Posted on 11/07/2005 12:05:04 PM PST by 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.
Cardinal Paul Poupard, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, said the Genesis description of how God created the universe and Darwin's theory of evolution were "perfectly compatible" if the Bible were read correctly. His statement was a clear attack on creationist campaigners in the US, who see evolution and the Genesis account as mutually exclusive.
"The fundamentalists want to give a scientific meaning to words that had no scientific aim," he said at a Vatican press conference. He said the real message in Genesis was that "the universe didn't make itself and had a creator".
This idea was part of theology, Cardinal Poupard emphasised, while the precise details of how creation and the development of the species came about belonged to a different realm - science. Cardinal Poupard said that it was important for Catholic believers to know how science saw things so as to "understand things better".
His statements were interpreted in Italy as a rejection of the "intelligent design" view, which says the universe is so complex that some higher being must have designed every detail.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
Hmmm, perhaps the "image" being referred to is the spiritual image, not a physical flesh-and-bones image...
If you look at the worldful of religions, there can at most be one which isn't the result of man reverse explaining like this. C. S. Lewis put it nicely when he says that the answer of history to the query "well, what other kind of God would you believe in, if you believed in one at all" is "almost any other kind."
"It's not all herds of cats. Churches merge as well as split. There never was a promise that, before the end, everyone (or even anyone) would get the bible totally figured out. Some of it, like the Revelation, is like the promos for a movie that hasn't been released to the theaters. The great evangelical call is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as the ticket in; God will work out the other details later. There is wide inter-church recognition of this even as there is disagreement on details."
To a certain extent, you are correct. But, then, it gets more complicated. When you've listened to as many people as I have offering interpretations of scripture, you begin to understand that there is little commonality. Yes, Christianity starts with "Jesus Saves," but that's about the limit of commonality. Everything after that starts getting screwy.
Perhaps but you might have to be a linguist to know that the translation you quote is not necessarily the proper one. For instance, if you read the Hebrew words as order and disorder rather than as morning and evening then "one literal day" is not really an issue. The most important part of Genesis is Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning, God created heaven and earth." That says it all right there. Indeed, science has affirmed that there was a creation event, something the non believers held fast against until the evidence became pretty solid. Albert Einstein was a hold out despite the fact that his field equations pointed directly to that fact.
If Chapter one of book one is not true, then none of it is true.
Why set yourself up to have a crisis of faith. God created the Universe. How He did it is not really very important. But my God, and I am a Catholic, is not a deistic god, he after all sent us His only Son for our salvation.
The scientists could create life from meatballs in the lab tomorrow and it wouldn't affect my faith a wit. They could genetically engineer eukaryotes into chimpanzees in the lab and it wouldn't touch my faith.
We can not know God's plan because we are not God. But we can have faith that God's plan is the plan.
"Hey Mineral...I give up....what's your gig? You a Christian or an Athiest?"
How would "irreducibly complex" features arise? If God was not tinkering with His creation, then the features would arise naturally and would not be IC.
Bureaucratic records, mostly. The Egyptians had a fondness for record-keeping.
Bully for you.
Are you going to even bother to try and address how this papyrus could have survived a year-long submersion?
Did they mention that a bunch of slaves once kicked their sorry @$$es and drowned them in the Red Sea?
No, which suggests that it most likely didn't happen. Like I said, the Egyptians were prolific record-keepers. As there is no other evidence that this Bible story is true, it's logical to conclude that it didn't happen.
Torah Scrolls are organic and eventually decay, at which point they have to be buried in a Jewish cemetery, next to the grave of a pious sage. But the original Torah Scroll exists in every kosher Torah Scroll in existence, which is written according to the strictest set of laws in existence to assure that each and every one is an exact duplicate of the original dictated by HaShem to Moses.
Even if such scrolls are 100% complete and accurate copies of the original such scroll, that is not evidence that the events described in such scrolls actually happened.
Besides, if the original Scroll still existed wouldn't you simply point out that it was written after the fact and is therefore unreliable?
Sure. Plus, there is no outside evidence for the claims in such scroll, so that also goes against its accuracy.
Interesting that nothing in the Bible can be accepted without outside corroboration while things written by ancient pagans are accepted on faith.
You seem to be missing, or ignoring my point. Even if the contents of the 5000+ year-old papyrus cannot be independently verified, the mere existence of such ancient papyrus writings is evidence against a global flood.
Unless, of course, you can explain to me how a fragile substance like papyrus could survive a year-long submersion?
Hey I thought the world when first created was without day and night?
Okay so you have now defined a day in terms of an evening and a morning. How long is an evening and how long is a morning? Did a evening and morning take exactly the same amount of time 20 million years ago as it does today? From where are you measuring this day? On Earth or at the Center of creation or outside of time? Ever hear of Einstein and relativity? Is God's time the same as ours? Some theologians and physicists believe that everything that was ever created or will be created already exists and the reason that God knows the future is because God is outside of time and space.
I continue to ask if Catholicism's Darwinist allies are willing to grant that this happened, but I realize I'm wasting my time.
Your "gxd" is obviously not HaShem, Who is the furthest thing from an occasional whistle-blower.
at the first self righteous church of pascagoula? (mississippi squirrel revival)
What was this commandment all about then?
Ex 20:8 -
"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Ex 20:11 -
" For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.
Ex 31:17 -
It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.' "
Heb 4:4 -
For He has spoken in a certain place of the seventh day in this way: "And God rested on the seventh day from all His works";
Besides, MM, I have never heard you say you believe any of the Bible. So isn't your motive more about discrediting the entire book?
Frequently not "always"
"And why will Scientology sell it, one piece at a time?
"
Uh...because someone's willing to pay?
The ordinary technical definition of a miracle is something that violates natural law. God newly creates each human soul, but this is a basic part of the everyday process of life. It happens many thousands of times every day.
The Bible suggests that the births of Isaac and of John the Baptist were miraculous in a stricter sense, because in both cases their parents were far beyond the age when they could naturally conceive a child. Abraham and Sarah were said to be a hundred years old and tell the Three Young Men that they have ceased to have sexual relations when they are told that they will have a child within the year. The story of John the Baptist echoes that earlier miracle and divine promise. That sort of thing doesn't happen every day.
You can say more loosely that each human conception is miraculous, because God takes an active part in forming the new soul. Or you can go further and point out that the universe would cease to exist if God did not continue to sustain it. But that's not the way the term is ordinarily used in its strict sense.
I think we have a winner!
Where had that papyrus been? Many documents were sealed in jars; if inverted (lid down) and the body of the jar did not leak, that would keep water out.
Ex 20:11 -
For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
"If you look at the worldful of religions, there can at most be one which isn't the result of man reverse explaining like this. C. S. Lewis put it nicely when he says that the answer of history to the query "well, what other kind of God would you believe in, if you believed in one at all" is "almost any other kind.""
Well, according to the post just before yours (165 I believe) you are incorrect regarding the numbers of catholics. Be that as it may, it is also true that there are a number of catholics who are not Christians...so if the claim is that the vatican represents a majority of Christians including nominal ones, that doesn't even appear to be accurate. (and to clarify before you get your undies in a bundle, there are quite a few nominal Christians in protestant denominations as well.
No matter where one might fall in that debate it is a fact that the Vatican does not speak for Christians...just catholics. I know of no non-catholics that place any value in what the vatican proclaims, and very many would would take issue with the vast majority of what comes from that source.
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.