Evolution and the Gospel

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by BobRyan, Aug 2, 2003.

  1. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Here we might find some more support for the RC posts.

    The RCC sponsors - teaches - evolution to it's people as "fact".

    But what about other faiths? I am guessing many non-RC groups do this as well, so feel free to join with the RC posts on that point.

    But what does that do to the Gospel?

    Can you really "cut and paste" God's Word?

    Is it safe to go with the mythologies of evolutionism or stick with the Gospel?

    What about the fall of man?

    If God "created" in the form of death, starvation, caranage, savage killing - how did "Adam fall from THAT"?

    Even Atheist evolutionists "Admit" that THIS day is a GREAT STEP UP from that carnage.

    The practical vies is that Man "climbed out of the MUCK of that CREATION".

    Not that man FELL from such a high lofty state.

    "And as Adam squatted on his cave floor bashing in his share of monkey brains - mommy hominid looked on in approval. And then sudddddenly - Adam had - A BAD THOUGHT - so now God the Son must die for all humanity to save them from hell".

    As Richard Dawkins noted - the Christianized-view of Evolutionism - is nonsense to the evolutionist - AND to the Bible believing Christian.

    For those who trust God "For in SIX days the Lord MADE the heavens and the Earth the SEA and ALL that is in them and rested the Seventy day (yom)".Exodus 20:11.

    It is the DETAILS of the Genesis 1-2 account that are appealed to in God's Law and Gospel and Salvation message.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  2. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    In the thread "How are infants saved" we learned from RC Historian Thomas Bokenkotter that the RCC compromised with the World and thus brought in practices supporting infant baptism.

    Can it be "surprising" then that in the 20th century - the RCC "does it again" with the atheist views on Creation and the origin of mankind?

    In the "Former case" the noble goal was to reach out to more pagans, in the latter case the "noble goal" was to "protect" the Bible from Science AS IF science had ever proven the mythologies of evolutionism, abiogenesis (New Spontaneous generation) or had refuted Entropy as a fact in our solar system that could be applied to Biology.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  3. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi BobRyan,

    Before I even clicked onto this thread, I had already guessed that you - again - were going to misrepresent the Catholic Church, which seems to be a reoccuring theme in your posts, and I'm sure it is related to the fact that your particular sect's theology is partially based upon a particular brand of Anti-Catholicism. Usually, where you find Anti-Catholicism, you're really looking at Anti-Pseudo-Catholicism because the Church's opponents aren't attacking the Church, but a Pseudo-Church, a straw Church, one which the Anti-Catholic has constructed according to his or her own whim. This is what you have done - again - in your post above.

    You wrote, "The RCC sponsors - teaches - evolution to it's people as "fact".

    You are incorrect. I encourage you to learn the truth, that is, if you are a man of good will, which I find increasingly harder to believe as each day goes by on this board.

    Here is a link for your personal research:

    http://www.catholic.com/library/adam_eve_and_evolution.asp

    If you wish to display a case of good will, you'll visit the site and retract your statement above before you properly represent the Catholic Church. That is, if you act according to the order of justice.
     
  4. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bob: Like Carson says, you are very wrong. I personally am not a believer in Darwin's Theory of Evolution, and the Catholic Church does not teach me to believe it. Darwin's Theory of Evolution is one of many theories of evolution, none of which has been proven as fact. The Catholic Church certainly does not teach it as fact or teach that we are to believe it.

    God Bless
     
  5. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    As has been my consistent approach on this board - I quote CATHOLIC sources when showing RC views.

    Thank you Carson for "one more" to add to the list.

    Here is the quote from YOUR source that is added to my file.

    In fact (as a Franciscan student recently affirmed on a purely RC message board) you "would be laughed right out of class if you came in here supposing that God REALLY created the heavens and the earth the sea and all that is in them in SIX days as scripture states". I for one - believe him.

    Here is a quote from him (of course it starts out with the obligatory RC response "you don't know what Catholics teach")

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  6. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    And so (if the smoke screen is quite through) we DO SEE from CAtholic sources THEMSELVES - that the RCC is actively promoting evolutionism NOT ONLY in its science courses BUT ALSO to its seminarians.

    So "Now that we know we can't obfuscate that point" can we get on with the main topic - HOW are you able to blend those two ideas? What have you done to the Gospel in taking that approach?

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  7. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    What still "continues to amaze me" is that MY practice of consistently quoting RC sources - is condemned by RC posters - withOUT impeaching my pro-RC sources or the quotes they give. But the VERY POINTS the RC members here object to are the VERY ONES promoted in the pro-RC source Quotes.

    How many others on this board are giving you YOUR OWN quotes as the source for "proof" of your problem?

    And yet....

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  8. Steven O. Sawyer

    Steven O. Sawyer
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2003
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bob, as a YEC and a Baptist myself, I also find a lot of abberant doctrines in the RCC. But I am sure you are aware that many mainstream (even conservative and evangelical) Protestants hold to a theistic evoltionary position. To name a few, Ravi Zacharias, R.C. Sproul, Chuck Colson, and William Lane Craig. On the Catholic side of the anti-Darwinian movement there is Phillip Johnson and Michael Behe and a few others in the ID movement.

    I am just curious as to why you are picking on the RCC about this issue? I'm not trying to defend RCC beliefs or theistic evolution... I'm just curious.

    Steve
     
  9. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you Steve, for this pointing this out. I would also like to add the name Dr. Dean Kenyon to the Catholic list of leaders in the anti-Darwinian movement of Intelligent Design.

    The Catholic Church doesn't teach evolution or science. Scientific theories come and go. Even in the world of science, evolution is a theory and not a fact. This thread is not going to go anywhere based on the false premise that the Catholic Church teaches evolution as fact.

    God Bless
     
  10. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
  11. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    Michael Behe, one of the leaders of the Intelligent Design movement:

    God Bless
     
  12. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    I agree that others besides the RCC endorse the errors of theistic evolution and I also agree that there are some notable RC members that have made significant contributions to the YEC argument.

    My point is that the RCC "officially" teaches Evolution in all its institutions - NOT just in its science classrooms BUT ALSO (as my quotes show) in its seminaries.

    So the question is - what does that do to their "Gospel".

    As you point out we could go to smaller Christian groups and perhaps find them also teaching this in their science classes AND seminaries as "approved" to the extent we find it in the statements above - but in those small groups that would ALSO promote this "instiution-wide" within their denomination - we doubtless would be dealing with a smaller global group, one that is probably not well represented on this message board. Since I am not sure there are enough of them on this board to put up a good defense for themselves, I would prefer to have them simply join the RCC argument (in favor of it) in responding to the point regarding the damage done to the Gospel by evolutionism's mythologies.

    Since I "know" we have some RC's here that are affiliated with the Seminary and others that may be well informed about the pro-evolutionism statements as quoted above - I am hoping they will present a vigorous defense of that view and how they salvage some vestige of the gospel while clinging to evolutionism.

    BTW - have you noticed that the Evolution vs Creation board does not seem to be allowing posts at the moment?

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  13. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    Note: Phil Johnson is a Presbyterian.
     
  14. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bob:
    No, the Catholic Church does not teach evolution as fact. Science classes in Catholic schools as elsewhere teach the theories of science that are out there. Evolution has been the only scientific theory for many years.

    There is the ID movement in its infancy now, and can be added along with evolution or any other scientific theory. Not many know about this theory yet, being that much of it is based on recent developments in genetic information.

    My pastor and bishop seem very interested in the Intelligent Design video they have seen.

    As far as what does this do to the Gospel, I recommend you read the church fathers of the Catholic Church. We have the same gospel that Jesus Christ taught__salvation by Grace, from the merits of Jesus Christ on the cross.

    Like Michael Behe says : “As a Roman Catholic I was always taught that God made life, and how He made it was up to Him.”

    "Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes." John Paul II

    I would hate to have a physician and surgeon, who only went to Bible College. I don't think he would do a good job. Science is an honorable profession, and doesn't have to conflict with faith.

    God Bless
     
  15. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4

    "Today, almost half a century after the publication of the Encyclical [Pius XII's 1950 encyclical Humani generis], new knowledge has led to the recognition in the theory of evolution of more than a hypothesis."

    "In his Encyclical Humani generis [1950], my predecessor Pius XII had already stated that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith about man and his vocation, on condition that one did not lose sight of several indisputable points (cf. AAS 42 [1950], pp. 575-576)."


    "It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory."


    Pope John Paul II
    Message to Pontifical Academy of Sciences
    22 October 1996
     
  16. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
     
  17. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Kathryn's recent post makes this point again - showing that since we don't want science coming from the bible - the best thing is to let science tell us about "origins" and ignore the point when God addresses the same subject "unscientifically". The "proble" is that God gave us a Bible that "weaves" the fabric of the Gospel with the story of creation, infusing both the Law and the Gospel with "the very details" that are supposedly "so unreliable".

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  18. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bob:
    The Bible is 100% reliable. The Bible is the word of God and teaches salvation. It teaches salvation by Grace from the merits of Jesus Christ on the cross. The Old Testament thru the New Testament is the word of God. We can count on the Bible___all of the Bible.

    But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2 Peter 3:8

    Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ? 1 Corinthians 10:16

    We do not have to believe the sun revolves around the earth. Our salvation is not dependent on our believing how God made the universe. We are Redeemed by the blood of Christ on the cross and saved by His Grace. The word of God is the word of Salvation.

    God Bless
     
  19. trying2understand

    trying2understand
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    HOW do these "quotes" show THAT the CHURCH OfFiCaLly "Teaches" evolUTION?
     
  20. A_Christian

    A_Christian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    0
    The pope (the head of YOUR religious institutions)
    is saying HE AGREES WITH EVILUTION... It is as
    simple as that. It is clear that YOUR pope
    doesn't believe in a literal acceptance of the
    GENESIS story as presented in GOD's WORD.

    Peter would entirely disgree with what this pope
    says on this point.
     

Share This Page

Loading...