Skip to comments.Roman Catholicism and Genesis (Traditional Catholic Theology Supports Biblical Creation)
Posted on 07/03/2009 9:35:53 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Roman Catholicism and Genesis
A review of The Doctrines of Genesis 111: A Compendium and Defense of Traditional Catholic Theology on Origins by Fr Victor P. Warkulwiz
The Catholic Churchs belief about Genesis 111 has been in a muddle for a long timeever since uniformitarianism and evolution came on the scene. This situation is similar to Protestant churches, sadly for both liberal and conservative ones. Within the traditionalist churches, this book is a welcome addition to the book Genesis, Creation and Early Man by the Russian Orthodox heiromonk Seraphim Rose,1 who documented that the Church fathers of Eastern Orthodoxy from the fourth century until the present almost all taught a young earth, a literal six-day creation, a global Flood, and the origin of languages at the Tower of Babel. Warkulwizs book focuses on the traditional teachings of the Catholic church from the early and medieval church fathers and comes to the same conclusions...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
I’m off to go commune with God’s wondrous creation via sailboat. Have fun with this one.
All the best—GGG
You should be telling the secular revolutionary evolutionists to leave your church alone...not those who champion the traditional Catholic interpretation of Genesis.
And speaking of Galileo:
The Galileo affair: history or heroic hagiography?
Without Genesis, much of the Bible makes no sense. Especially the harder passages. Genesis must be taken in by faith, so we see that when God said “In the day you eat of it you will surely die”, we understand the catastrophe upon them and us when they did.
Given the above link, why are you so quick to lay all the blame on “your church” for putting Galileo in jail?
I will read your response when I return from communing with God’s wondrous creation :o)
All the best—GGG
Minority and NOT the POPE
get and outboard and some tackle and do it right.
YEC Literalist Dittoes
Thanks for the ping!
so predictable GGG.So the church wasn’t motivated by control of information and knowledge? The church was/isn’t still trying to discredit or spin new knowledge that doesn’t fit into their written-in-concrete, dogmatic conclusions?
Please-enjoy your day on the boat, but don’t for one second think that you apply the same rules of inquiry to religious based claims as you do to claims based on the scientific method. Once again with religion the conclusions are the dogma, with science the process is the dogma. The scientific process will eventually find the truth based on evidence. The religious conclusions have no room to change and accommodate new information. your choice
O, and which creation myth does the church believe in now? I think there are 2 different creation accounts in Genesis!