Pope affirms evolution
Catholic leader causes uproar as he voices support for ‘Big Bang’ theory
Controversy — Pope Francis rattled Catholic and Protestant theologies by contradicting established fundamental creation story. Google Images
“When we read in Genesis the account of creation, we run the risk of imagining that God was a magician with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so.”
These words might sound as if they came from some controversial preacher. But they did not. They were spoken by Pope Francis to an audience from the Pontifical Academy of Science Oct. 27, according to Newsweek. In that speech, he officially affirmed that the Catholic Church believes in both evolution and the Big Bang theory, although with the addition of God into the equation.
“The Big Bang that today is considered to be the origin of the world does not contradict the creative intervention of God,” Francis said to his audience. “On the contrary, it requires it.”
Merriam-Webster defines the Big Bang as, “the cosmic explosion that marked the beginning to the universe according to the big bang theory.” Based on that definition, I am inclined to give that particular point to the pope. Genesis 1:1 (NIV) says, “God created the heavens and the earth.” There is no explanation given of exactly how he did that. While I believe it to be unlikely, there is a possibility, however remote, that he chose to create our universe through the rapid expansion of highly condensed matter.
Francis then went into further detail about exactly how the universe was created. He said creation was not one single event, but that it “went forward for centuries and centuries, millennia and millennia until it became what we know today.”
That was the part where Francis lost me. His statement brings up two assertions, both of which I disagree with. The biggest issue, of course, is that of evolution. But hidden within that is another assertion — that creation itself took thousands of years.
Back to the first chapter of Genesis. The Bible clearly states creation as taking six days. In the NIV, each set of verses describing a day ends with, “And there was evening, and there was morning — the (fill in the blank) day.” According to God and Science, a website dedicated to showing evidence for God, there is some debate among scholars as to the meaning of the particular Hebrew word used to mean “day” because it can occasionally mean a long period of time. However, the fact that each day is described as having an evening and a morning seems to me to indicate pretty strongly that they were, in fact, literal days.
There is another point that convinces me each day was literal. According to Genesis 1:11, plants were created on the third day. However, the sun, whose light plants need in order to survive, did not come into existence until day four. As the Institute for Creation Research points out, that would be fine so long as the days were actually literal. But if each day represented thousands of years, the plants would have died long before the sun came into being, let alone any other forms of life.
Putting all of that aside, the biggest issue I had with Francis’ speech was his assertion that evolution actually happened.
“Evolution in nature is not in contrast with the notion of divine creation because evolution requires the creation of the beings that evolve,” Francis said.
He went on to say that God has indeed used evolution to create the forms of life we know today.
“(God) created beings and left them to develop according to the internal laws that he gave each one, so that they would reach their fulfillment,” Francis said.
This is an argument I have heard quite often in attempts to reconcile evolution and the Bible. Is it not possible that God simply created a handful of life forms and then guided evolution to do the rest? The short answer is yes. It is entirely possible. But is that actually what happened? I believe the answer to be a resounding “No.”
When Genesis 1 talks about the creation of the plants, the sea life, the birds and the land animals, the NIV uses a variation of the phrase “God created them … according to their kind” each time. That sounds to me as if each type of animal was created specifically. Rather than making a few birds, a few fish and a few land animals, I believe God carefully created each type of animal.
The pope said God is not a magician, and I agree with him. God is far more powerful than a simple charlatan performing parlor tricks on the sidewalk. God created the entire universe. So why would a God with that much power create a prototype and then sit back and watch for thousands of years as it slowly turned into what he meant for it to be? Would he not simply jump straight to the final model? I know I would.
There is one final factor that leads me to believe God did not use evolution to perfect life. Near the end of each set of creation verses, the NIV says, “And God saw that it was good.” To me, that sounds like he was satisfied with his work. This is further evidenced by his resting on the seventh day. He was happy with his creation.
As a creative type myself, I know how critical creatives are of their own work. We slave over a piece until we are satisfied. Just the other night, I stayed up until 2 a.m. working on a Photoshop project because I wanted to be sure every detail was perfect. Only when I was completely happy with my creation did I allow myself to turn off the light and go to bed.
God is the master creator. Would he not be the same way? Why would he paint the canvas of our universe, call it good and then sit back and watch the canvas morph into what he really wanted it to be? As the very standard of perfection, would he not pour his heart into his work until he was completely satisfied? True, this is no scientific argument. It is only conjecture from a human mind whose love of creating is dwarfed into nothingness compared to that of her creator. But somehow I just cannot envision the being who created creativity itself as being satisfied with anything less than exactly what he set out to make.
In the end, the debate is not really about science versus religion or creationism versus evolution. At the end of the day, I believe it all comes down to this — do we accept the Bible, word for word, as the true and inerrant word of God, regardless of what the world tells us? That may be the most important question we ever ask ourselves. Do we believe it? There can be no middle ground, no riding of the fence. Either we believe or we do not. It is as simple as that.
BROWND is a copy editor.
The Truth of Genesis: An Open Letter to the Archbishop of Westminster
Earlier (November 2014), I wrote the article “The Truth of Genesis: The Papacy Refuses To Teach the Truth of Genesis”. It was in response to the ungodly remarks of Pope Francis, a Jesuit, who displayed his ignorance and/or disdain of the scriptures by saying that “God is not a magician”, and “Evolution is not inconsistent with creation”.
There were those who responded that they were surprised that Pope Benedict XVI did not respond and jump at the chance to proclaim the literal truth of Genesis chapter one. Catholic laity, you are so blind to reality and have not investigated the true origin and teachings of the inner Catholic regime! I followed up the “Challenge to the Pope” article with “An Open Letter to the Archbishop of Westminster”. I conveyed
what failed to occur with my letters to the Pope, and wrote to the Archbishops of Great Britain. It follows
below. It was written in October 2011:
***
Earlier this year (2011), I had read about the Easter message given by Pope Benedict XVI. So I wrote an article named “A Challenge Given to the Pope”. It was a universal challenge given to the leader of the “universal (Catholic) church”. During Easter Week, the Pope had said for all to believe the message of Genesis, but not to take the scripture literally (Creative Reason). He implied that Genesis was morally true, but not literally true.
In the article, I made reference to a “double dribble” in basketball. I was trying to use restraint, give a measure of respect, and allow the Pope the “benefit of the doubt”. What I was actually bringing to the table was the scripture of James 1:8, which says “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways”. The Pope, and the Vatican regime, advocated false doctrine, and I considered them to be “unstable “.
I sent the article to the Pope, and to various divisions of the Vatican (the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Congregation for the Clergy, the Congregation for Catholic Education, and the Congregation for Religious). Not just once, but three times. And for good measure, I also sent the article to the news media and Catholic sites in Italy, France, Germany, Spain, Belgium, Southeast Asia, England, Ireland, Israel, New Zealand, Australia, Japan, and all USA Catholic websites and magazines I could find, along with 54 newspapers and news sites in the USA. How often does someone publically challenge the Pope on points of doctrine and truth of scripture? Don’t you think that should have made headline news? Who (or what) is controlling the news media, and hiding the truth from the people?
The Pope had the whole month of May to respond. Do you think that he was willing to retract his false statements, and inquire about the truth of Genesis? No! After five months, I still have received no communication. But I also sent the article to the “Pope in Exile” and the Greek Orthodox. Yet still also, no response. Plus I wrote to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York (Anglican Church), but only an assistant of the York Bishop responded, yet it didn’t amount to anything. When it comes to the truth of scripture, the Clergy runs and hides. Perhaps, for that reason, church attendance is on the decline, and the doctrine of Atheism (evolution theory) is not being opposed.
It would seem to me that if religious leadership, such as the Vatican, Archbishops in the UK, the Sanhedrin in Israel and others, fail to examine, and accept the truth of scripture, why are people following and believing in the things they teach? The Pope was wrong about Genesis! Since he has refused to correct himself (and give liberation to Catholic believers), what other falsehoods have the Papal Regimes been teaching?
So, this is a public letter to the Archbishop of Westminster. I’ve been reading articles from the UK concerning how various scientists and educators want to “outlaw” the teaching of Creationism. I also am in favor of discarding Creationism, because it does not correctly represent the Genesis text. No one, that is employed in any school system, anywhere on Earth, is qualified to teach Creationism. Genesis is not about the creation of Earth and the universe. It’s about the history of Earth after Creation Week.
For hundreds of years, the world of Theology has been teaching foolishness, and has refused to admit its ignorance about the scriptures. Instead of repenting, and learning the truth, the Clergy, such as the Pope, would rather see chaos, and the people dying in ignorance, than to make provisions for the masses to learn the true rendition of scripture. Why is that? If it was up to me, I’d replace them with someone more “spiritual and godly”.
As I said earlier, I received no response from the Pope. Neither did I get any response back from the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. So this letter is written to the Archbishop of Westminster, to see if he is any more “godly” than the others. Will he also join the “council of the ungodly”, and “stand in the way” of Bible believers? The correct rendition of Genesis is the “Observations of Moses”, and is the explanation of the 600+ million year fossil record of escalating death.
***
As you should have guessed, the Archbishop of Westminster failed to respond. One of secretaries of the archbishops, whom I also had forwarded the letter, said that they would make sure their archbishop would get it. In case they are still working in that capacity, I won’t mention their name. Still, no response. Even the churches and Christian Schools who are trying to teach Creationism in Great Britain failed to respond. So they also don’t want to teach the “Truth of Genesis’.
Herman Cummings
ephraim7@aol.com
Isn’t it just POSSIBLE to consider the Biblical account of Creation in the context of the time and culture in which it was written down? The fact that evolution is still being debated in 2014 astonishes me. The archaeological, biological, chemical and genetic evidence supporting the evolution of all life on Earth is simply indisputable. I suppose there are people who cling wistfully to the notion that all that evidence is nothing more than a big elaborate Satanic deception, which make me wonder why God gave us BRAINS if He didn’t intend us to do science with them.
“Science replaces private prejudice with publicly verifiable evidence.” -Richard Dawkins
It may be argued that Bible provides us with a moral and ethical framework within which we might better conduct our lives with decency and humility. But the Bible is simply NOT a science textbook. The exact author(s) of the Genesis account will probably always be a topic of scholarly debate, but I doubt if God sat him on His knee and said, “Now listen carefully and write this down, son, because I’m going to tell you HOW I DID IT.”