As a Roman Catholic I became curios as to where my own church stood on the topic of creationism vs evolution. In my online research I came across a catholic apologist named Robert Sungenis who gave a talk entitled “The Catholic Doctrine of Creation“.

The Catholic Doctrine of Creation by Robert Sungenis, Part 1

The Catholic Doctrine of Creation by Robert Sungenis, Part 2

The Catholic Doctrine of Creation by Robert Sungenis, Part 3

The Catholic Doctrine of Creation by Robert Sungenis, Part 4

The Catholic Doctrine of Creation by Robert Sungenis, Part 5

The Catholic Doctrine of Creation by Robert Sungenis, Part 6

Now here is part 2 of Dr. Kent Hovind’s series on creation. If you missed part 1 you can find it here.

The Garden of Eden

Bible Translations

At about the 7 minute mark Dr. Hovind discuses which is the best bible translation to use. The king James version is his preferred choice.

I was listening to a catholic creationist address the same question and he recommended the Douay-Rheims version or the Revised Standard Version- Catholic Edition also known as the Ignatius bible because it is published by Ignatius press. He also said that the New American Bible (NAB) was OK but recommended not using the foot notes of this translation.

Following are links to two web pages (one catholic, one protestant) that discuss the different strengths and weaknesses of different English translations of the bible. Both sites are worth having a look if this is something your interested in exploring further.

Catholic: Bible Translation Guide

Protestant: Bible Translations Into English

Dr. Hovind recommends The Answer Book by Sam Gipp as well as the web site http://www.avpublications.com/

I recommend Where we got the bible by Henry Graham

The Gap Theory

Dr. Hovind recommends the book Unformed and Unfilled : A Critique of the Gap Theory by Weston W. Fields

Giant Human Skeletons?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ce/3/part2.html

http://www.geocities.com/saqatchr/page46.html

http://www.theaaca.com/membersbios/bio_cain4.htm

A lot of sites I’ve looked at say that many of these so called giant human skeletons are hoax’s while other sites seem to support the possibility that some of these discoveries may be real. Until I can actually see one for myself in a museum somewhere I’m going to remain a bit skeptical.

Cave Man?

Nebraska Man

Piltdown Man

Neanderthals

Australopithecines (Lucy)

Peking Man

Homo Erectus

Dr. Hovind recommends the book “Bones of Contention: A Creationist Assessment of the Human Fossils” by Marvin L. Lubenowsils

Human Artifacts Found In Layers Of Coal?

I find Dr. Hovid’s theory of creationism just as plausible as the theory of evolution and his presentation is certainly interesting but…

The sources he often quotes from as “proof” of his assertions seem somewhat dubious. An example of this would be his use of the book “The hidden history of the human race” A quick Internet search of this title brings up all sorts of problems related to using this book as an authoritative reference to support his theory.

See: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/lepper.html

One can still legitimately believe in the biblical account of creation without accepting all of Dr. Hovid’s proofs.

The Bible and Health

A book that Dr. Hovid recommends that I whole heartily endorse is called “World Without Cancer: The Story of Vitamin B17″

Also see the Video “World Without Cancer”

Also see this website for a list of foods high in vitamin B17

Also see Dr. Kent Hovind’s video “The Bible and Health”

Other resources From Dr. Hovind include:

The Fluoride Deception

The Natural Health Librarian

Church and State

Hushmoney

Atheism

God Doesn’t Believe in Atheists: Proof That the Atheist Doesn’t Exist

Dr. Kent Hovind’s Website

www.drdino.com

I did have one problem with this presentation however that I feel compelled to correct. At about the 6 minute mark in the video Dr. Hovind says the following:

“I was really shocked to find out a couple of years ago that some of the major catholic theologians of the past have taught man gets to become God”

He is referring to paragraph 460 in the Catechism of the Catholic church which reads:

460 The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature“:^{2 Pet 1:4} “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.”⁷⁹ “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”⁸⁰ “The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.”

^{81 St. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres. 3, 19, 1:PG 7/1,939.}

^{80 St. Athanasius, de inc.,54, 3:PG 25, 192B.}

^{81 St. Thomas Aquinas, Opusc. 57:1-4.}

Being a Catholic and having never heard this before I was a little shocked as well. So I did a little research of my own and discovered that is not what the catechism is teaching. For an explanitation of paragraph 460 check out the following links.

“So That We Might Become God”: Understanding Catechism No. 460

Musings on Theosis or Divinization: “God became man so that man might become a god”

You can agree or disagree with Catholic teaching but it bugs the crap out of me when people start criticizing the Catholic Church over stuff the Catholic Church dosen’t teach (worshiping statues etc..)

Anyway it’s a minor complaint, over all I liked what he had to say.

Enjoy the video

Part 1 – Dr. Kent Hovind – The Age of the Earth

For more information visit: Creation Science Evangelism

Here are links to some of the information mentioned in this video

National Council On Bible Curriculum In Public Schools

Teaching Creation Science Public Schools

Come Back Next Sunday For Part 2