Skip to comments.Evolution Was the Key in Joseph Campbell’s Loss of Faith
Posted on 06/16/2009 9:48:01 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Joseph Campbell died in 1987 but remains influential. In this revealing video, Campbell clarifies why he left the Roman Catholic faith of his youth EVOLUTION...
(Excerpt) Read more at uncommondescent.com ...
Thanks for the ping!
Too bad. The more I have studied evolution, the more I have confidence in my faith as a Christian.
Evolution needs to be re-named.
Since Darwin lived so long ago in the 1800s, I propose a new term, something that will point out the archaic misunderstandings of Darwin, combined with a linguistic remnant of another discredited ‘theory’.
= short for “Steampunk Spontaneous Generation”.
evolutionism is evil, plain and simple.
It was obvious Joseph Campbell had very little belief in anything.
His “Power of Myth” that PBS ran over and over again was nothing but blind philosophy.
Small wonder PBS was in the tank for zerO.
And the irony isn’t lost when Charlie Gibson (reportedly) said he’d never heard of the word “Laodicea” either.
You have a problem when you bring up Campbell because to him the power of the Shaman’s myth(or any myth) was just as powerful as the Christian myth.
Since when did Catholics take the Bible literately?
I wonder what dioceses he was attending.
The “faith of Christ” is a gift God imputes to his people. If he was relying on some sort of other faith that he ginned up on his own, it would only be a matter of time until he could no longer sustain it.
I don’t know about PBS but Bill Moyer’s career was close to over when he stumbled onto Campbell and made a ton of money plus revitalizing his career.
Too bad he didn't live long enough to see the Catholic church change its attitude toward evolutionary theory.
OTOH, the outright ignorance of Young Earth Creationists has been the cause of the loss of faith by many others.
I thought Campbell had a very thilly thpeaking voith. Not unlike the actor Ed Wynn’s “Perfect Fool.” How apt.
Yep. Moyer was just as blind. And no doubt made a lot of money selling the nothingness of Joseph Cambell’s road to nowhere.
Moyer acted as if he learned some startling new revelation. In fact it’s an old lie, but being reborn in our day in another form, called “all roads”.
More nonsense from SpamSpamSpam. The Catholic Church does not follow his anti-intellectual “lead” and has no problem with the scientific evidence for biological evolution — the Church concerns itself with the “ought” issues which are at right angles to the “is” issues settled by scientific inquiry.
Evoluation isn’t evil.
And neither is evolution.
I am a Christian and I loved Joseph Campbell. His insights into how mythology informs modern culture are amazing. Even if he himself lost his faith along the way, his ideas support the notion that there is truth to be found in all religions.
GGG Posting Short Form
|Check All that Apply|
|□||I Read It In Answers In Genesis|
|□||I Read It In Creation Safaris|
|□||I Read It at The Discovery Institute|
|□||I Read It at The Institute for Creation Research|
|□||I Saw It At The Creation Museum|
|This is About|
|□||Refuting Something Darwin wrote over 100 years ago|
|□||Proving All Geology points to a World Wide Flood|
|□||Proving the Earth is less than 10000 Years Old|
|□||Linking "Darwinism" to:|
|□||Something I don't understand, but it seems to support my viewpoint|
|I Would Also Like to Post|
My Nifty Budda Picture
My Nifty Sniffing Dog Picture
My Naked Emperor Picture
My Mars Rover Picture
My Road Signs Picture
Just check the appropriate boxes, and you're good to go! The cool thing is, just as much thought goes into every post! You get the CONVENIENCE of automated posting without any compromise to your usual quality!
LOL...Sorry, your boxes don’t work, so I’ll have to keep doing it the old fashioned way.
I don’t know who Joseph Campbell is but no Catholic loses his faith because of evolution. It doesn’t even make any sense. That said the idea that all religions have some truth in them is very Catholic.
Toss in some religious background and he becomes an atheist that thinks Christianity useful, even ‘beautiful’ but myth.
You post is a perfect example of why no Catholic loses his faith over evolution. It’s an interpretation of scripture that has no authority behind it except the person. Every Catholic does personal interpretation but every Catholic also acknowledges that the Magisterium has final say on how those passages are to be taken. So far the Magisterium has said evolution of life forms (whether started from one life or many)is not a problem for the faithful. The authoritative reading is that God started life (not how God started life).
I believe the Catholic church teaches that it is acceptable to believe Genesis is either actual fact or metaphorical. Leaving one to believe in evolution or not. Me? I believe it is literal.
"A five year old kid could read Genesis and know that Human Evolution is not possible if the words in the Bible are true. "
A five year old would interpret according to the axioms of his own culture and the limits of his knowledge. The Church accepts plain sense readings of scripture but acknowledges that these may be faulty.
This is a good thread that explains the Catholic view on this, Adam, Eve, and Evolution.
I actually had that written as part of my response but it is not precisely true. Some people have studied other cultures enough to be able to interpret differences in meaning. How educated their opinions are is certainly up for debate. Yet the Church recognizes that two cultures can say similar things and have very different meanings.
From the previous link-
“Pope Pius XII warned us, “What is the literal sense of a passage is not always as obvious in the speeches and writings of the ancient authors of the East, as it is in the works of our own time. For what they wished to express is not to be determined by the rules of grammar and philology alone, nor solely by the context; the interpreter must, as it were, go back wholly in spirit to those remote centuries of the East and with the aid of history, archaeology, ethnology, and other sciences, accurately determine what modes of writing, so to speak, the authors of that ancient period would be likely to use, and in fact did use. For the ancient peoples of the East, in order to express their ideas, did not always employ those forms or kinds of speech which we use today; but rather those used by the men of their times and countries. What those exactly were the commentator cannot determine as it were in advance, but only after a careful examination of the ancient literature of the East” (Divino Afflante Spiritu 3536). “
That’s weird. He could have stayed RC and believed in evolution. You can believe in lots of things and be RC.
You just can’t believe in salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone, and in the sufficiency of Scripture alone.