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 ...
Zeus? Brahma? Allah?
Now God is too much of a class act to actually come out and say it, but I get the impression He thinks these folks supposedly speaking for him are a bunch of idiots.
Cardinals aren't known for repeatedly studying through the Bible. They seem to be unfamiliar with the thrust of the Book.
BEWARE, unleashing the Lion of the Tribe of Judah can be harmful to your worldview! (Red letters indicate words spoken by Jesus)
Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses,...
Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
1Cr 15:54-55
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?
Mar 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Isa 45:12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, [even] my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.
Zec 12:1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.
Isa 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:
Isa 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I [am] the LORD; and [there is] none else.
Isa 40:21-22
Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?
Isa 64:4 For since the beginning of the world [men] have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, beside thee, [what] he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 5:1 This [is] the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Deu 4:32 For ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee, since the day that God created man upon the earth,
Gen 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.
New Testament references to Adam.
Luk 3:38 Which was [the son] of Enos, which was [the son] of Seth, which was [the son] of Adam, which was [the son] of God.
1Cr 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul;
Jud 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
1Ti 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
That's how you deal with this:
Michael Behe told this Court that Intelligent Design is not a religious proposition but he told readers of the New York Times that the question Intelligent Design poses is whether "science can make room for religion."What exactly are you denying? Did Behe not tell the court what the plaintiff's summation claimed, that "Intelligent Design is not a religous proposition?" Did he not make the quoted statement to the New York Times, that the question ID poses to science is whether science can make room for religion? Is there no problem with the two statements? If ID is not religious, why is it asking that question? Hello? Get a story.
The Clinton technique: Admit nothing, deny everything and make counter- accusations.
I don't really think God is telling these misbehaving grownups to act as they do, or I'd have more issues with Him than I do. But "faith in things unseeen" doesn't seem to cure insanity.
I read some where and it stuck in my mind.
With religion any thing is possible. With Science only the possible is possible.
Yes. Or distract. Or move the goalposts. Or change the subject. Or brazen on forever.
I hope they were watching how well that works in court, but I doubt it.
Suppressing Christians. Doesn't it give a nice warm glow to your (what passes for a) heart?
Looks like we get to be commies again tonight. You deal with it. Bedtime for Vade-0.
People should really read Young's literal translation of the bible.
I love it; you ordered yourself out of the backroom.
LOL. You might want to go review some of what science thought was possible. Bleeding might be a good one. George Washington might have benefitted from the "possible" there - instead he died prematurely. The "cure" killed him. So, I'd stay away from such generalities and let the facts speak for themselves. Often, what is seeking the approval of science has little to do with science and more to do with power. When grant money begins to run out, it's amazing what new discoveries pop up as well. What causes cancer today will cure it tomorrow and cause the runs in a year. Science is awash in crap. Some of us are trying to point it out while pinching our noses and trying to aim people away from it back to what science is supposed to be...
Oh, you can't see the difference between the two statements. Perhaps you need to take a walk and get some oxygen circulating through that thing between your ears. He's talking about YOU.
You aren't wrankled about ID establishing a religion. It doesn't do that and comes nowhere near it. It simply posits that there is an intelligence behind our matierial existance.
You see that and read "God". Then suddenly, you go nuts.
You're so dead set against "God" that any hint that there might be one is reason for protesting against something - anything. Behe is just saying that you should shut up and allow that the possibility exists that Religion is right and you might be wrong. And he does it dispassionately while you're all out of sorts. His stance is just honesty from objectivity. Yours is rabid protest from bias. You can't allow yourself to imagine that a God could exist. Behe doesn't have a problem with it. As a result, he's not ruling out the impact it might have on his research.
Go take a walk. Breathe deeply.
So you disavow modern science? What, do you live in a cave? Who gave you fire? It was a Homo erectus scientist who gave you fire! Who gave you medicine? And automobiles? And computers?
What you are saying, is you want to destroy the scientific method, but still live off of its findings.
Better study up on making arrowheads.
Thats the best, most succinct summation of the flaws of ID I've seen today. Good job.
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.