Funky Tut...
Posted on 10/27/2014 1:47:14 PM PDT by RaceBannon
The Big Bang “doesn’t contradict the intervention of a divine Creator, but demands it,” Pope Francis said Monday morning, because the beginning of the world “is not the work of chaos.” The Pope was addressing the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, gathered in the Vatican to discuss “Evolving Concepts of Nature.” God is not some sort of wizard, said Francis, but rather “the Creator who brought all things into being.” The origin of the world derives directly “from a supreme Principle of creative love,” he added. “Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
So, true or false, evangelicals interpret every line of Scripture literally...?
False. Context of scripture determines literal, figurative or allegorical interpretation. Scripture interprets scripture, an understanding that contradicts another passage elsewhere in the Bible is not correct.
No. Considering the Scriptures (rather than the God's Word, Who became Incarnate of Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made Man, and to whom those Scriptures testify) to be not merely the highest authority, but somehow, unlike all other texts, self-interpreting is ignorant. The problem with sola Scriptura is that it isn't what it claims to be, because what it claims to be can't really exist, because texts, even Divinely inspired texts, are not self-interpreting.
When pressed, every "Bible believing" Christian proves that he or she is secretly relying on a hermeneutic tradition to arrive at the "literal" meaning of Scripture. And it is almost always a hermeneutic tradition that is deliberately constructed in opposition to the hermeneutic and doctrinal tradition that existed in the Patriarchate of Rome about half a millenium after their schism from the Holy Orthodox Church.
As an example, I would point to the fact that most folks who aver that the Bible is "literally true" somehow regard "Take, eat, this is my body," to be merely metaphor or symbol, not literally true -- essentially appealing to a tradition that the Latin church's teaching on the nature of the Eucharist is not merely a little defective and in need of correction (We Orthodox have problems with their application of the Aristotelian notions of substance and accident to explaining a Divine Mystery), but is absolutely false and must be absolutely denied. Thin arguments based on stretched interpretations of other passages of Scripture are put forward to defend the claim that Our Lord did not mean what He said when instituting the Eucharist on the night on which He was betrayed, but the fact is that most Biblical literalists are nothing of the sort, since if one is a Biblical literalist, one cannot hold a Zwinglian view of the Eucharist.
Let me clarify....which I believe will address the remainder of your questions. We do not evolve in the sense of Darwin's evolution. When God created man, which means He was the Creator, we were created in the form we have today. We did not climb out of some primordial soup or evolve from an amoeba or any such nonsense.
God did create us with the capacity to reason, think, have emotions, and most importantly have a soul. None of which are found in the animal kingdom.
Initially Adam and Eve were without sin. However, we did have choice and sadly sin was chosen creating the need for God to make a way for us to have a restored relationship with Him
That has been realized through the death, burial and resurrection of Christ for those who believe in Him.
God's Word makes it clear He has always existed and will always exist.
What IF the Big Bang didn’t happen and it’s a fantasy for adults..
A Yarn, a Story, a modern legend, propaganda, or wishful thinking.?.
-OR- little of all those things.........
not so sure I'd compare a college grad of today with the education of a 12 year old from 1611. they actually learned real stuff in school....not the pc nonsense found in college today.
there were no north carolina african American studies degrees back in the day.
yeah...the Bible says so much about Mary remaining a virgin, her immaculate conception, being assumed, her appearing in various forms, praying/worshipping her, the papacy, etc.
you really don't want to examine the Scriptures real close on this because the rcc position falls apart real quick.
and I certainly hope you don't appeal to the ECF's because they were all over the board on these issues.
“Oh man....that’s good”
And brought to you by the same people that wrote the NT! Now don’t that beat all.
364 AD? Jovian’s repeal of the anti-Christian edicts of Julian the Apostate? Really? You date the “RCC” from that? Or is there some more obscure event I’m missing.
The only scripture that Evangelicals don’t interpret literally is “If you don’t eat my body and drink my blood you have no life in you”!! Every other thing in the Bible is to be taken literally! LOL.
Yeah. Imagine that. People depending on what God tells them over what man tells them.
Such fools.......
mlo: Then scripture is wrong.
Sure. Because we all know that the ToE could never be wrong.......
/s tag that should not be needed but is.......
Where did he say God did not create the Universe ex-nihilo?
Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”
If he's suggesting evolution then he's denying ex-nihilo as the ToE denies any involvement by God....or that there is God for that matter.
Genesis even says this:
"And the sea brought forth..."
"And the earth brought forth...."
That's pretty OK, isn't it?
I will not defend the Latin's strange notion of "the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary", which as an Orthodox Christian, I regard as an attempt to fix a non-existent problem.
However, Our Lady's perpetual virginity, and the fact that after her death, she was assumed body and soul into Paradise, are matters that Christians, whether Orthodox, Latin, Assyrian, Coptic, Armenian or Jacobite, agreed upon until some Germans in the 16th century came up with the strange notion that a shortened version of the Scriptures were a self-interpreting axiom-system from which everything true about not only God, but the earthly relatives of Our Incarnate Lord Jesus Christ, could be proven.
As an aside, I note that Papal dogmatization of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary is defective not because it affirms that she was assumed body and soul into heaven, but because it fails to condemn the erroneous view, current in many circle of the Latin church, that she did not die.
On what basis do you put the details of the Virgin Mary's life in the same category with regard to the authority of Scripture as the fact Jesus died for our sins, rose again from the dead (as attested by many witnesses) and ascended into heaven, rather than the the category in which Fermat's Little Theorem and the presidency of George Washington fall?
Funky Tut...
>>Sure. Because we all know that the ToE could never be wrong.......
/s tag that should not be needed but is....... <<
I did NOT see that one coming!
Just wow...
:)
My theory is that, from this side of creation, it could look like a “big bang”. Doesn’t mean it was. That center spot in the universe where all of the galaxies are fleeing from is where God’s mouth was when He spoke it into existence.
Click on my profile page for more on the RF guidelines.
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.