Very nice article. One minor nitpick, the theory of evolution is not really new, there were ancient Greeks who believed in some form of random changes leading to student different species. I don't recall the details but it is mentioned in the book The Fall of Darwin’s Last Icon. So that would explain St. Augustine's seeming familiarity with such ideas.
Blessed Catherine Emmerich said (some? All?) giants began with Cain's son Thubalcain. Who knows? I believe it is possible if we believe that Goliath was one, and that particular giant is intrinsic to the story. I appreciate your questioning the prevailing narrative about evolution!
With prudence, we can read and think all the insights that come from Blessed Anne Catherine Emerich's visions. It is always a very challenging and fruitful reading. As about evolutionism, we must question such a paradigm that practically destroys the classical metaphysical doctrine of "forms" (or "ideas" - in Plato's terms) - which implies that it is impossible for a particular creature to transform into another (completely different) type of creature. In Aristotelian-Thomistic terms, the only possible modification is that of "accidents," but not of "substantial forms." Thank you for your comment!
Very nice article. One minor nitpick, the theory of evolution is not really new, there were ancient Greeks who believed in some form of random changes leading to student different species. I don't recall the details but it is mentioned in the book The Fall of Darwin’s Last Icon. So that would explain St. Augustine's seeming familiarity with such ideas.
I will check that book, it is good to know who where the pre-Darwinists thinkers. Thank you for your comment!
Blessed Catherine Emmerich said (some? All?) giants began with Cain's son Thubalcain. Who knows? I believe it is possible if we believe that Goliath was one, and that particular giant is intrinsic to the story. I appreciate your questioning the prevailing narrative about evolution!
With prudence, we can read and think all the insights that come from Blessed Anne Catherine Emerich's visions. It is always a very challenging and fruitful reading. As about evolutionism, we must question such a paradigm that practically destroys the classical metaphysical doctrine of "forms" (or "ideas" - in Plato's terms) - which implies that it is impossible for a particular creature to transform into another (completely different) type of creature. In Aristotelian-Thomistic terms, the only possible modification is that of "accidents," but not of "substantial forms." Thank you for your comment!
And that probably explains why no one has been able thus far to prove the Darwinian evolution theory.
That is correct. The „missing link” does not exist.