tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post2052237326811326055..comments2024-03-22T18:43:00.710-04:00Comments on Unam Sanctam Catholicam: Does the Church teach spontaneous Creation?Bonifacehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10672810254075072214noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-31967442272645801732018-07-31T14:36:34.382-04:002018-07-31T14:36:34.382-04:00Old Post but w/e
When Vatican I says the whole su...Old Post but w/e<br /><br />When Vatican I says the whole substance of everything was created ex nihilo why not intepret it more sensibly God did not create using some kind of formless Prime Matter, but ex nihilo created the forms and matter of all creation.<br /><br />Occasionally a new substance arises that was never there before. Take the mule. The mule's matter was not created ex nihilo when the first mule was made, but God either directly or indirectly (by positing it virtually in the horse and donkey) created the form of the mule. The matter of the first mule was at some point created ex nihilo, but that was historically before the first mule.<br /><br />Likewise, God made Adam out of dust in Genesis. Ott doesn't believe this excludes the possibility of man's body being made from pre-existing organic matter; after all a dead body can be called "dust". Regardless, the material cause of Adam was there before the form of Adam was. When God ex nihilo created the form of Adam, He imparted it to previously ex nihilo created matter. Ultimately Adam was entirely created ex nihilo, but just like the mule this does not entail his material cause and formal cause were instantaneously created. Though unlike the mule we know de fide that God directly created the formal cause of man. Mitch Turbablancahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02604164839042511240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-31678396497031385572011-01-26T03:43:32.666-05:002011-01-26T03:43:32.666-05:00"This statement is much more weighty than the..."This statement is much more weighty than the first, as it comes from an ecumenical council and anathematizes anyone who would deny it. It's impact on theistic evolution comes with the clause "as regards to their whole substance." Clearly, theistic evolutionists do not deny creation ex nihilo, nor the special creation of man by God, nor God's creation of the immaterial along with the material. But what they do deny is that creatures, and mankind specifically, was created at once by God "as regards their whole substance." "<br /><br />Could one not say, that for God, it was all created at once with the seed he planted at the beginning of time? In the same manner, are not all of our lives (everything in our lives) happening constantly and always to God, the very millisecond after the egg is "sprayed" (I don't know the english word). and our life is formed?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-80654295428438589032008-06-28T23:15:00.000-04:002008-06-28T23:15:00.000-04:00God created EVERYTHING (that is, the totality of e...God created EVERYTHING (that is, the totality of existence) <I>ex nihilo</I>, but the Bible doesn't say He created every single thing individually <I>ex nihilo</I>, does it?<BR/><BR/>From Genesis 1 we learn: He commanded the EARTH to bring forth vegetation. He commanded the WATERS to bring forth swarms of living creatures. He commanded the EARTH to bring for living creatures.<BR/><BR/>From Genesis 2 we learn: He formed he beasts of the field and the birds of the air from the ground. He formed the first Man from the ground! He formed the first Woman from the Man. This is not <I>ex nihilo</I>... it's special creation, certainly, but not <I>ex nihilo</I>.<BR/><BR/>So where does that leave us? Not every THING was created at the same instant, since we are told of the stages of creation. But before Adam was formed from the clay of the earth (or "primeval ooze" as it is called nowadays), can Man be said to have existed in substance? Did Man exist between the time God formed the body and the time He blew into its nostrils the breath of Life?<BR/><BR/>I think we will find that, as specific as the Church's language is regarding creation, it is not explicit and complete enough so as to rule out a theistic "evolution", a development of life from life. However, such a theory does not ever rule out special creation.<BR/><BR/>That's just my thoughts on the matter... I hope I'm not straying into heresy!Jeffrey Pinyanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08758581112217835988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-29407904856219058432008-06-15T23:42:00.000-04:002008-06-15T23:42:00.000-04:00Well, after taking a bio 101 class, I found the ma...Well, after taking a bio 101 class, I found the majority of the facts to be simply propaganda, for example, by using postulates for evolution to indeed prove it. However, a few cases were hard to argue against: when two different flower species were introduced into an ecosystem, a new hybrid species was found two decades later, supposedly proving that a "new" species developed. Personally, I am skeptical even of this.<BR/><BR/>To me, St. Augustine's works on Creation would be very interesting to look into, especially his theory of "seeds" becoming life forms, in his "Literal Commentary on Genesis" (hard to find, though some St. Thomas quotes some of this in the Summa, I.45 when he discusses creation).<BR/><BR/>One other fact: whenever any scientist just doubts some aspect of darwinian evolution, he is immediately ostracized, which can only confirm that the powers that be want this theory to be propagated, perhaps even knowing that it is false.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-57684511202761287022008-06-12T16:00:00.001-04:002008-06-12T16:00:00.001-04:00We argued (respectfully)...We argued (respectfully)...Anselmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16902869236387031205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-60145477386883395952008-06-12T16:00:00.000-04:002008-06-12T16:00:00.000-04:00One of my profs in a Physics class argued on philo...One of my profs in a Physics class argued on philosophical / theological grounds that macro-evolution is indeed a fact.Anselmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16902869236387031205noreply@blogger.com