Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 69

Thread: The Vatican and Darwin

  1. #1
    IncitingRiots
    Guest

    Default The Vatican and Darwin

    "The Vatican has admitted that Charles Darwin was on the right track when he claimed that Man descended from apes.

    A leading official declared yesterday that Darwin’s theory of evolution was compatible with Christian faith, and could even be traced to St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas. “In fact, what we mean by evolution is the world as created by God,” said Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture. The Vatican also dealt the final **** to speculation that Pope Benedict XVI might be prepared to endorse the theory of Intelligent Design, whose advocates credit a “higher power” for the complexities of life...."

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle5705331.ece

  2. #2
    Trinity
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IncitingRiots View Post
    "The Vatican has admitted that Charles Darwin was on the right track when he claimed that Man descended from apes.

    A leading official declared yesterday that Darwin’s theory of evolution was compatible with Christian faith, and could even be traced to St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas. “In fact, what we mean by evolution is the world as created by God,” said Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture. The Vatican also dealt the final **** to speculation that Pope Benedict XVI might be prepared to endorse the theory of Intelligent Design, whose advocates credit a “higher power” for the complexities of life...."

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle5705331.ece
    Since the 60s the Catholic Church did not have any problem with the theory of evolution. Even if Darwin had renounced to the christianity he never wanted to be labeled as an atheist. He had seen himself more as an agnostic.



    His wife Emma had a faith into a God. One day, she wrote to him and told him that there is an order of things than cannot be studied by the scientific method. Darwin has said in his biography that often he has reread this letter and he cried every time. He also said in his biography that the mystery of everything is insoluble and this is why he became agnostic. Charles Darwin was a very ethical man, a good man. He was against slavery. He respected life and was a humanist. He was not fanatical. A decent man. There is many unjustified prejudices about this man.

    His preferred animal was the ground worm. He was liking landscapes or lands with a green gr*** on surface. Because worms are helping to have a greener gr***.

    Trinity
    Last edited by Trinity; 02-18-2009 at 08:26 PM.

  3. #3
    Senior Member disciple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    587

    Default

    Greetings,
    Trinity you said,
    "Since the 60s the Catholic Church did not have any problem with the theory of evolution."
    Can you expound a little, do you mean the church has no problem with those who believe the theory of evolution is correct or the church believes it is correct?
    In Matthew 19:4 Jesus said,"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female."
    Clearly Jesus is referring to the creation account in Genesis which then would leave no question for those who believe the Scriptures, that evolution is not a valid theory.
    Thanks.

  4. #4
    Trinity
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by disciple View Post
    Greetings,
    Trinity you said,
    "Since the 60s the Catholic Church did not have any problem with the theory of evolution."
    Can you expound a little, do you mean the church has no problem with those who believe the theory of evolution is correct or the church believes it is correct?
    When I was at University in the middle of the 70s, I had read a book on the matter of the Evolution and the Faith, wrote in the 60s.

    Though it is virtually unknown among laypeople, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences is an independent body within the Vatican. Over the years its membership roster has read like a who’s who of 20th-century scientists (including Max Planck, Niels Bohr, and Erwin Schrödinger, to name a few), and it currently boasts more than 80 international academicians, many of them Nobel laureates and not all of them Catholic — including the playfully irreligious physicist Stephen Hawking.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifi...my_of_Sciences

    The Catechism of the Catholic Church:

    "159. Faith and science: "...methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are." (Vatican II GS 36:1) 283. The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers.... 284. The great interest accorded to these studies is strongly stimulated by a question of another order, which goes beyond the proper domain of the natural sciences. It is not only a question of knowing when and how the universe arose physically, or when man appeared, but rather of discovering the meaning of such an origin..."

    In Matthew 19:4 Jesus said,"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female."
    Clearly Jesus is referring to the creation account in Genesis which then would leave no question for those who believe the Scriptures, that evolution is not a valid theory.
    The Catholic Church believes the Creation was done by God, but the theory of evolution is seen as one of the laws that rules his Creation. When there is conflict between science and religion this is because scientists or religious people are discarding pieces of the great puzzle.

    Trinity

  5. #5
    Trinity
    Guest

    Default

    Charles Darwins was a honest and humble man. He knew that his theory was not perfect. This is why he wrote a chapter [ chapter six] about the difficulties of his theory in his book 'The Origin of Species'.

    The Origin of Species
    Chapter 6: Difficulties on Theory
    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin/chapter6.html

    He had this hope that the future scientists could solve these difficulties. Some as the Catholic priest Gregor Mendel did it.

    Trinity

  6. #6
    Heart2Heart
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trinity View Post
    When I was at University in the middle of the 70s, I had read a book on the matter of the Evolution and the Faith, wrote in the 60s.

    Though it is virtually unknown among laypeople, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences is an independent body within the Vatican. Over the years its membership roster has read like a who’s who of 20th-century scientists (including Max Planck, Niels Bohr, and Erwin Schrödinger, to name a few), and it currently boasts more than 80 international academicians, many of them Nobel laureates and not all of them Catholic — including the playfully irreligious physicist Stephen Hawking.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifi...my_of_Sciences

    The Catechism of the Catholic Church:

    "159. Faith and science: "...methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are." (Vatican II GS 36:1) 283. The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers.... 284. The great interest accorded to these studies is strongly stimulated by a question of another order, which goes beyond the proper domain of the natural sciences. It is not only a question of knowing when and how the universe arose physically, or when man appeared, but rather of discovering the meaning of such an origin..."



    The Catholic Church believes the Creation was done by God, but the theory of evolution is seen as one of the laws that rules his Creation. When there is conflict between science and religion this is because scientists or religious people are discarding pieces of the great puzzle.

    Trinity
    What are the pieces of the great puzzle?

  7. #7
    PostTribber
    Guest

    Default "...in His image?"

    God said He created Adam out of the dust of the earth. now the Vatican says God stripped Cheetah down to his bipedals and put him in the Garden? "if the Pope were married, he wouldn't see himself as infalible." the Bible doesn't accord any man with 'glory', unless 'silly hats' count. Science has it's bias just as Denominations do, but if an organization claims the Bible as the Word of God, then they are bound by it; nothing added or subtracted.

    the Vatican seems to be fretful of losing it's significance in this 'world', of having to find ways to maintain it's sphere of influence it once enjoyed over kings and sovereigns. Christ is the Head of the Church. He's been given all power & authority in Heaven and on Earth. He won't compromise with the world with something that cost Him on the Cross.

  8. #8
    Trinity
    Guest

    Default Did Darwin Kill God?

    "There are some who believe that Darwin's theory of evolution has weakened religion, fuelled in part by Richard Dawkins' publishing phenomenon The God Delusion. Conor Cunningham argues that nothing could be further from the truth.

    Cunningham is a firm believer in the theory of evolution, but he is also a Christian. He believes that the clash between Darwin and God has been hijacked by extremists - fundamentalist believers who reject evolution on one side, and fundamentalist atheists on the other. Cunningham attempts to overturn what he believes are widely held but mistaken ***umptions in the debate between religion and evolution.

    He travels to the Middle East where he shows that from the very outset, Christianity warned against literal readings of the biblical story of creation. In Britain, he reveals that, at the time, Darwin's theory of evolution was welcomed by the Anglican and Catholic Churches. Instead, he argues that the conflict between Darwin and God was manufactured by American creationists in the 20th century for reasons that had very little to do with science and religion and a great deal to do with politics and morality.
    Finally, he comes face to face with some of the most eminent evolutionary biologists, geneticists and philosophers of our time to examine whether the very latest advances in evolutionary theory do in fact kill God."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00jhfwt

    Did Darwin Kill God? (1/6)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VNeRU5dwXI
    Did Darwin Kill God? (2/6)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udHkK...eature=related
    Did Darwin Kill God? (3/6)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQudZ...eature=related
    Did Darwin Kill God? (4/6)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueMPE...eature=related
    Did Darwin Kill God? (5/6)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocJ5H...eature=related
    Did Darwin Kill God? (6/6)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz8Sj...eature=related

    Trinity

  9. #9
    PostTribber
    Guest

    Default no transitional forms

    therefore, no 'evolution'. now, about your sins and the coming judgement....!

  10. #10
    TRiG
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by disciple View Post
    No question for those who believe the Scriptures, that evolution is not a valid theory.
    So much the worse for scripture, then, since evolution clearly is a valid theory.

    TRiG.

  11. #11
    Senior Member disciple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TRiG View Post
    So much the worse for scripture, then, since evolution clearly is a valid theory.

    TRiG.
    Greetings Trig, nice to meet you,
    OK I am willing to listen, what makes it valid?

  12. #12
    TRiG
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by disciple View Post
    what makes it valid?
    Vast mountains of evidence.

    TRiG.

  13. #13
    asdf
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TRiG View Post
    Vast mountains of evidence.

    TRiG.
    We could expound on that. How about:
    Vast mountains of evidence, recognized by scientific consensus and supported by pretty much every discipline of scientific inquiry.

  14. #14
    Senior Member disciple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TRiG View Post
    Vast mountains of evidence.

    TRiG.
    Gee all these vast mountains of evidence and scientific consensus and it is still just a theory, a theory used by man in the hopes of explaining away God.

    An unproven conjecture; An expectation of what should happen, barring unforeseen circumstances; A coherent statement or set of statements that attempts to explain observed phenomena; A logical structure that enables one to deduce the possible results of every experiment ...


    A hypothesis that has withstood extensive testing by a variety of methods, and in which a higher degree of certainty may be placed. A theory is NEVER a fact, but instead is an attempt to explain one or more facts.


    a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena. In other words, it is the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science.

  15. #15
    TRiG
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by disciple View Post
    a theory used by man in the hopes of explaining away God.
    That claim is, simply, a lie. Stop lying (or ignörantly repeating others' lies). It doesn't make you look good.

    Quote Originally Posted by disciple View Post
    it is still just a theory.
    I find it rather bizarre that you follow the monumentally stüpid phrase just a theory with the scientific definition of the word theory. You obviously didn't read what you quoted.

    Try pushing a pencil off your desk. The chances are that it will fall to the ground. This is due to the operation of a force known as gravity, of which you may have heard. Gravity exists. It's a fact. The theory of gravitation is an overarching explanation used to explain that fact.

    The evolution of life is, similarly, a fact. It happened, and it still is happening. It has been observed in real time, and it has left many many traces in the historical record. The theory of evolution is, as you yourself said, a model which serves to explain all the observed facts of evolution. It's beautifully simple in the grand structure, but detailed enough to be endlessly fascinating. It is, also, rather better understood and better supported than the theory of gravitation.

    TRiG.

  16. #16
    Columcille
    Guest

    Default

    TRiG, Are you saying there is only one "valid theory?" I mean my Science Desk Reference states the following:

    The theory is a general statement that explains the facts. A theory can lead to a new conclusion or the discovery of a phenomenon. Developments of a theory often result in a change in paradigm--that is, looking at or thinking about a scientific problem in a totally different way.

    I should think there are several "theories" floating out there. There may be one that is "popular" but that does not make it any more or any less valid. I mean, some make connections about the missing link, only to find out it was a hoax, like some made up from a pig's tooth in Africa. I do not see any cross species evidence. I am not saying it is not possible, only that science can never answer the deeper questions of which faith does.

  17. #17
    Senior Member disciple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TRiG View Post
    That claim is, simply, a lie. Stop lying (or ignörantly repeating others' lies). It doesn't make you look good.



    I find it rather bizarre that you follow the monumentally stüpid phrase just a theory with the scientific definition of the word theory. You obviously didn't read what you quoted.

    Try pushing a pencil off your desk. The chances are that it will fall to the ground. This is due to the operation of a force known as gravity, of which you may have heard. Gravity exists. It's a fact. The theory of gravitation is an overarching explanation used to explain that fact.

    The evolution of life is, similarly, a fact. It happened, and it still is happening. It has been observed in real time, and it has left many many traces in the historical record. The theory of evolution is, as you yourself said, a model which serves to explain all the observed facts of evolution. It's beautifully simple in the grand structure, but detailed enough to be endlessly fascinating. It is, also, rather better understood and better supported than the theory of gravitation.

    TRiG.
    So Trig, because I don't agree with you you can call me a liar and insinuate that I am stüpid and ignörant. I will not hold that against you, the God who created me teaches love, forgivness and kindness, qualities that really are not necessary for the survival of the fittest but are important in the kingdom of God. Look all around you Trig, everything you see, your house, your books, your computer all had a maker. Do you really think something as complex as man, with so many irreducible systems could be an accident, a result of time and chance?

  18. #18
    TRiG
    Guest

    Default What's that, then?

    Quote Originally Posted by Columcille View Post
    the missing link
    Which?

    TRiG.

  19. #19
    TRiG
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by disciple View Post
    So Trig, because I don't agree with you you can call me a liar and insinuate that I am stüpid and ignörant.
    No, I called you a liar because you told a lie. You may not have known it's a lie: you may be carelessly repeating a lie you've been told, without checking the evidence for yourself. In that case, you're ********.

    TRiG.

  20. #20
    Senior Member disciple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TRiG View Post
    No, I called you a liar because you told a lie. You may not have known it's a lie: you may be carelessly repeating a lie you've been told, without checking the evidence for yourself. In that case, you're ********.

    TRiG.
    Sorry Trig, you are the one who has been lied to and to give the credit due God, to time and chance is really, really careless. Have you ever picked up a bible and asked God to show you the real evidence, unless you think Darwin is more reliable than God. And by the way, there is still no proof that man evolved from any lower form, its still "just a theory".

  21. #21
    Trinity
    Guest

    Default

    I knew about this hypothesis that we may have evolved from the reptiles, or from the chimpanzees, but never I knew concerning an evolution with some apes from the sea. The origin of life is a very mysterious thing.

    Elaine Morgan says we evolved from aquatic apes
    http://www.ted.com/talks/elaine_morg...atic_apes.html

    The Scientists and the clergymen, they have both some difficulty to let go a false paradigm.

    Trinity

  22. #22
    TRiG
    Guest

    Default *sigh*

    Quote Originally Posted by disciple View Post
    Sorry Trig, you are the one who has been lied to
    Yes, I was lied to by my religious parents (not off their own bat: they were just repeating the lies they'd been told, just as you are). Then I did some finding out for myself.

    The specific lie you told was the claim that evolution was made up by men for the specific purpose of doing away with God. This claim is so flat-out wrong that it can only be called a lie.

    People who have examined the evidence believe that evolution happens because we've seen it happening. The evidence is absolutely overwhelming. To disbelieve evolution requires putting your hands over your ears and singing very loudly (a trick humans are depressingly good at, I must say). What we want to believe, about God or anything else, is irrelevant.

    Evidence. It matters.

    TRiG.

  23. #23
    TRiG
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by disciple View Post
    love, forgivness and kindness, qualities that really are not necessary for the survival of the fittest
    You don't think so? You don't think that a social animal might find these useful? Chimps have a sense of fair play.

    A human that did not have these qualities would not be "fit", would not do well in society, and would likely have fewer offspring than his or her more cooperative counterparts.

    TRiG.

  24. #24
    Senior Member disciple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    587

    Default

    Hello Trig,

    Quote Originally Posted by TRiG View Post
    Yes, I was lied to by my religious parents (not off their own bat: they were just repeating the lies they'd been told, just as you are). Then I did some finding out for myself.

    I ***ume from this statement that you don't believe God is real and that the account in the Bible is not factual. What is it that you found out?

    The specific lie you told was the claim that evolution was made up by men for the specific purpose of doing away with God. This claim is so flat-out wrong that it can only be called a lie.

    Perhaps you could say that this is my "theory" based on observing the actions and at***udes of those who believe or have faith in the idea that men evolved from apes and that everything came from nothing.

    People who have examined the evidence believe that evolution happens because we've seen it happening. The evidence is absolutely overwhelming.

    Please share with me the evidence that proves that man evolved from a lower form of life.

    To disbelieve evolution requires putting your hands over your ears and singing very loudly (a trick humans are depressingly good at, I must say). What we want to believe, about God or anything else, is irrelevant.
    Actually, if one reads the Bible and the theory of evolution it is more of a leap of faith to believe everything came from nothing than to believe in a Creator who designed everything.

    Evidence. It matters.

    Please provide some.
    TRiG.

  25. #25
    AllyManderson
    Guest

    Default

    When someone told a lie you called them a liar TRiG. You said that they might not have known it was a lie - but it was still a lie.

    A cousin of mine from England visited me here in Glasgow, And we had introduced the smoking ban a few months earlier - My cousin lit his cigarette, A criminal offence. He committed a criminal offence - without knowing that is what he is doing. Every lawyer in Scotland, England and the United States would tell you
    "This man is not a criminal"

    Would you honestly say

    "Before visiting Scotland - The Englishman should have the 1,000 pages of Scots law. Thus he is a criminal - as he did a crime!"

    Is he ******?
    __________

    Telling something that is not true - does not make you a liar.

    When my Mathematics teacher in Primary 1 said
    "So Ally, 4 + 4?"
    And I answer "Six Miss"
    Should she have denounced me as a Liar?

    (Obviously more complex examples from learning Calculus and Algebra in later years could be used here)

    Would you really call a mathematician who has reached a wrong conclusion "******"?

    Would it have been ****** for me to say to my teacher "Provide me with evidence for why four plus four does not equal six?"
    ___________

    TRiG, I believe you owe, as a gentleman, an apology and I think talking-down to people is a very poor trait to have. You are perhaps a fairly smart person - but please do not feel you can lecture us all, talk down to us all - and generally behave in a manner that makes all of us pity you.

    Every blessing,

    Alastair ("Ally") Adam Manderson III Esq
    Last edited by AllyManderson; 08-20-2009 at 03:13 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •