Collegeville Bible Commentary

It basically says that the Book of Genesis was not written as a scientific fact, it should not be taken literally because it is full of symbolisms. For example, when Adam took a bite of forbidden fruit and began sewing the leaves as protection and it was not working (keywords: "try" to cover), it shows innovation of man and how we inventive, but it is useless compared to what God can do.

The book we use is Collegeville Bible Commentary by Pauline A. Viviano

Well, at least that's what my theology professor said. And he is a Catholic priest, and studied theology for some time now because he is old (LOL jk jk). He holds a doctorate in theology oh and did I mention he is a priest tooa yeah and he is a Jesuit (if you do not know the relevance of this property do not post this is not a remedial class)

What do you think about thisa

He's right. This does not mean that I agree with him on the existence of God but he is right in the sense that evolution is not atheism. What I like about Catholics is how open-minded, they are compared to evangelicals who take everything literally. The Catholic Church has taught that the Bible should not be taken literally, it is simply a guide for 'god of learning and understanding morality. " I was raised Catholic and have never taught that evolution was wrong or evil. It has been accepted yet that does not diminish their faith.

There are many Christian evolutionists. To accept evolution does not mean you're less of a Christian. Just because Genesis story of how humanity came to be does not mean it should be considered as fact. Fundamentalists as a user here told me long ago "have a childlike faith, kind of immature." They do not seek a deeper meaning to the Bible. What they see is what they preached.

Not much

Dogma> Reality

You really can not make that assumption when the Lord of Genesis, they say formed human likeness. Genesis 1:26 might talk about evolution and creation are compatible.

What is a Jesuita

(This is what you get for ordering ME around!)

I think your babbling is not very coherent. Try to think and ask again.

Evolution does not replace God, but it does remove one of the goals for a god, which is to explain the diversity of life that we observe in nature.

I agree. I do not really have much to learn about the evolution until long after I became an atheist. Evolution has nothing to do with my becoming an atheist.

Religion and science can go hand in hand, yes. I know many Christians who have no problem with scientific facts.

true, nothing can replace what does not exist.

Evolution has nothing to do with God. If someone wants to believe in God, they can still accept that evolution is a fact.

Evolution and theism are not mutually exclusive. But evolution and creationism are.