Skip to comments.
Evolution in the bible, says Vatican
News.com ^
| 11/7/05
| Mikey_1962
Posted on 11/07/2005 12:05:04 PM PST by Mikey_1962
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 841 next last
To: Mikey_1962
"THE Vatican has issued a stout defence of Charles Darwin, voicing strong criticism of Christian fundamentalists who reject his theory of evolution and interpret the biblical account of creation literally. " Well finally that argument is settled.
God has spoken.
To: Zionist Conspirator
You need to brush up on your "20 Questions" skills.
Here, go learn something from http://www.20Q.com
Try Old Earth Creationist, Evangelical.
102
posted on
11/07/2005 1:01:00 PM PST
by
The Red Zone
(Florida, the sun-shame state, and Illinois the chicken injun.)
To: BuglerTex
How is it that all the civilizations around the world learned to write at about the same time, only a few generations ago.Well, lessee, a "generation" is usually considered to be 33 years. So you're saying written language appeared around 1906? Well, to be fair, many in developed societies delay child birth considerably in comparison to historical norms. So let's say a generation is 54 years. This moves the origin of writing back to 1843, or 1735 if you want to say that as many as 5 generations is still only "a few". That still leaves us a little short, but is the best I can do.
103
posted on
11/07/2005 1:01:01 PM PST
by
Stultis
To: Rokke
Life is a result of a purely natural force? In terms of how a baby is born? Absolutely. There is nothing supernatural about the process.
104
posted on
11/07/2005 1:01:02 PM PST
by
Palisades
(Cthulhu in 2008! Why settle for the lesser evil?)
To: Grig
Is it really possible to fit a camel through the eye of a needle? Is referring to someone other than God as your "father" really an unforgiveable sin which dooms one to eternal perdition?
No sane person believes that the entire Bible is devoid of metaphor. Sane people disagree on which passages should be taken literally and which should be regarded as metaphorical.
To: Palisades
"There is nothing supernatural about the process."
Then I guess you don't believe God plays any role. On that, we will have to agree to disagree.
106
posted on
11/07/2005 1:02:19 PM PST
by
Rokke
To: Junior
The intelligent design being advocated today hints that God is always tinkering with organisms I'd quibble, saying "frequently" (more so in the 'evolution' of the higher organisms).
107
posted on
11/07/2005 1:02:28 PM PST
by
The Red Zone
(Florida, the sun-shame state, and Illinois the chicken injun.)
To: soltice
Hey, it was six literal 24-hour days, it says so right there in Genesis. Even though mankind has divided the day into 24 hour increments...and mankind is the only species to mark the passsage of time in such a manner...God conformed Himself to OUR temporal demarcation, not vice versa!
108
posted on
11/07/2005 1:02:31 PM PST
by
jcb8199
To: FeeinTennessee
Leaving aside the question of whether parts of a marvelously designed system can or cannot behave rather as the Darwinists propose living organism in their environment do, leading to wonders of the sort we observe, I would point out that your understanding of Big Bang cosmology is sorely wanting.
The most refined version of Big Bang cosmology, Hawkings' 'Null Initial Condition' cosmology, is a mathematical model of a universe created ex nihilo: there isn't even a 'before' before the beginning. Just as there shouldn't be, since time itself is a creation, along with space. The 'explosion' isn't an explosion, but an expansion of space from no volume to the universe we see.
I always find it amusing when atheists, who cannot conceive of causation in the philosophical sense as being anything other than physical causation, proclaim that the Null Initial Condition cosmology 'removes the need for a first cause'. They are then left with no answer to Hawkings' own question, "What is it breaths fire into the equations to make there be something for them to describe?"
Theists, of course, have a simple and satisfying answer to that question.
109
posted on
11/07/2005 1:02:33 PM PST
by
The_Reader_David
(And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
To: Sols
evolution, abiogenesis, and the Big Bang are mutually exclusive concepts.
In what way are these concepts mutually exclusive?
110
posted on
11/07/2005 1:02:53 PM PST
by
gitmo
(Thanks, Mel. I needed that.)
To: zeeba neighba
Did the simian ancestors have souls?Then you are maintaining that "Adam" actually introduced physical (and not just "spiritual") death to all humanity?
I was unaware that there was no contradiction between this and Darwinian evolution. How many scientists believe in the human soul, or that Australopithecus was originally immortal?
You learn something new every day!
111
posted on
11/07/2005 1:02:59 PM PST
by
Zionist Conspirator
(Vehe'emin BeHaShem, vayachsheveha lo tzedaqah.)
Comment #112 Removed by Moderator
To: PatrickHenry
To: zeeba neighba
what's wrong with crocs? :)
To: Mikey_1962
115
posted on
11/07/2005 1:04:01 PM PST
by
VOA
To: HHKrepublican_2
I agree totally...They are both compatable...the REAL theory...not the ones the Atheist fundamentalists (lol) portray spoken like a true catholic.
To: Zionist Conspirator
I hate to say it, but you're the hood ornament of some rabbi.
117
posted on
11/07/2005 1:04:32 PM PST
by
The Red Zone
(Florida, the sun-shame state, and Illinois the chicken injun.)
To: Ted Kennedys Neck Brace
There was nothing "mythical" about the flood or the covenant made by God afterward.My apologies for assuming you were Roman Catholic.
118
posted on
11/07/2005 1:04:56 PM PST
by
Zionist Conspirator
(Vehe'emin BeHaShem, vayachsheveha lo tzedaqah.)
To: Nightshift
119
posted on
11/07/2005 1:05:30 PM PST
by
tutstar
(OurFlorida.true.ws)
To: Rokke
Yes. But those are not miracles in the strict sense of the word. Ordinarily, the sun rises at exactly the time scientists predict.
For a believer, beauty is one of the signs of the presence of God as Creator of the universe, but it does not violate natural law.
120
posted on
11/07/2005 1:06:58 PM PST
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 841 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson