All the Fathers of the Church believed in the Biblical teaching of Genesis chapter 1. There is nothing contradictory between science and creation. However, there is definitely a contradiction between evolution and Catholic truth. And trying to have it both ways with theistic evolution which ultimately denies original sin since evolution requires eons of chance changes with interim organisms dying and new ones arising. At the ripe time of evolution, God then infuses a human soul into a creature that becomes in His image and likeness. (See my previous post on why evolution makes no logical sense to a Catholic believer.) Lots of problems. Theistic evolution denies the immortality of Adam and Eve as originally created and denies original sin as the origin of death, since death preceded Adam and Eve. Evolution is a direct attack on the faith and must be vigorously repudiated by serious Catholics!
Keep in mind that belief in evolution requires as much (or even more) faith than belief in God and creation. And this nonsense is making unbelievers out of generations of the young who are brainwashed into accepting an unproven hypothesis as absolute secular dogma. Scientists themselves admit that the fossil evidence is scant, especially with respect to links between the various life forms. What does that indicate? Think about it. If God created the species as Genesis describes, there would be no links because the species were individually created.
Some of the arguments in favor of evolution are truly ridiculous. I once saw an exhibit at the National Zoo in the reptile house. It showed a diagram of a lizard and used biological symmetry to "prove" that we had the same ancestor as a lizard. Of course, that is no argument at all and doesn't illustrate anything of the kind. Many plant and animal organisms from a flower to a honeybee to a snake to a bird, to a mammal illustrate the biological principle of symmetry. Even non-living objects like the planets show symmetry. That there is consistent order in the universe is more an argument for an intelligent designer than for evolution by chance. If all kinds of independent development was going on wouldn't diversity in design be more likely?
But I always come back to common sense. The weatherman can't accurately predict the weather even a few days out. Often what he does predict turns out totally wrong. So if a weather scientist can't accurately predict something so near in time , how can we possibly believe he knows what happened 200 million years ago? It's patently absurd on its face.
|FOR SALE: Lovely covered bridge - bargain basement price!|
If you believe all that I'll be happy to sell you the covered bridge at Meems Bottom at a bargain price.