What Is Your View On Creation?

[goldenchild17]

agreed. though for now I'm content with where I am with it. Science is improving and changing more and more everyday. I'm sure in each age people are just as convinced that they have it right just as much as people today believe that we have it right. Maybe we do, but I tend to think science has much more to learn and "evolve" (as much as I hate the word) before it has reached its true peak. So I'll stick with my religious views over popular science. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't really care, my faith saves me, not my scientific views.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='Vasilius Konstantinos' post='1921245' date='Jul 15 2009, 10:47 PM']For the OP: I dunno. I was not there. I have no clue what happened. Al I am certain of is that God was there in His uncreated glory and spoke into existence creation from His uncreated energies, the Breath of Life. Therefore I am a Creationist, as that meaning God made it. How he did it? By His voice. How long ago? I don't know, don't care.[/quote]

just sayin.
you don't sound like a 'creationist' necessarily, if all ya believe is that God was there, had a hand in it, breath of life, etc. most would classify that as noncreationism.

well, i think. evolution might be what creationism is all about. (unlike my last post) unless it's about creating the earth in six days? anyways.

but even still, if all you believe is what you say, then you're not opposed to evolution, or the time being longer than 6000 years etc etc.

but in a sense, sure you're a 'creatioinist'.
whatever ya call it, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

i know me for instance, believe God breathed life into the first life, or at least humans. i don't think they'll ever replicate consciousness at all, and lean toward not being able to make life, but if they do it won't be conscious.
maybe that's old fashioned of me etc. but that's what i think. it just doens't seem possible. and i'd like to think something as special as life etc is only something God can do.
yet i believe in evolution. and the universe and earth are millions of years old.
(there's a plausible chance humans were just inserted here, or an actual intervention occurred... looking at the gaps. but there's not enough of gap or uncertainty to think that it was an actual interverention per se. (definitely not enough info to teach it in science class. it'd be like saying "we don't understand or we see holes in quantum mechanics, therefore let's teach it was God, even though those gaps are very reasonably explained with science alone"- it injures the scientific process. and should only be taught, in philosphy class-- i know what'st he big deal if it's taught, but to me it's the principle))

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Mapache' post='1920939' date='Jul 15 2009, 11:44 PM']I have a hard time believing that it's "just a story". The Bible is the God-Breathed...His inerrant word. If the Creation is just a story, then Moses parting the Red sea is just a story and David and Goliath is just a story and Jesus' life, death and resurrection is all just a story.[/quote]
That doesn't necessarily follow. There are different genres in the Bible, even within the same books of the Bible. The first line of Genesis doesn't use the definite article in Hebrew (it doesn't say "in [b]the [/b]beginning"); it says something more along the lines of "to begin" (that is, if my Hebrew prof taught me correctly, though it's been a few years since I've had Hebrew, and so I acknowledge that I could be mistaken). It's stating what's important for Moses (if you agree that Moses penned Genesis) and the people of Israel to know in relation to their faith. It is not intended to give a scientific explanation. The important thing is [b]that [/b]God created everything [i]ex nihilo[/i].

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1920989' date='Jul 16 2009, 12:25 AM']I can't imagine a better way for an ancient scribe to describe the Big Bang than to say, "and God said let there be light."[/quote]
I agree.

[Gregoriana of Nyssa]

I believe that God created. That's all that really matters to me. How he created, I don't know.

I grew up believing evolution was evilution, but after college I realized it made no difference how we came to be, as long as God was behind it. But one day the church I was attending at the time, a Bible church, had--instead of a sermon--a presentation on the truth of literal creationism. It was actually something you HAD to believe to be a member. That's when I began to realize I was going to the wrong church.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Gregoriana of Nyssa' post='1926288' date='Jul 21 2009, 07:52 AM']I believe that God created. That's all that really matters to me. How he created, I don't know.

I grew up believing evolution was evilution, but after college I realized it made no difference how we came to be, as long as God was behind it. But one day the church I was attending at the time, a Bible church, had--instead of a sermon--a presentation on the truth of literal creationism. It was actually something you HAD to believe to be a member. That's when I began to realize I was going to the wrong church. [/quote]
Yep. I don't think we were required to hold to a literal 6-day creation, but it was nevertheless presented as Gospel truth (I was SBC).

[Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam]

Both St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine wrote to the effect that it was irrational to conclude that animal species do not change over time since we know that the land and such can change over time. If we believe that God is loving and cares for creation, He would allow his creation to adapt to a changing environment. This seems to me to be very close to evolution, even before Darwin ever posited anything.

Also, St. Augustine wrote against taking the two Creation Stories in Genesis as literal. It seems to me that the tradition and thinking of the Church are open to the understanding of evolution.

I think, however, that the resistance to accepting evolution by many is a matter of a philosophic disagreement rather than that of a scientific one. It seems to me that more and more in society "truth" is being replaced by scientific "fact" in society. More and more science has the final word on actions taken in society rather than faith or philosophy, especially where ethics is concerned. Arguments from faith and from philosophy are more and more shunned and called ignorant and ignored. In an effort to reject this trend of science as the final word and rejection of everything else, I find people are throwing the most authoritative thing they have at science, the Bible. Instead they should fight this tendency with philosophy since ultimately it is a philosophic preference of certain arguments over others. Instead, they attempt to make evolution a choice between the Bible or Science when if both are true there should be no disagreement. The problem with this is that they fight science on science's ground by trying to scientifically prove the creation stories in Genesis. This is a problem. One should look at the tradition of Christianity and of the Church, the Bible, and look at philosophy, since ultimately it is based on reason which at times can include scientific facts to support itself although does not necessarily need them, and argue from these aspects since this is the foundation of on which Theology stands.

[Gregoriana of Nyssa]

[quote name='Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam' post='1926549' date='Jul 21 2009, 11:47 AM']The problem with this is that they fight science on science's ground by trying to scientifically prove the creation stories in Genesis. This is a problem. One should look at the tradition of Christianity and of the Church, the Bible, and look at philosophy, since ultimately it is based on reason which at times can include scientific facts to support itself although does not necessarily need them, and argue from these aspects since this is the foundation of on which Theology stands.[/quote]

And because of this fighting science on science's ground, they're not taken seriously. The Bible is not a science textbook!

[zunshynn]

You want to hear something sad? I was talking to a good friend of mine, a very devout lady, and she was telling me about her children being away from the church and how they're trying to get her to abandon her faith by arguing against it scientifically and everything... and she mentioned how she just tells them that she's going to be faithful to the church even if she doesn't agree with some things (I wondered what those things could possibly be, because like I said, she's very devout.)

And so today, she mentioned that one of those things was how the church teaches that "Adam and Eve and Noah and the flood are fables" It's just sad how because there are theologians that make it sound like they're teaching the church's teaching, even though they're not. She was shocked but really happy when I told her that really isn't the Church's teaching, that we are supposed to believe they were real people.

She just had this sense, that she couldn't believe that they were just fables, but she's the type that just doesn't do the whole trying to "understand" everything, so when she was told that they were, she just kind of tried to accept it, even though she just had this sense that they couldn't "just be stories". Just so faithful. I was touched by that... and just frustrated that these theologians confuse the faithful the way they do.

[princessgianna]

DISCLAIMER: I am not a scientist. I am not a theologion. I am just a young lady trying to look at everything at a logical objectival viewpoint. Many times this is hard. For this I ask and encourage opinions and criticism. Thank you.


[quote name='picchick' post='1920909' date='Jul 15 2009, 05:33 PM']Yep, this is how I sorta see it to.

We did not come from monkeys. We were made from the image of God. God created the earth. He created it from nothing. But, how and how long He decided to take? I don't know. I'll talk to God over coffee on that one.[/quote]
On our image- I am at the point that the whole image is not a literal and material sense but rather in a spiritual sense. If we "saw" God -He is not necessarily this old grandpa in heaven. Rather the fact He lives forever and we share that "image" with our souls.

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1920921' date='Jul 15 2009, 05:39 PM']My dad, in the line of work he's in, knows a heck of a lot about geological timelines, ages of rock, etc. In my opinion, his, and the opinion of science, there is zero question that the earth is far far far [i]far [b]far[/b][/i] older than 6000 years old. I have no problem reconciling that to the beliefs of the Church. None whatsoever.
"A contradiction cannot exist in reality. Not in part, nor in whole."
There needn't be any contradiction present in Creationism and science.[/quote]

Edited July 23, 2009 by princessgianna

[mortify]

I personally believe the creation of the first Adam was mysterious precisely because creation of the second Adam was mysterious.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='zunshynn' post='1928483' date='Jul 22 2009, 06:24 PM']You want to hear something sad? I was talking to a good friend of mine, a very devout lady, and she was telling me about her children being away from the church and how they're trying to get her to abandon her faith by arguing against it scientifically and everything... and she mentioned how she just tells them that she's going to be faithful to the church even if she doesn't agree with some things (I wondered what those things could possibly be, because like I said, she's very devout.)

And so today, she mentioned that one of those things was how the church teaches that "Adam and Eve and Noah and the flood are fables" It's just sad how because there are theologians that make it sound like they're teaching the church's teaching, even though they're not. She was shocked but really happy when I told her that really isn't the Church's teaching, that we are supposed to believe they were real people.

She just had this sense, that she couldn't believe that they were just fables, but she's the type that just doesn't do the whole trying to "understand" everything, so when she was told that they were, she just kind of tried to accept it, even though she just had this sense that they couldn't "just be stories". Just so faithful. I was touched by that... and just frustrated that these theologians confuse the faithful the way they do.[/quote]
Another victim of Mr. Brown.

[scardella]

Creation happened. and God did it.

[CatherineM]

I've often thought that the 6 days of creation were a bit like Joseph's dreams. I can see an ancient scribe being inspired by the Holy Spirit in his dreams. Each day he writes what he saw the previous night. Each stage of evolution he saw in his visions were written down as happening in one day because that is how he received it.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1929734' date='Jul 23 2009, 05:07 PM']I've often thought that the 6 days of creation were a bit like Joseph's dreams. I can see an ancient scribe being inspired by the Holy Spirit in his dreams. Each day he writes what he saw the previous night. Each stage of evolution he saw in his visions were written down as happening in one day because that is how he received it.[/quote]
Interesting.

[Truth_Seeker]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' post='1920921' date='Jul 15 2009, 06:39 PM']My dad, in the line of work he's in, knows a heck of a lot about geological timelines, ages of rock, etc. In my opinion, his, and the opinion of science, there is zero question that the earth is far far far [i]far [b]far[/b][/i] older than 6000 years old. I have no problem reconciling that to the beliefs of the Church. None whatsoever.
"A contradiction cannot exist in reality. Not in part, nor in whole."
There needn't be any contradiction present in Creationism and science.[/quote]


Totally agree.

This issue played a very big role in my first year of college. I had never really been taught what evolution actually was, and how much evidence there is for the changing of species over time. My two introductory biology courses, which were both full of evolutionary ideas, had me questioning my faith a lot (not to mention everything else that was testing my faith at the same time). It became something I was determined to figure out for myself - Where does science meet Catholicism, where does scientific theory meet truth?

I know that I don't have it all figured out for myself yet, but I continue to learn, and my search has made me love science that much more. I've come to understand science as humans just trying to understand the universe, trying to make sense of where we live. Science is our search for truth in the natural world, and it therefore must not contradict God-given truth.

If you seriously, and academically looked at the evidence for evolution, there can be no denying that species change over time. However, evolution in itself does NOT explain how we got here, it doesn't explain the beginning of the universe. It mearly explains what happens to species that are already present.

I still don't know for myself how the earth and the universe came to be in the scientific sense, but no matter what happened, I believe that: God was constantly in charge of what was happening, God was the one who started life, humans are made in the image of God, humans have souls (like no other animal) and souls cannot "evolve".