Catholic Discussion

[Alexander]

When I was baptized? Thats kinda like being born into it...

 

[darkbeaver]

I was torn from my crib, mum was drunk as usual, dad was at sea again, she took me to the church
and they dipped me in a bucket of magic dish water and the Minister started to jabber and babble in tune with the pipe organ, a goat was bled and everyone smeared the blood on thier faces and started copulating with the chickens and hurling themselves against the walls untill they collapsed in a writhing stinking heap on the alter. Later the quests had cucumber sandwhiches on the lawn, I was fed on the breast of a shewolf and we watched as the church burnt to the ground ,I still have the bible the United Church Women gave to me on that portentious occasion, I often flip through the charred pages and try to figure what the hell it means.It may not have occured exactly as I remember but I was just a baby beaver.Amen:wave:

 

[L Gilbert]

Why is because I haven't seen such a high degree of arrogance and vanity for a very long time. (Thought I wrote that somewhere.)
I think anyone can post a heart anywhere anytime. It means very little. If you truly loved people you wouldn't talk down to them like they were ignorant little sheep that needed to be taught your particular way of thinking.

 

[karrie]

Why would you believe the story of creation word for word? That's absurd. Even the priests I've talked to say it's not to be taken literally. As far as I'm concerned, Einstein's relativity theory is the answer you're looking for. What's a day to God after all?

 

[look3467]

Why is because I haven't seen such a high degree of arrogance and vanity for a very long time. (Thought I wrote that somewhere.)
You did say that.

I think anyone can post a heart anywhere anytime. It means very little. In the eye of the beholder.

If you truly loved people you wouldn't talk down to them like they were ignorant little sheep that needed to be taught your particular way of thinking.

Not intended to be perceived that way, but unfortunately it is.

It is a way of thinking just like you have your way. But bottom line, is there love that we can both agree on?

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[Alexander]

It doesn't mingle. You either believe in creationism or you believe in evolution. Personally, I think they both have flaws and it is difficult to believe anything when being played by higher powers.

 

[selfactivated]

Doesnt Kreskin have a debate topic on this?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

I only accept the Adam & Eve thing, I can't alter that.. or anything else in the Bible for that matter.

Well then, I regret to tell you that your attempt at reconciling evolution and your view of Christianity is sunk. If you insist on that degree of biblical literalism, no resolution is possible. One of them has to be wrong.


Hint: it's biblical literalism that's wrong

 

[look3467]

westmanguy;

Hey brother, I had inklings of the presence of God all my known life. But really didn’t come to know Him until I was thirteen years when I walked down the aisle to accept Jesus as my Savior.
I’ve learned allot since and have studied the bible with a passion.
I’ve been a deacon, a song leader and sang a few solo’s in the church. I’ve raised six kids and all of them know the Lord.
I’m still married to the same gal and going on 39 years.
God has blessed me beyond what I deserve and have only Him to thank for all of it.
I am 60 now and I give myself another 20 maybe and then I will graduate from this course on living to my reward in heaven. That reward is Jesus.

May Jesus grant you knowledge and understanding as you progress through this life’s journey.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Well, Christians aren't going to throw Creationism out the window. Thats one of the founding bricks on the belief. That God created us all.

Some Christians won't, but most of them do. Creationism doesn't mean god created us all. Well, it does in a sense, but it means a great deal more than just that, most of which has to be thrown out the window if you want to understand evolution. Creationism in its usual meaning is rooted in a pretty literalist interpretation of the Bible that even the most basic knowledge of science would tell you cannot possibly be correct. As I've said in other threads, there's nothing in evolutionary theory that precludes a creator. Starting from the position of belief in a creator, you can make a perfectly legitimate philosophical argument that the creator set up evolution to work as it does and installed natural selection as its major mechanism. What you can't do, however, is reconcile a literal reading of the biblical creation story with the findings of modern science, you have to find an allegorical or metaphorical meaning in the scriptures.

 

[Alexander]

How about this; God is all knowing so when he created the universe he already knew that we would evolve into his image.

Or

We were created instantly by God and he's leaving tests of faith around for us to find.
WOW! Now I know what the Easter Bunny has to do with Christianity!!

 

[Tonington]

It doesn't mingle. You either believe in creationism or you believe in evolution. Personally, I think they both have flaws and it is difficult to believe anything when being played by higher powers.

Not true. Evolution provides no explanation for how life came to be, only how it has come to be organized the way it is now. Abiogenesis and creationism are at odds.

Edit: What flaws do you see with evolution?

 

[fatbasturd]

My mom and dad had guilt issuses and passed them on to me.....

 

[look3467]

Westmanguy

My understanding after searching for answers, have led me to this: Mankind is older than what the creationist believe it to be.

The 7 day creation story is just that. It is God’s way of telling us that He created the worlds, mankind and all that there is.
But for simplicity, the 7-day creation story suffices, as well as the story of Adam and Eve.
We may part ways here but I have come to that conclusion based on what I believe the Holy Spirit has revealed to me.
I have bible references to show how that is so.

Mankind has been evolving from: ? Point in time, no body knows. But God did create the first man Adam and the first man Eve. Both Adam and Eve are called Adam.

Evolutionist can agree with that as far as evolving.

The key point to understand here is this: That God is the creator, and we are His creation.
Everything in between is mans interpretation.

If you focus on who we are in relation to Him, than there is nothing to be gained by proving either case. For neither can be proved.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[look3467]

My mom and dad had guilt issuses and passed them on to me.....

Guilt issues? Can you expound on that.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[fatbasturd]

They were Catholics...it's an inherent trait.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

If you focus on who we are in relation to Him, than there is nothing to be gained by proving either case. For neither can be proved.

Well... not really. Evolution is a fact established well beyond any reasonable doubt, it's about as secure a claim as the one that the earth orbits the sun. There are quibbles at the fringes, about the precise way natural selection operates in particular cases and the role of sexual selection and things like that, but the fact of evolution is such that only an ignorant fool would withhold assent. Evolution is a proven fact, it has been directly observed to happen, even to the point of the creation of new species. It's visible in action everywhere if you know where to look. One of the more obvious examples is the increase in antibiotic-resistent bacteria we keep hearing about.

You're quite right that mankind is older than creationists believe. The more extreme of them will grant an age for the planet of only 6,000 to 10,000 years, which is such obvious nonsense to anyone with any knowledge of the evidence it's hard to credit that anyone with a more than 2-digit IQ could believe it.

God did create the first man Adam and the first man Eve.

The first man Eve? When was that? I thought Eve was female. There have been recognizably genus Homo creatures on the planet for millions of years,. and recognizably species Sapiens for at least hundreds of thousands of years. At what point in the evolutionary process do you think god stepped in and inserted a soul into these creatures?

 

[look3467]

They were Catholics...it's an inherent trait.

Do you believe in Jesus? I mean trust Him completely?

peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[look3467]

Well... not really. Evolution is a fact established well beyond any reasonable doubt, it's about as secure a claim as the one that the earth orbits the sun. There are quibbles at the fringes, about the precise way natural selection operates in particular cases and the role of sexual selection and things like that, but the fact of evolution is such that only an ignorant fool would withhold assent. Evolution is a proven fact, it has been directly observed to happen, even to the point of the creation of new species. It's visible in action everywhere if you know where to look. One of the more obvious examples is the increase in antibiotic-resistent bacteria we keep hearing about.

I can agree with your statement.

You're quite right that mankind is older than creationists believe. The more extreme of them will grant an age for the planet of only 6,000 to 10,000 years, which is such obvious nonsense to anyone with any knowledge of the evidence it's hard to credit that anyone with a more than 2-digit IQ could believe it.

The first man Eve? When was that? I thought Eve was female.

Mankind is flesh whether male or female. Called: Adam.
Gen 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

There have been recognizably genus Homo creatures on the planet for millions of years,. and recognizably species Sapiens for at least hundreds of thousands of years. At what point in the evolutionary process do you think god stepped in and inserted a soul into these creatures?

Nothing can be known of anything until knowledge is given.

Where mankind arrived at the knowledge of a soul is when God introduced Himself to Abraham. After that it has been an evolutionary growth in knowledge of God.

But to fully understand the state of the first man soul, we have to look at Jesus. Why? Because it is in Jesus where the very first mans soul is released from its prison.

Prison meaning, that because there was no bridge to tie the spiritual world with the physical world, the souls of mankind where held in a state of suspension. Until Jesus was sent to bridge the gap and save all souls that were lost due to the spiritual separation. Better understood as: death.

The 7-day creation story than comes into play with Jesus re-creating it, meaning starting all over again from the beginning, and taking every soul that ever lived from day one, and saving those souls.

That is why I believe in universal salvation of all mankind.

Every living flesh body has a soul. It is a marriage between the spiritual and the flesh.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

A marriage of our children brings separation from us.

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

The spirit is Adam, and the flesh is Eve. Eve is the weaker vessel, the flesh.

So I accept the evolutionary process but with a divine creator of the original.

I also accept the creationist view, of God being the sole creator but with an evolutionary process, and a process that has taken billions of years.

For apart from earth, there is no time frame.

That is my view and if it is a of any worth to someone, than, I hope it will help them.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[L Gilbert]

Not true. Evolution provides no explanation for how life came to be, only how it has come to be organized the way it is now. Abiogenesis and creationism are at odds.

From the link I posted above:

7. Evolution cannot explain how life first appeared on earth.
The origin of life remains very much a mystery, but biochemists have learned about how primitive nucleic acids, amino acids and other building blocks of life could have formed and organized themselves into self-replicating, self-sustaining units, laying the foundation for cellular biochemistry. Astrochemical analyses hint that quantities of these compounds might have originated in space and fallen to earth in comets, a scenario that may solve the problem of how those constituents arose under the conditions that prevailed when our planet was young.
Creationists sometimes try to invalidate all of evolution by pointing to science's current inability to explain the origin of life. But even if life on earth turned out to have a nonevolutionary origin (for instance, if aliens introduced the first cells billions of years ago), evolution since then would be robustly confirmed by countless microevolutionary and macroevolutionary studies.

8. Mathematically, it is inconceivable that anything as complex as a protein, let alone a living cell or a human, could spring up by chance. Chance plays a part in evolution (for example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits), but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins or other entities. Quite the opposite: natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving "desirable" (adaptive) features and eliminating "undesirable" (nonadaptive) ones. As long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly short times.
As an analogy, consider the 13-letter sequence "TOBEORNOTTOBE." Those hypothetical million monkeys, each pecking out one phrase a second, could take as long as 78,800 years to find it among the 2613 sequences of that length. But in the 1980s Richard Hardison of Glendale College wrote a computer program that generated phrases randomly while preserving the positions of individual letters that happened to be correctly placed (in effect, selecting for phrases more like Hamlet's). On average, the program re-created the phrase in just 336 iterations, less than 90 seconds. Even more amazing, it could reconstruct Shakespeare's entire play in just four and a half days.

Edit: What flaws do you see with evolution?

Good question.