Biblical Guidance

Faith,

Theologically, the RCC doesn't believe evolution either as it violates their doctrine of God. They just don't care if you wanna work evolution in somehow and they need to up membership.

There is a third reasonable alternative that is loosely labeled the gap theory which allows a gazillion years between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. I know some people scream impossible but it's way more plausible than evolution.

If you search youtube for the Jason Lisle - Hugh Ross debate, you might enjoy the discussion of both perspectives.

1969Mach said:

Faith,

Theologically, the RCC doesn't believe evolution either as it violates their doctrine of God. They just don't care if you wanna work evolution in somehow and they need to up membership.

Click to expand...

Can you prove either of these statements? From actual Catholic sources that is, and not some creationist or anti-Catholic sources?

FaithT said:

As you know I have been struggling with whether to remain Lutheran LCMS or return to Catholicism. I’ve asked questions here and another forum. I’ve talked to 2 priests, my pastor and a Lutheran pastor on here, off the forum and I’ve read everything I can on religion, but most importantly, the age of the earth and evolution.
I’ve read a lot on CA and listened to some podcasts there.

The LCMS are literalists when it comes to the Bible. They believe the earth and universe are about 6,000 years old and wouldn’t ever consider evolution.
Catholics are free to believe these things or not.

Im very much leaning toward returning to the RCC. It would be so freeing to be able to stop trying to make excuses for why certain fossils were found or why the Grand Canyon appears old. I’m going to Reconciliation and Mass this Sunday.

Question, does the RCC get Biblical guidance from the Pope, Magisterium etc. and is one of their functions to guide us in reading and interpreting the Bible?
Just thought I’d give you an update.

Click to expand...

WELS would be even worse. Lots to like about WELS or LCMS but they are confirmed anti-scientific about creation. Knowing what I know about fossils and geology and biochemistry I could not maintain the intellectual dualism to belong to WELS or the LCMS. And the rest of Lutheranism seems far far to liberal to be true to the Gospel. Maybe there is an odd sort of Lutheran group out there that is faithful to the Gospel and does not require denying reality to do so. I donno.

Catholics can be creationists or accept evolution. There are some propositions, such as that all of humanity is from one stock, which we must affirm. (How Denisovians and Neanderthals fit into that is an open question, and perhaps best answered by saying they were human even if not Homo sapiens sapiens.) And we can’t go around saying other Catholics who disagree with us on this are wrong. We CAN argue the science, but we may not say the other guys are theologically wrong. And we all need to be open to new information that may rule out one or the other option. I am an evolutionist and a Catholic in good standing on that matter. But if the Church tells me I need to consider something else I will. Likewise, creationists are in good standing, but should not be doctrinaire about this question where doctrine simply is not settled. We need to maintain the plasticity on this one thing to follow if and when it is figured out.

The WELS and LCMS are convinced they have it figured out. I see them as denying scientific fact in saying so, and restricting the liberty of Christians to follow the facts which the order of creation has shown us about the cosmos, the planet, and the nature of life all around us. As a Catholic I am free to follow the science.

The role of the magisterium is not to define every verse of the Bible. They have defined only a few handful of verses. All the rest we are able to use our skills, or to see what ordinary faithful scholarship has in commentaries. It’s not a free for all, but neither is it a magisterial dictatorship. There are limits, but there is substantial freedom. So I accept that God creates and guides and shepherds his creation. And that it is marvelously done. As a Catholic I am not afraid of what might be discovered. God speaks to us through creation. I am not required to wear blinders.

FaithT said:

Question, does the RCC get Biblical guidance from the Pope, Magisterium etc. and is one of their functions to guide us in reading and interpreting the Bible?
Just thought I’d give you an update.

Click to expand...

I would say that the Pope and Magisterium functionally aren't there to define every word, phrase and passage in the bible. More that in the history of the Church it's been our modus operandi to employ our reason in determining these things. In the case of creation, the Church hasn't come down dogmatically on either side of the argument because reasonable arguments can be made in favor of either position and perhaps the Church sees value in both. Since the debate isn't a soteriological issue the Church probably figures it's fine to let people form their own opinions so long as it doesn't violate revealed truth (like God exists and he created the whole cosmos).

EDIT: I would add though that the Church has worked to develop the catechism so that we can be sure when employing our reason to understand any aspect of the faith: be it what's revealed in scripture or nature, we remain within the boundaries of orthodoxy. Our conclusions can be checked against the teachings within the catechism and if they're found to violate any of that we can correct ourselves accordingly.

1969Mach said:

Faith,

Theologically, the RCC doesn't believe evolution either as it violates their doctrine of God. They just don't care if you wanna work evolution in somehow and they need to up membership.

There is a third reasonable alternative that is loosely labeled the gap theory which allows a gazillion years between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. I know some people scream impossible but it's way more plausible than evolution.

If you search youtube for the Jason Lisle - Hugh Ross debate, you might enjoy the discussion of both perspectives.

Click to expand...

Our desire to "up membership" isn't driven by anything other than a desire to save souls. Full stop. You're new here so you should really read the site rules and recognize that you just posted in the Catholic forum.

1969Mach said:

Faith,

Theologically, the RCC doesn't believe evolution either as it violates their doctrine of God. They just don't care if you wanna work evolution in somehow and they need to up membership.

There is a third reasonable alternative that is loosely labeled the gap theory which allows a gazillion years between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. I know some people scream impossible but it's way more plausible than evolution.

If you search youtube for the Jason Lisle - Hugh Ross debate, you might enjoy the discussion of both perspectives.

Click to expand...

False. The Catholic Church takes no position on evolution.

FaithT said:

One Google search will show him he’s wrong. He just has to Google Catholic increase in numbers.

Click to expand...

DuckDuckGo is your friend. It's so easy sometimes.

FaithT said:

As you know I have been struggling with whether to remain Lutheran LCMS or return to Catholicism. I’ve asked questions here and another forum. I’ve talked to 2 priests, my pastor and a Lutheran pastor on here, off the forum, and I’ve read everything I can on religion, but most importantly, the age of the earth and evolution.
I’ve read a lot on CA and listened to some podcasts there.

The LCMS are literalists when it comes to the Bible. They believe the earth and universe are about 6,000 years old and wouldn’t ever consider evolution.
Catholics are free to believe these things or not.

Im very much leaning toward returning to the RCC. It would be so freeing to be able to stop trying to make excuses for why certain fossils were found or why the Grand Canyon appears old. I’m going to Reconciliation and Mass this Sunday.

Question, does the RCC get Biblical guidance from the Pope, Magisterium etc. and is one of their functions to guide us in reading and interpreting the Bible?
Just thought I’d give you an update.

Click to expand...

To answer your questions, yes, they do. That's one reason why we have specific verses from the OT and NT, and why the message of that day pertains to those readings.
It's my understanding that the Lectionary goes through a three year cycle, just so that the most necessary parts of the Bible can be fully covered.
There are, of course additional opportunities in the Church that offer additional bible study.
They might be radio, tv, parish study groups, published books, and also internet sites as well.
So there is a wide choice of good study material available, for every day of the week.

FaithT said:

Question, does the RCC get Biblical guidance from the Pope, Magisterium etc. and is one of their functions to guide us in reading and interpreting the Bible?

Click to expand...

If your intention is to use Scriptures for prayer and meditation, the help provided by a good Catholic bible like the NABRe is enough. The Magisterium enters the picture only as a guide in a “general” way, that is when it gives guidelines for the understanding of Scriptures.

FaithT said:

As you know I have been struggling with whether to remain Lutheran LCMS or return to Catholicism. I’ve asked questions here and another forum. I’ve talked to 2 priests, my pastor and a Lutheran pastor on here, off the forum, and I’ve read everything I can on religion, but most importantly, the age of the earth and evolution.
I’ve read a lot on CA and listened to some podcasts there.

The LCMS are literalists when it comes to the Bible. They believe the earth and universe are about 6,000 years old and wouldn’t ever consider evolution.
Catholics are free to believe these things or not.

Im very much leaning toward returning to the RCC. It would be so freeing to be able to stop trying to make excuses for why certain fossils were found or why the Grand Canyon appears old. I’m going to Reconciliation and Mass this Sunday.

Question, does the RCC get Biblical guidance from the Pope, Magisterium etc. and is one of their functions to guide us in reading and interpreting the Bible?
Just thought I’d give you an update.

Click to expand...

Peter, though unable to be precise in measure of exact time, was explaining timelessness to the best of his ability for human comprehension.

Timelessness in measures of 1000 years as but 1 day to Him seemed like a very very very long time. And it is, actually. But perhaps it is even longer than that... Millions maybe, which was more than likely not even a number back then.


2 Peter 3:8
But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night.

2 Peter 3:1-18
This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, ...
2 Peter 3:5-7
For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.


2 Peter 3:8-9
But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.