Posted on 10/28/2014 3:19:32 PM PDT by Faith Presses On
In an exciting declaration, Pope Francis I stated that God should not seen as a “magician with a magic wand,” while unveiling a statue of his predecessor Pope Benedict XVI at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. Pope Francis also stated that evolution and the Big Bang theory are both true and not incompatible with the church’s views on the origins of the universe and life.
“When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,” Francis said, according to the Independent. Francis continued by stating that God “created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
You’re as stupid as the left wing journalist. I never said it was okey dokey to do anything to Galileo. I simply said he was not ex-communicated. And Copernicus published his heliocentric theory a half century before Galileo came on the picture without incident. The idea that the Catholic Church is anti science is bs spouted by left wing morons and Bipolar idiots. God bless you Bob, you need it.
Amen.
>>That simply isn’t true. If you think you can prove it, have at it {You can’t).<<
Mathew 16:18 “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
The RCC traces its lineage, unbroken, to Jesus’ words.
>>Most Christians speak out against catholicism because it’s their duty to speak out against cults and teachings that are contrary to God’s word. <<
IOW, the misunderstanding of the many who prefer buffet style Christianity does not agree with the more severe and true teachings of the RCC.
You are welcome to interpret the teachings of Christ as it fits your lifestyle.
You are NOT welcome to decry those who actually believe the scriptures as do the RCC.
Unbelievable.
You're 100% right.
Thomas Henry Huxley quite logically and consistently recognized in Darwinism a disproof of miracles--of all miracles--saying that everyone who understood it would celebrate its driving out of all thought of miracles from the world, "never to return." And yet "theistic evolutionists" accept every miracle in their bible and their tradition . . . but insist that the very act of creation, the one thing that by definition cannot be subject to natural physical laws (because there was no such thing as natural physical laws prior to it), is uniquely singled out for scorn in the name of "science." Huxley would be so disappointed in them.
Isn't it G-d "the magician" who is, by the very nature of things, responsible for every miracle? Do you hear any theistic evolutionists laughing to scorn any particular post-creation miracle? No you do not. They all accept "G-d the magician" when it comes to every other miracle or supernatural or preternatural act in history. But when it comes to the act of omnipotence that, out of absolute nothingness, brought into existence all created reality (along with its laws) suddenly "G-d the magician" isn't so cool. Suddenly "G-d the magician" is silly, a lazy man's way of avoiding the hard work of answering difficult questions.
We never hear these "theistic evolutionists" holding forth on the number of ways that, by purely natural means, the "virgin birth" could have been accomplished (artificial insemination, whatever). This is sighingly placed in the category of "purely miraculous--do not inquire." But miraculously creating the universe from nothing exactly as described by Genesis simply because that's the way He chose to do it? This is unthinkable! G-d's gift of human reason (which is dumb in the face of other miracles) simply will not be insulted by such mumbo-jumbo.
How does this sound . . . the "virgin birth" was brought about by another woman giving birth and Mary adopting. There now. Does it really have to be miraculous if the result is the same? After all, the "what happened" is so much more important than the "how it happened," isn't it, hmmmmm??? After all, G-d isn't a "magician!" Well, except for the whole "hocus-pocus" thing.
The utter inconsistency and blatant hypocrisy of the whole thing makes my anger burn white hot. And what is the reason for it all? Just so they won't be confused with those awful Protestants. Why, the Eastern Orthodox are so determined to not be confused with Protestants that now they're claiming that the bible isn't a chrstian holy book at all, and that the idea that it is is an alien idea imported from islam!
If the confrontation with islam caused some distortion in the churches' teachings, it seems so did the confrontation with Protestantism.
>>sorry, he’s wrong on evolution. just is.<<
Nicely reasoned argument there. And it has the added bonus of working on ANY argumentation.
Who needs logic when you have assertion as a tool?
should we add your personal religious experience to the myriad of protestant denominations that already exist???
I’m perfectly welcome to. I’d point out the irony, that what the RC church teaches goes directly against scripture, but I don’t have the energy tonight.
I pray all will see the truth.
isn't there a phrase somewhare that says to God a day is like a thousand years....or something along that line??
Catholics know all that stuff....they wrote it down and saved it through the ages so that you would have a bible to read...say "Thanks, Catholics"!!!
2 Peter 3:7-9New International Version (NIV)
7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
The passage is referring to the Lord’s patience regarding the end times. It is not referring to the time it takes for literal events to occur.
Sure, why not? I have no objection. Don’t have a name for it other than KJV. Would that work?
Prove it.
You really need to read and understand the Book of Revelation especially the first three chapters. Once done you will realize how silly your theory is.
I'll save my Thanks to God. After all it is His Book not the Catholics. So He used Catholics to compile His Book that His followers wrote (none of them Catholic by the way). Big deal. He used a donkey to clue Balaam in on some thoughts as well( Num. 22:28). So take a number.
sure it is...time, if there is noone there, is a moot point. God created everything but to suggest that He did it in our concept of a day is nonsense
Sure they were Catholics....His followers became known as Catholics during the first cantury The fact that they were not called Catholic during the time of Christ's life is irrelevant....that very group became known as Catholic.
No, His followers were called Christians. But the apostasy did start early. Yes, the mixing of pagan rites and Christian practices did indeed start early. None of the Apostles called themselves Catholic, wore a crucifix or dressed themselves in royal robes. There are many more differences in what Jesus and the Apostles did and what is practiced now.
Says you. Gods Book was written for us. We were meant to understand it. Genesis is written painstakingly clear to overcome the objections you give. See 2 Thess. 2:11
The word ‘days” is teh same word throughtout old testament and means a 24 hour peroid.. People believe in the virgin birth, Christ Death and resurectin but can’t believe that God created the earth in 7 days. Amazing.
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.