid response, the latter is not.

(06-04-2019, 12:38 PM)cassini Wrote: As for his Protestantism, well the history of 'faith and science' shows us that were it not for Protestants few would know the truth. Catholicism championed all the false sciences as they emerged even though it was their duty to protect the flock from false philosophy.

A Catholic could never say such blasphemous words against the Bride of Christ.

Your obsession with your own personal interpretation of Scripture has finally led you to say that the Catholic Church defected, and Protestants have the Truth. That is the ultimate conclusion when you will not listen to the Magisterium.

Be assured that I'll be offering some penances for you that return to the Church and abandon these heretical and blasphemous notions.
Reply
#39
(06-04-2019, 04:51 PM)Tolkien RRJ Wrote: Not true at all.  uniformitarianism is the unbiblical belief that todays processes have always happened at the same rate.   

Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation. But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 
2 Peter 3 

Uniformity of nature is that all things behave the same way in the same circumstances. Besides, those assumptions used by the uniformtanist, not only is based on faith, but can by observation, be shown false.

The second letter of Peter has never been interpreted that way by the the Fathers, or the Magisterium. See here.

To suggest this passage condemns is to condemn St Augustine's interpretation of it which supports uniformitarianism. The relevant passage from that article :

Quote:Firstly, the Magisterium does not cite the passage in any major source of Catholic teaching. The Enchiridion Symbolorum, for instance, never references it. A survey of a dozen major Catholic Dogmatic Theology manuals from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries also proved fruitless. Thus, we have apparently no teaching of the Magisterium or Theologians regarding this verse which demand we accept one or the other reading.

Given the lack of Magisterial statements and theological guidance for interpreting the verse, we turn to the Fathers. Here, we do have some data, but a very small quantity. The Enchridion Patristicum shows no references to this passage in relation to doctrine, and other Patristic indices show only three Fathers addressing the passage at all. None assert that it condemns uniformitarianism, or the principles behind it.

The first, St Jerome, uses an accommodated sense to call Jovinanius one of the “scoffers,” but does not interpret the phrase in an applicable way. In his commentary he says nothing relating to a uniformitarianism.

Next, St Augustine cites the passage in his City of God. There he discusses the end of the world and the extent of its destruction in comparison with the Flood. He does not spend any words rejecting uniformitarianism (a notion with which he would have surely been familiar as it was taught by the Greek philosophers who asserted an eternal universe). Augustine states that the present world stands in the place of the antediluvian world, and the post-Apocalyptic world will be similar. He then asserts that, just as the nature of this world was not changed by the Flood, man’s “nature, however, shall notwithstanding continue, though in eternal punishments” after the Judgement.

The clear meaning is that as Noah had his own scoffers saying that there was no sign of a Flood coming, which destroyed all men, so it will be at the end that scoffers will find no sign of a Judgement coming, yet it will also destroy all men and the whole universe. He does not assert the rejection of uniformitarianism and instead speaks of nature not changing.

Next, Pope St Clement I in his Epistle to the Corinthians seems to paraphrase St Peter calling those men “foolish” who would not concern themselves with the coming judgement because “these things we have heard even in the times of our fathers; but, behold, we have grown old, and none of them has happened unto us.” At the end of the same chapter, he speaks of the quickness with which the Lord will come.

St Augustine also takes this same idea in his other reference to 2 Pt 3:4 in his commentary on Psalm 44 writing: “Call to mind the generations before you; you will find that the making of Adam is but a thing of yesterday. So do we read that all things have gone on from the very beginning: they were therefore done quickly.” Thus, St Augustine affirms a uniformitarian reading of this passage. He accepts that things have gone on in the same way from the beginning. He then warns, “The day of Judgment also will be here quickly. Do thou anticipate its quick coming. It is to come quickly; do thou become converted yet more quickly.”

Further, as the article notes, the great scripture commentator, Cornelius a Lapide, in fact uses this passage to show that the stability of nature is actually an argument for God, and the "scoffer" is in fact blinded to this because he uses what should prove the order of the universe, and therefore God, to deny God.

It is only Protestants who needed to support their false "Flood Geology" who have re-interpreted this passage to condemn uniformatarianism. No Catholic author has ever done this, nor any Father, nor the Magisterium.
[-] The following 2 users Like MagisterMusicae's post:
  • Augustinian, jovan66102
Reply
#40
(06-04-2019, 09:15 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(06-04-2019, 12:38 PM)cassini Wrote: cassini
(06-04-2019, 12:38 PM)cassini Wrote: As for his Protestantism, well the history of 'faith and science' shows us that were it not for Protestants few would know the truth. Catholicism championed all the false sciences as they emerged even though it was their duty to protect the flock from false philosophy.

A Catholic could never say such blasphemous words against the Bride of Christ.

Your obsession with your own personal interpretation of Scripture has finally led you to say that the Catholic Church defected, and Protestants have the Truth. That is the ultimate conclusion when you will not listen to the Magisterium.

Be assured that I'll be offering some penances for you that return to the Church and abandon these heretical and blasphemous notions.

Ah, another ad hominem ploy, now I am a blasphemer for pointing out the history of popes abandoning the traditional understanding of Genesis and its six day creation as revealed by Moses.
 
No doubt the same accusation can be said of Our Lady who in 1634, (one year after Pope Urban VIII confirmed the infallibility of the 1616 decree that declared a heliocentric reading of Scripture is formal heresy), forecast that in the 19th century, heresies would flourish.’ Then Our Lady appeared at La Salette in 1846 - 11 years after Pope Pius VII was conned into allowing heliocentrism to be believed and thus the true reading of Scripture – prophesising ‘Rome would become the seat of the anti-Christ.’ Wow, what do you say about such blasphemies Magister?
 
Your obsession with your own personal interpretation of Scripture,’ you say. Are you denying the history of the Church of 1616 and 1633 Magister?

(1) “That the sun is in the centre of the world and altogether immovable by local movement,” was unanimously declared to be “foolish, philosophically absurd, and formally heretical [denial of a revelation by God] inasmuch as it expressly contradicts the declarations of Holy Scripture in many passages, according to the proper meaning of the language used, and the sense in which they have been expounded and understood by [all] the Fathers and theologians.”

(2) “That the Earth is not the centre of the world, and moves as a whole, and also with a diurnal movement,” was unanimously declared “to deserve the same censure philosophically, and, theologically considered to be at least erroneous in faith.”


Are you telling readers of Fisheaters that the above findings are fiction or as Vatican II inferred that it was the ignorance of the times? Are you saying what all the Fathers believed as the true revelation of Scripture was wrong? That is what you are implying when accusing me of my adhering to their interpretation when it comes to a geocentric reading.
 
The defection of churchmen, even popes, is not a defection of the Bride of Christ. The Church is protected by the Holy Ghost who will not allow error contradict its teaching OFFICIALLY. Yes, popes can do and say what they like, but they only apply to the Church when a pope uses his official magisterium when deciding on matters of faith and morals. I can assure you no pope in the history of Catholicism has ever challenged the infallibility of the 1616 decree. As regards long-ages and evolution, well here again no pope ever used his office to impose any such beliefs on the flock, merely went along with ‘science’ to avoid another Galileo case.
 
That is the ultimate conclusion when you will not listen to the Magisterium.’
The magisterium was ONLY used by Pope Paul V in 1616. It is you who have made it your task to deny its decrees, not me. As for your prayers for my return to abandoning the magisterium, well please do not insult God by praying for someone to reject his revelation.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)