Ryan Grant Interview w/ Hugh Owen of the Kolbe Center - Creation vs Evolution

[@macatcas]

About the headship of the husband, it is also key to Christological understanding of the mystical marriage of Christ and Church. How foolish to throw out central, unchanging truth/tenets of the Faith to please the changing tastes, prejudices and mores of contemporary culture.

[@seanpetersen9326]

Hugh Owen helped me through a dark time. Great guy. He has a love of God I like to think. Prayers to you and Mr. Grant!

[@chrismichael8292]

More Ryan Grant and more Ripperger! Please! Amazing inspiring stuff! God bless you!

[@shmauer9713]

I love everything by the Kolbe Center!

[@misbehavens]

Excellent interview. My mind is being blown right now. Never had I seriously considered this position until listening to this conversation. I’m going to have to do some more research!

[@lukebrasting5108]

If you're wanting to do more research, check out a book called Realist Guide to Religion and Science by Fr. Paul Robinson of the SSPX. It won several awards last year and stirred up some controvrsey among hard-line Catholic traditionalists.

[@misbehavens]

Luke Brasting Thanks for the recommendation. I’ll check it out.

[@kevinmark6180]

@@lukebrasting5108 Please check out the rebuttals to Fr. Robinson on the Kolbe website. Also, Robert Sungenis has a book dedicates to rebutting the book by Fr. Robinson.

[@seanpetersen9326]

How has your research come along?

[@janeoizasunday9989]

Thank you for this explosive and comprehensive interview and inputs. I must say, it has helped me to have a deeper knowledge and understanding of the scriptural accounts of creation and the existence of God almighty. My faith connection to my Creator is deeply enhanced. I recommend that this should form part of our Catholic Faith formation in our parishes and formation houses.

[@neilanadams5173]

All priests, bishops and seminarians should listen.

[@jw7368]

Delawanna including some of the most popular and praised, (even among “conservatives”) like Bishop Barron

[@carledwardvincent7131]

Priests, bishops and seminarians have been trained to reject the teaching of the Catholic Church. Extremely few realize they've been taught the cogitations of heretics.

[@AveChristusRex]

PROVINCIAL Council of Cologne (1860) (Tit. IV, c. 14): "Our first parents were formed *immediately* by God. Therefore we declare that the opinion of those who do not fear to assert that this human being, man as regards to his body, emerged finally from the spontaneous continuous change of imperfect nature to the more perfect, *is clearly opposed to Sacred Scripture and to the Faith*."

[@yasharenner6681]

What an incredible witness to the beauty of the Catholic Faith. God bless this man!

[@soroushfetkovich5084]

Mr. Owen proves without a doubt that his intentions for his researches were all just and his arguments are right on... his explanation is fantastic!

[@brennus9151]

God bless you, Hugh Owen!!

[@mattvalentine7094]

This man is a Saint.

[@michaelconikerteam-qe9uo]

Wow! Thank you for such clear and consistent sacred Divinely authoritive teaching in. God is Spirit, which is the core, source and complete breath of all human existence.

[@thinkandrepent3175]

I thank God that he led me to this servant Of Jesus Christ. ❤ My Faith has reemerged in a way I had despaired would ever happen.🙏

[@stevedoetsch]

Evolution is bad science. I sat down to study it years ago and spent two years reading all the books I could, both for and against it. The counter arguments seemed credible, but the hardest thing for me to get past was, if evolution were wrong, why did so many smart people and scientists believe it? Eventually, I realized that as a work of science evolution was almost useless because it made no predictions, and as a theory, it was not falsifiable, but as a mythology, it was a wonderful creation myth that could "explain" the world without the need for God. That's when it became clear to me that evolution was believed not because of it's scientific merits, but because it provided a way for people to remove God from their lives. That's why evolutionists are so hateful to people who disagree with them. You are touching a scar, a wound, in their psyches that they were able to cover up with the mythology, and to them, criticizing the theory is a direct attack on themselves, because it brings back the knowledge, the awareness (that's what your psyche is, an awareness), of the thing they were trying to deny - that they have a responsibility to their maker and they will be held morally accountable for their actions. Good Pro-evolution Book Darnwin's Dangerous Idea by Daniel C Dennet - this book is good because while most evolutionists are dishonest on this point, Dennett admits that if you accept the premise of biological evolution, you must admit that the same principle that "creates" design in biological life must also be at work in everything else in the universe. Hence, Darwin's idea is "dangerous" in the sense that, if it is true, and Dennet believe it is, that evolution governs not only life, but everything. Basically, if you're going to be intellectually honest, you can't be Catholic and an evolutionist, because they are mutually exclusive ideas. Good Books Against Evolution Icons of Evolution Book by Jonathan Wells - this book is good because it shows the long series of hoaxes in the history of evolutionary science which, even though they have been admitted by scientists, the hoaxes have not been made well known to the public. Each generation is raised on a hoax, and when that hoax is proven false 20 to 40 years later, the damage has already been done, and a new hoax is put in place. Basically, the author shows that even scientists themselves know how weak the evidence for evolution really is because so many of them have created false evidence for it.

[@macatcas]

Duke Thank you. An excellent comment that contributes to this important discussion.

[@arthurjeremypearson]

__"if evolution were wrong, why did so many smart people and scientists believe it?"__ "Living with people and getting a wife and kids" is more appealing than "being a stuck up stickler for the truth." That's why. "Stuck up sticklers for the truth" is appealing to only certain people, and those people are less likely to want to have kids. "The truth" is an evolutionary dead end. If you care more for the truth, you have fewer kids. The truth is being bred out of humanity. __"Basically, the author shows that even scientists themselves know how weak the evidence for evolution really is because so many of them have created false evidence to support it."__ That's a serious accusation. It's something that could be DEMONSTRATED if it were true, and if it could be DEMONSTRATED then "evolution" would be discarded by those whose main goal is "the truth" not "living with people." That's a fact.

[@mantexas9033]

Duke mutations damage and degrade genetic material. How can a set of more damaged genetic data be more advanced and more evolved than the previous set which has less damage. Makes no sense.

[@bigbearn1383]

The enlightenment movement was anti Christian and much money was used to brainwash the universities, media, schools, and politics . The intellectuals bought into it and only evolutionist get the scientific positions and they interpret their hypotheses with the evolution lens The bible talks about how at the end men will believe in fables And evolution is a fable A paradigm shift is coming. Get ready for the red pill.

[@evangallion1661]

Duke is a very Chad name.

[@mr.e.kelleher4659]

Wonderful explanation of harmonizing nature and the Bible and starting to take science, or natural philosophy, back from the Moderns and Scientists (capital letters), who I am beginning to see in the same vein as other Movements and Heresies (Communism, Protestantism, Arianism) and extricating myself from this thinking.

[@thistledownz.2982]

I've been waiting for this.

[@rociomallet]

Yes!!! Finally someone said it!. Evolution is not bad science, evolution is not science at all! Evolution is philosophy. As this man said: "the line has to be drawn between science and theology". Science cannot study the origin of the universe and either the origin of man because that origin is not natural. We cannot use the natural processes running the universe to explain the origin of the universe, because in the origin, the universe was not there, so nothing natural existed in the origin!, Necessarily whatever caused the universe to exist has to be Non-natural.

[@BronxCat]

God Bless you Ryan

[@Braingrandchild]

Hugh Owen, what a good man.

[@donmeccia4137]

Much of western civ could be restored if the Church came to its senses and taught this NON evolutionary story again. That, and the Consecration of Russia would do it. As is, we are no where close and so we continue to pray for the Kolbe Center's work to grow and unfold everywhere its needed. May God Bless them!!!!

[@hobbywright8495]

Evolution is humanity’s biggest blunder.

[@leejennifercorlewayres9193]

It's no blunder. 🇮🇱 communists passed it off to deceive.

[@jw7368]

The last 15 mins of this are powerful

[@jboysmith76com]

This video is so helpful. God bless.

[@michaelspeyrer6068]

It makes me sad that so many of my fellow Catholics are so completely ignorant of both sacred scripture and modern science and theory. And when the Church clarifies teaching to do that as St. Thomas showed, that if there is a real conflict either our science is wrong or our interpretation of scripture is incomplete, people within the Church reject what Holy Mother Church herself teaches because it challenges their own personal flawed interpretations.

[@mariafroelich5753]

Fascinating!

[@TyranyFighterPatriot]

Long live Creation!!!

[@thistledownz.2982]

This may be the ace in the hole, or reserved Grace of some sort that Our Lord will use to draw men to himself and unite the church.

[@allisgrace1313]

I had that very thought as well.

[@snokehusk223]

I don't know if you covered this in some other video but how do you respond to theory that humans spread from Africa and that haplogroups prove this apparently.

[@mr.e.kelleher4659]

How crazy is it that God can make men and apes so similar genetically and phenotypically, yet so different? I interpret it as a sign that God is showing us He can make animals so close to man physically, yet still they are not equal.

[@knightclan4]

,Uniformitarianism versus catastrophism. More geologists are seeing the evidence for catastrophic flooding as prevalent in the rocks. The question then becomes, how many floods. That question can then lead people to the possibility of scripture being true, and Jesus being our Savior.

[@Nonnobisdomine77]

Any thoughts on the writings of Luisa Piccaretra on creation. Fr. Joseph Iannuzzi says that Jesus told Luisa that he created creation in epics not literal human days.

[@kevinmark6180]

Interestingly, Hugh Owen is somewhat of an expert on Luisa (he had written at least one book on her) and he argues Luisa's words on creation strongly support a literal six day creation.

[@bigbearn1383]

Amen. The Pope should listen to this.

[@prayershelp5715]

Amazing that some Priest and certain Leaders of the Catholic Church has more faith, trust and focus than the current questionable "POPE" .

[@knightclan4]

Uniformitarianism versus catastrophism is what schools should be teaching. If you’re honest with yourself, try to prove catastrophism wrong before even discussing evolution. Unwitnessed time is the only foothold evolution can use as its ace card.

[@crystald3346]

Heisenberg, even, condemned Descartes for his division of the material from God.

[@jacobitewiseman3696]

Examples of mutations of people example 1. Cynocephaly have dog heads and could make there bodies hard against spears. Downside they could not speak. Example 2. A blind man using echo location is a goft to him. It obviouse that he can't see. Mutations are more of a exchange than a upgrade.

[@hnnogo6402]

Adam had both soul persuasions of male and female, and then God separated them by Eve coming out of Adam. Thats why Jesus had to be God seed + human seed made from immaculate protozoa of Mary after she was conceived by her parents.

[@knightclan4]

If you’re worldview is based on God having authority, you’re not going to put your faith in man’s ever changing scientific alternatives to God’s history in scripture.

[@uiPublic]

Original sin wasn't to be gods, but take advice of devil's for it as one them.. Else Original sin is rooted in the act of disobeying/rebelling against God, makes sense the Devil would advise for it.

[@uiPublic]

Compare the 'Sinless' remarks of Christ or his co-crucified on right, as best Florist's perfume for my funeral rather with any other like us would make lest disappoint Eden's once again...

[@stevenbauer6090]

Bryant was a adult error and a fine Basketball player

[@39knights]

As far as I understand the Popes have said we must accept there was a real Adam and a real Eve; and that God is the original cause for all creation. The rest the Church has not made a definitive statement on. I see and understand all that Hugh said here (and have heard it from Kent Hovind, Ian Juby, etc.) and it does make sense. But there are other things I didn't hear him speak about. Like there are certain errors in our DNA code that can be found in two other family of primates (chimps and orangutans). Just as we can use chance and probability calculations to show how impossible it is for DNA code to evolve naturally; it also shows it is impossible for the same DNA errors to appear in a complex code in three different groups in the exact same place. The only sensible and rational conclusion is it must have been inherited from an ancestor; and because it is 3 different groups then from a common ancestor. This is relatively new information so I waiting to see a reasonable response before jumping on the evolution bandwagon too.

[@39knights]

I agree with you. That is why I am awaiting a proper response. In this era of relativism in everything I am holding to the fundamentals; which in this case is God did create everything (the how is still debatable); and there was a real human Adam and Eve. In the Bible Genesis says that God 'formed man from the earth'; and the Hebrew that is used conveys a hands on approach 'as if God took the material in His hands and molded it'; rather than speaking it as the other things in creation. If you hang your hat on your interpretation of the DNA not being errors and it turns out to be that they are; then your faith will be in a crisis and that is a dangerous place to be. Remember that God works through the good Nature He created and not against it (according to St. Thomas 'grace builds on nature'). At some point most if not everything may have a natural explanation.

[@39knights]

I'm not looking to be combative on the issue; but you find such a dogmatic instant creation 6000 years ago approach to Genesis mainly amongst fundamentalist protestants. All I am saying is that beyond the belief God is the instigator of the material universe and that there was an actual Adam and Eve; then a Catholic in good standing can continue to study and investigate how this creation came to be through valid investigative methods. As for Jesus making scientific points ...... To take those passages of scripture and determine that Jesus was talking of creation 4000 years before His time is really stretching it. Jesus is using scripture to make a point about marriage and not taking a scientific stance on the origins of the Universe 4000 years earlier. In another passage in scripture Jesus says that the mustard seed is the smallest of seeds; yet in reality it isn't. However we don't get bent out of shape saying Jesus made an error; we simply realize the context of what he was saying and the fact he was using the established ideas and understanding of the time to make a theological point. If you were to give the exact same scientific weight to His comment on the mustard seed and on the date and instantaneous nature of creation; then Jesus would be found in error about one of them. I for one still hold that what we see in nature, history, and the so-called fossil record is a once established set of diverse species which are now de-evolving across the board; with no new information being created but a steady loss of information. But there also seems to be a reasonable interpretation which shows a guided formation of the different life-forms to a very high point until a catastrophic event (The Fall maybe 6000 years or so ago) put a stop to it and it has been deteriorating ever since. I can't wait to find out the answer to these questions when we find our rest in Heaven and God reveals all to us.

[@jw7368]

39knights the Holy Spirit has told us in Scripture. Do you not believe in the Great Flood? The evidence for that is absolutely overwhelming. In fact the evidence tells us that it happened EXACTLY as explained in Genesis. Research: hydroplate theory. It's time to stop putting your trust in man..particularly modern man..the ideas that have sprung up over the last ~500 years... the period of church history known as the period of Apostasy. The devil has been raging and going wild with his deceptions. Look at America.. do you think a country that has been killing its own babies for 45 years, has totally legalized gay marriage in all states, brainwashes everyone (starting with children) into gay and transgender propaganda, starts wars all across the world...do you think that country would be teaching people the truth?? Expand that to the whole modern world. Research geocentrism and hydroplate theory. Evolution is just one of many deceptions of Satan. Trust the Holy Spirit when he speaks straightforwardly in Scripture

[@39knights]

+J Money Actually I have seen just about everything Walt Brown (hydroplate theory), Kent Hovind, Ian Juby, Kolbe Center (young-earth) and Malcom Dowden, Robert Sungensis (geocentrism) has to offer. Not much there I couldn't talk at length about (and that is in favor of them). My biggest point here has been that the Church itself has not spoken definitively on the subject which means it is still letting us play nice in the sand about this until it finds it has to step in.

[@JohnBoyX570]

39knights - Can you link me to the data on this DNA code errors study ? I did find something put out by ICR that seesm to touch on what you're getting at.. icr.org/article/6037/372

[@jacobitewiseman3696]

1:21:57 you should say supposed prehistoric animals not just dinosaurs but otherwise good point. Also 2 heads are a birth defect.

[@williammcenaney1331]

What does Mr. Owen mean by "molecules to man evolution?" I don't know of. any biologist who believes that a molecule can become a living creature. Evolutionary biology is a science. Origin of life research is another scientific field. In fact, biological evolution assumes that there already are living creatures.

[@robert112uk]

Dear brother, everything you say about evolution is correct. The origin of it is satanic. However you are still somewhat blind because you call JPII a saint. I tell you it is impossible for a true Catholic Saint to teach universal salvation as JPII did, or kiss the filthy koran as JPII did, and most especially it is impossible for a Saint to perform and approve of that Abominable service at Assisi, where our very Lord was deposed and that filthy statue of the buddha was placed on top of the tabernacle, and idolatry and even voodoo was practised within our Holy Temples which desecrated them. All this was done in the name of Ecumenism, which is satanic to the core. The Truth which is unchangeable FOREVER, is that there is NO salvation outside of the Holy Roman Catholic Church! It is IMPOSSIBLE for a Saint or True Pope to teach otherwise!

[@williammcenaney6803]

This conversation troubles me because Mr. Owen seems to ignore the difference between creation in what I would call "the metaphysical sense" and creation that makes something begin to exist. The Catholic Encyclopedia says that creation is not a change. To create something, God makes it exist. God creates to make something begin to exist and to sustain something that already exists. Even if the universe has always existed, it still needs God, the creator, to give it existence. www.newadvent.org/cathen/04470a.htm

[@arthurjeremypearson]

Someone explain to me why people prefer LONGER videos like this one?

[@jw7368]

I took a two semester course on evolution. More evidence in this one video than in those two semesters. Only 2.5 hours too

[@ScarlettOHare1]

The Church of Christ IS KATHOLIK. Just not all of us are Roman.

[@artmaven4901]

A comparison of evolution and creationism?! Apples and oranges, right off the bat. Creationism offers an explanation for literally everything--where the planets and stars and seahorses and granites and dandelions came from, plus it offers an explanation even for the origin of intangible phenomena like happiness and souls. It also contains a justification for religion and faith. Creationism is also, as a religious dogma, not subject to questioning, revision, or falsification, those all being technically heretical if not outright blasphemous. Darwin's theory of evolution offers a tentative explanation of ONE observed phenomenon--speciation. That's it. That's all it does. It says nothing about where anything came from. It also says nothing at all about God or religion. It's also by definition as a scientific theory tentative, meaning that it can be falsified. And as a theory, it's subject to all the testing anybody cares to do. I am baffled as to why creationists continually conflate these two kinds of statements. Creationism is about everything, and is based in religious dogma; scientific theories are about one thing at a time and are based on empirical evidence. Creationism is by definition immune to inquiry; scientific theories must be tested. Two different kinds of statements, incompatible in every way: why do creationists keep trying to compare them? I really wonder about that.

[@jw7368]

Art Maven not even the point. There is clearcut evidence that dinosaurs did NOT live 65 million yrs ago, but actually lived at the same time as humans, a comparably short time ago. Are you going to suggest that we today are not taught and brainwashed with the supposed fact that humans evolved from apes, and that all life on earth shares a common ancestor? When in reality this goes against tons and tons of evidence and is itself probably the wildest conspiracy theory of all time? This isn't even about Darwin..it's about what we are being taught today, and have been taught for decades. Btw if you are a heliocentrist..there's also clearcut evidence to counter that theory..same with Big Bang.. this is about what people are MADE to believe in today's world, and how it has an effect on souls. This video only scratches the surface as to how massively we've been brainwashed. Your comment is a skirting of the very point

[@artmaven4901]

You said :"There is clearcut evidence that dinosaurs did NOT live 65 million yrs ago, but actually lived at the same time as humans, a comparably (sic) short time ago." Please provide a few links to published peer-reviewed scientific papers from reputable journals to support this claim. Please include author name(s) and pub date. Looking forward to it. You said: "Are you going to suggest that we today are not taught and brainwashed with the supposed fact that humans evolved from apes, and that all life on earth shares a common ancestor?" "Teaching" and "brainwashing" are two different things, with different implications. Can you please specify what you mean, and provide some examples? Note: you may be thinking of Darwin's theory when you said, "...humans evolved from apes..." but that's not what Darwin theorized, and not what the evidence tends to show. Rather, Darwin thought that humans and apes shared a common ancestor. Today, we classify both humans and apes as hominids, members of the Hominidae family. You said: "Your comment is a skirting of the very point". I may not have expressed myself very well. I have been working on that statement for some time, because creationists almost never see what I'm trying to express, and tend instead to read all kinds of outlandish things into it. I'll try again--here's a very short version: Religion and science are two entirely different and incompatible systems. It's therefore impossible and a waste of time to try to reconcile their competing claims. Hopefully that's a bit clearer.

[@artmaven4901]

You said :"There is clearcut evidence that dinosaurs did NOT live 65 million yrs ago, but actually lived at the same time as humans, a comparably (sic) short time ago." Please provide a few links to published peer-reviewed scientific papers from reputable journals to support this claim. Please include author name(s) and pub date. Looking forward to it. You said: "Are you going to suggest that we today are not taught and brainwashed with the supposed fact that humans evolved from apes, and that all life on earth shares a common ancestor?" "Teaching" and "brainwashing" are two different things, with different implications. Can you please specify what you mean, and provide some examples? Note: you may be thinking of Darwin's theory when you said, "...humans evolved from apes..." but that's not what Darwin theorized, and not what the evidence tends to show. Rather, Darwin thought that humans and apes shared a common ancestor. Today, we classify both humans and apes as hominids, members of the Hominidae family. You said: "Your comment is a skirting of the very point". I may not have expressed myself very well. I have been working on that statement for some time, because creationists almost never see what I'm trying to express, and tend instead to read all kinds of outlandish things into it. I'll try again--here's a very short version: Religion and science are two entirely different and incompatible systems. It's therefore impossible and a waste of time to try to reconcile their competing claims. Hopefully that's a bit clearer.