tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post112749305271589465..comments2024-03-14T11:50:14.761-04:00Comments on DarwinCatholic: "Darwinist" DangersDarwinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-42563980059494073572016-09-15T17:57:06.259-04:002016-09-15T17:57:06.259-04:00So if you believe in the resurrection of the dead,...<i>So if you believe in the resurrection of the dead, and you believe St. John the Baptist when he said that God could turn the rocks into children of Abraham, then why is it so difficult for you to believe in creation? Why do you put so much faith in the dust to create life, and so little in God?</i><br /><br />The reason for thinking evolution to be an accurate account of the biological history of species on this earth is not because we do not believe that could is capable of creating ex nihilo. Obviously, we know at Catholics that God holds the very world in existence through the active force of His will. A slow evolution of a species is no less God's work than its instant creation, because either way the only reason the world exists from moment to moment is that God wills it. <br /><br />Rather, the reason why many Catholics (including John Paul II and Benedict XVI) have found the findings of modern biology convincing is that simple fact that they fit the evidence which we find in God's creation, available to the reason which God has given us. <br /><br />Why do we find the similarities between the DNA of different species that we do? Why do we find the fossils that we do? Why do we observe the population dynamics among creatures that we do? <br /><br />All of these incline us to think that God worked out his plan in a certain way in this world, a way which can be predictably described by biological science in a way no more or less Godly than the way in which we predict the behavior of chemical interactions or the movement of the laws of motion. Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-57743523762931655602016-09-14T04:21:34.660-04:002016-09-14T04:21:34.660-04:00Look at the history of Evolution, where it came fr...Look at the history of Evolution, where it came from, and what has followed in its wake, and that'll be enough to cause you to doubt the truth of it.<br /><br />Where it came from: Enlightenment naturalists who read the ancient Greek and Hindu evolutionists.<br />What followed in its wake: apostasy, atheism, naturalism, eugenics, two world wars, both socialism & fascism.<br /><br />Most of the great 20th century dictators were Darwinists. Why? Because the upshot of Darwinism is, 1. might is right, the will of the strongest is the law, 2. man has no spiritual soul, he is a beast that can be enslaved and reprogrammed into the ideal "citizen".<br /><br />Think for a moment how much the devil has profited from Darwinism. Darwinism has taught countless millions to believe, not that they were made in God's image, but that they were made in the image of an ape; not that they are a little lower than the angels, as the scriptures teach, but they are a little higher than the ape, as Darwin teaches. That's countless millions who are going to hell because they have no faith.<br /><br />Darwinism is seriously destructive of faith, and I myself would renounce my faith if I thought it were true. I say this as someone who grew up agnostic and accepting what I was taught at school. I first tried to reconcile Darwinism and Catholicism, like many do, but then I saw that they were incompatible and there was no reason to reconcile the Catholic Faith with a 19th century philosophy that has caused so much apostasy and death. It is ridiculous to hope for eternal life and the resurrection of the body from a God who would make man through a billion year cycle of death and "survival of the fittest". If that is God we have no hope of eternal life. The scriptures are very clear that death came into the world through sin. The notion that death is in God, or that God has always willed the death of creatures, is a Hindu concept, not Catholic. If Darwinism were true I would in fact become a Hindu, because that's where it logically leads to.<br /><br />All the Darwinist and Darwinist compromisers sneer at the idea that God made man "through a miracle". Apparently, dust turning into a giraffe over a billion years is less miraculous that dust turning into a giraffe in an instant; I don't know why this is, but perhaps the concept of a billion years bamboozles the mind a bit. But let us be serious and ask: do you believe in the resurrection of the dead on the last day? Do you believe, as the Church teaches, that all the billions of men that have died will be resurrected in their bodies on the last day? On that day, God will form <i>billions</i> of bodies <i>in an instant</i> (He won't wait billions of years for the dust to turn itself into human form). So if you believe in the resurrection of the dead, and you believe St. John the Baptist when he said that God could turn the rocks into children of Abraham, then why is it so difficult for you to believe in creation? Why do you put so much faith in the dust to create life, and so little in God?Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13858873453982708283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-42481483718657934342008-09-19T16:33:00.000-04:002008-09-19T16:33:00.000-04:00But since evolution is never going to impinge on o...<I>But since evolution is never going to impinge on our daily lives, and we only have to read the papers to see that many biologists use evolution to justify their atheism -- why should we teach our children about evolution? It seems like all danger and no upside</I><BR/><BR/>Two reasons. One you'll like as a religious person, and one which I consider important even though I'm not.<BR/><BR/>1. If you teach your children about evolution, and explain how it doesn't disprove God, then you have countered the argument that evolutionary atheists are going to make. Whereas if you do not teach about evolution, they are left open to being bamboozled by something they have no exposure to and no way to crtiically evaluate.<BR/><BR/>2. The idea that evolution does not affect our daily lives is wrong. That would be like saying because you do not use the statistical formulas you may have learned in university on a daily basis, an understanding of statistics is not important. It is important, because it allows you to evaluate all of the surveys and polls and such that we're told about in the news every day. Similarly, many of the current (and future) events of the day will require an understanding of evolution to deal with. For example, bird flu, biotechnology, genetic engineering, etc. Without a solid understanding of evolution, it is very difficult for a person to read about what is going on in the world today and make informed decisions about what to think of it all. Even non-biological areas are borrowing concepts (by analogy) from evolution, and without an understanding of how biological evolution works, you have no means to determine whether the analogies are correct or not.<BR/><BR/>The danger and the downside is in not teaching evolution correctly (which would refute the arguments of the atheists) and thoroughly (which would avoid the dangers posed by survey courses or teaching a dumbed-down version to grade 6es). While not teaching it at all would give the child neither correct nor incorrect information, it's the least thorough teaching possible, and that has a dangerous downside.Myronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11734754018546873245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-1127882256147555692005-09-28T00:37:00.000-04:002005-09-28T00:37:00.000-04:00Genuinely good thoughts.Oh, and I noticed that you...Genuinely good thoughts.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and I noticed that you adapted the beginning of "A Brief History of Time" in a clever way. It's a point that Dr. Hawking doesn't want to face, it seems.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04633871907076984715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-1127771817329216602005-09-26T17:56:00.000-04:002005-09-26T17:56:00.000-04:00Indeed, most general science intro level text book...Indeed, most general science intro level text books (and many bio 101, chem 101, physics 101 type books as well) are simply terrible committee written driven, which simplify to the extent of being both dull and wrong. No argument from me there. <BR/><BR/>The great difficulty for many parents (whether they homeschool or are simply trying to do their due dilligence on what is being taught to their children) is that it's hard to be an expert in everything, and so invariably they end up have to judge textbooks in fields in which they are not experts -- a doubly hard tastk.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13522238.post-1127761695804657972005-09-26T15:08:00.000-04:002005-09-26T15:08:00.000-04:00Thank you for commenting. As far as utilitarianis...Thank you for commenting. As far as utilitarianism, I should confess that I don't hold it for evolution alone. To the detriment of science, I think we are introducing complex topics into the curriculum at way too young of an age. Unfortunately, the trend I see in education is to make students a Jack of All Trades and a Master of None. <BR/><BR/>In regards to Evolution's role in education, I have mixed emotions. Personally, I don't have a significant interest in the topic. I think if we are going to teach it that it needs to be taught thoroughly. My greatest fear is that when we introduce a topic, we dumb it down. I don't know your familiarity with survey courses. They have been in vogue at universities for awhile, but they have come under considerable criticism, because they are so vacuous.M.Z.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17019301238333072406noreply@blogger.com