Pope Francis declares evolution and Big Bang theory are right

Bacterial resistance can and has occurred via random genetic mutation which is the basis for evolution. As I say though, there is no reason why mutation can't go one step forward and two steps back. That is where I believe the theist component comes in.

Hi,
I have to disagree with your statement on bacteria evolving using its resistance to an antibiotic. The end result is it is still a bacteria. Also I would like to add that mutation destroys information and does not add to. Things are not created out of chaos.


peter
 
The only number of times a pope has made an official dogmatic declaration is twice in all of history. Only twice. This was not one of them. It is always said in an encyclical and is directly stated as an official dogmatic statement -- it isn't just based on personal opinion.

Hi Lysander:)

I agree that this does translate to the official dogma of the Catholic church. But the Popes statement is not quite just an opinion either.. this is not just an off the cuff statement that he made. There is a "method behind the madness." The statement is designed to increase the influence of the Catholic church with Atheist and long age Creationist. This is similar to his statement about homosexuality. When this statement on evolution dies down and people forget all about it, then maybe his next statements will be to garner inter-religious support. When that controversy (if any) dies from that, his next statement will appease the ears of protestant Christians. The crowd tends to have short term memory about these things. All of it is designed to increase Catholic influence. He is scheduled to speak before the US congress soon (which is against US law, heads of state are not supposed to speak before congress) , also a public declaration next year is to be made regarding the agreement signed as it pertains to the union between protestants and Catholics (scheduled on the anniversary of the Diet of Worms). Its all about influence.



I love Catholic people, but the institution has a different agenda and many sincere Catholics and protestants will not realize it until after it rears its ugly head. (Rev 13:3) Hopefully by then they will not be caught up in the midst of it.

God Bless,
MoG
 
Hi Lysander:)

I agree that this does translate to the official dogma of the Catholic church. But the Popes statement is not quite just an opinion either.. this is not just an off the cuff statement that he made. There is a "method behind the madness." The statement is designed to increase the influence of the Catholic church with Atheist and long age Creationist. This is similar to his statement about homosexuality. When this statement on evolution dies down and people forget all about it, then maybe his next statements will be to garner inter-religious support. When that controversy (if any) dies from that, his next statement will appease the ears of protestant Christians. The crowd tends to have short term memory about these things. All of it is designed to increase Catholic influence. He is scheduled to speak before the US congress soon (which is against US law, heads of state are not supposed to speak before congress) , also a public declaration next year is to be made regarding the agreement signed as it pertains to the union between protestants and Catholics (scheduled on the anniversary of the Diet of Worms). Its all about influence.



I love Catholic people, but the institution has a different agenda and many sincere Catholics and protestants will not realize it until after it rears its ugly head. (Rev 13:3) Hopefully by then they will not be caught up in the midst of it.

God Bless,
MoG

This wasn't intended to appease anyone. The Catholic Church has no issue with Evolution long before Pope Francis. And even centuries before Darwin, the Catholic Church offered commentary on Genesis that suggested no contradiction to what later became known as evolution.

The pope said nothing of controversy or even anything new. In fact, what he said has been pretty old for a long time now.
 
This wasn't intended to appease anyone. The Catholic Church has no issue with Evolution long before Pope Francis. And even centuries before Darwin, the Catholic Church offered commentary on Genesis that suggested no contradiction to what later became known as evolution.

The pope said nothing of controversy or even anything new. In fact, what he said has been pretty old for a long time now.

I understand its not a new statement, but its not an off the cuff statement either. Otherwise, why repeat it to begin with?
 
Of course it wasn't. He wrote it as a speech to the Pontifical Academy of Science.

That is because it has always been the agenda of the Catholic church to increase its influence regardless of the means. "The end justifies the means" has been her philosophy. This is a prinicipal of Vatican II.
 
That is because it has always been the agenda of the Catholic church to increase its influence regardless of the means. "The end justifies the means" has been her philosophy. This is a prinicipal of Vatican II.

Absolutely not. That is not the agenda nor has it ever been. And Vatican II had nothing to do with the idea of "the ends justify the means" principle. Some people (including some Catholics) thought it was a council to change the way the mass is performed and so forth, but even that isn't true. The idea of Vatican II was to make sure laymen were just as involved with evangelism and holding clergy accountable to their responsibilities as servants of God.

The fact that even some Catholics otherwise is why many loyal bishops have proposed a Syllabus of Errors in response to Vatican II.
 
@ Godspell - astonishing that it is not hard to find a scientific organization that has shown the errors of evolution (only recently)but in some ways the academic community will always cling to error when their careers and livlihood and teaching are at risk if you say the emperor has no clothes. The facts are not in truth as you presented them. It is 4% difference between man and chimp/primates and that represents 35 MILLION differences. Evolutionists have been claiming 2% for ages until an actual picture of the chimp genome was done only a few years back. You avoid argument/debate that disproves your point. I haven't found any that disprove mine but, at least I read them and take notice if any points are correct. Interesting side note about choosing anthropology as a career. Almost all of them end in academia and their embrace of evolution has turned this career into mostly a dead end. http://www.aaanet.org/resources/students/anthrodegree.cfm (please note - I picked a web site that is pro anthropology :).)

As for @LysanderShapiro and @ManOfGod, a big thanks for returning to the OP. Perforce, I have already posted that I think most of the Pope's statements are being directed at certain groups to unify with Catholicism. which is in line with what ManofGod posted in post#122. I think unity is important but not at the expense of truth. When you mix false with truth, the truth tends to be buried/ignored/disappeared.
 
Godspell; attempting to respond reasonably in a chat board message is a challenge, but one worthy of effort.
I suppose I should assert first my unqualified belief that The Bible is not, and should never be considered, a book of science. However, I must compare scientific theories against what I do consider to be the divinely inspired Word. This process, coupled with the still unanswered, but significant questions left by evolution see me believing evolution, such as you promote, and the Triune God of The Bible are mutually exclusive.
God is revealed as something a great deal more than a celestial engineer. He is revealed as the Creator of all, who, even after having displeased Him, cares enough for us individually to make available a means to full reconciliation. Those excited assertions that,"God is awesome," are realized when one contemplates this. And an awesome God who is all knowing and all powerful, who created and sustains all and also has demonstrated care for us as individuals is inconsistent with a clockmaker who, at some point, noticed us and decided to engage.
The proponents of evolution have been no more, or less, guilty of dishonesty over the years. On both sides, those who would obstruct truth have done so out of the same wrong motives - power. But to my mind, Scripture can withstand the dishonesty of man far better than can the science underlying the assertions of dishonest scientists.
 

GBzone

Inactive
That is because it has always been the agenda of the Catholic church to increase its influence regardless of the means. "The end justifies the means" has been her philosophy. This is a prinicipal of Vatican II.

From my observations and reading of history she is nothing but a card player that will play any suit that will ensure she survives or is convenient .She also cheats . Never play cards with her .

Evolution while on the face of it or by appearances looks to have some merit.
But no one has ever shown .known or ever proved that one species can change into another or indeed mate with another . Nor can they .
Even a horse and a donkey being very close to each other will produce a mule. But there is no life in its seed and so cannot reproduce itself . If you want another mule you need another horse and donkey.
In one species say a dog or for that matter Darwins famous finches .You have every variable . So at one end you have those miniature toy dogs and at the other a great dane . As with everything in between you have only dogs. A cat is not a dog. and a dog is not nor can be a cat . Cats have their range also and variations . But that is within the range of the gene pool as it were or as God intended has made it so.
Within Adam was all that was needed to reproduce all the variations of men that there are . Men have not evolved from apes nor can they . Nor have they evolved from half ape men to men . Men can descend to brutes ands act like animals or worse . that is one thing . But God still demands they give an account of themselves as men .

Evolution does not take into account the laws of physics .Let alone God.
Are we to assume then that those laws have evolved as well? and in that case can still evolve or change? That is absurd and no one believes it . For if those laws can or do or might change then they are untrustworthy and no one would get in a plane and expect to reach their destination. or get in a car and turn the wheel left and expect it to go left etc.
They are for all practical purposes eternal.
if it is insisted they are not. Then by what law did this so called big BANG! work by?
If they do not then the law was there before the big ......................................BANG!
Then how did those laws come about?
Nope.
The universe does not 'work' without God ,Let alone the earth and men . and the world in its history and present declention proves it and in any event the Word of God states it .

It matters not then what this man or that man high or low may say or deny. It does not change the facts .It does matter though when people blindly follow them.
and while people
and each person is responsible for their own actions and words. Those who lead them down the broad road to destruction will suffer the greater condemnation.

in Christ
gerald
 
:) I used to believe in micro evolution until I researched it further.

One of the main arguments that killed it for me was mutation. Studies of samples in radiation reveal that there is never 'uphill' progress. Which is required to support evolution. There is only lateral and downhill.

I agree that it doesn't bring about anything better. I guess it depends on the definition one uses for micro evolution.

I was mainly trying to point out the deceptive way that people use fact and observation to get people believing in evolution and then twist it into false or speculative science.
 

GBzone

Inactive
I agree that it doesn't bring about anything better. I guess it depends on the definition one uses for micro evolution.

I was mainly trying to point out the deceptive way that people use fact and observation to get people believing in evolution and then twist it into false or speculative science.

I would add to that .That man has to and will have to and will come to the understanding of his own limitations . Both in thought and deed and in word also .
and while the imagination is a wonderful thing and you can traverse the earth and even to some extent the stars with it and plan and create wonderful things . It too has its limitations and without God cannot go further .
"Man looketh on the outward appearance God looketh on the heart " 1sam 16:7
Applies to all things .Yet on earth man can look further than his nose and every time he takes the trouble to do so ,He always finds God is right and the world wrong.
There is a knowledge that passeth all understanding or comes by the intellect . For what the spirit can grasp and know to be true in a moment it can take quite a while and in some cases years fro the mind to catch up and articulate it .
I had often wondered about the "fountains of the deep " In the account of Noah Gen 8:2 and other places . For it was my thinking how can you have fountains of water under the sea?
It was not until I saw the 'Blue Planet' with David Atenborough and they sent a submersible a mile down into the sea . That lo and behold (its still works) there they were fountains of the deep.

In Christ
gerald
 
Hi Lysander:)

I agree that this does translate to the official dogma of the Catholic church. But the Popes statement is not quite just an opinion either.. this is not just an off the cuff statement that he made. There is a "method behind the madness." The statement is designed to increase the influence of the Catholic church with Atheist and long age Creationist. This is similar to his statement about homosexuality. When this statement on evolution dies down and people forget all about it, then maybe his next statements will be to garner inter-religious support. When that controversy (if any) dies from that, his next statement will appease the ears of protestant Christians. The crowd tends to have short term memory about these things. All of it is designed to increase Catholic influence. He is scheduled to speak before the US congress soon (which is against US law, heads of state are not supposed to speak before congress) , also a public declaration next year is to be made regarding the agreement signed as it pertains to the union between protestants and Catholics (scheduled on the anniversary of the Diet of Worms). Its all about influence.



I love Catholic people, but the institution has a different agenda and many sincere Catholics and protestants will not realize it until after it rears its ugly head. (Rev 13:3) Hopefully by then they will not be caught up in the midst of it.

God Bless,
MoG

as to the desire of influence by the RCC, I do not blame them/it. They truly believe they are the Body of Christ. As such, they are really rather obligated to convince us of the same. We're I convinced they were accurate, I would join them. I don't know if it is an American problem or something more universal, but there has come to be strong pressure and high expectation that those who have beliefs in that which is immutable, or rationally related to it, should act as if those beliefs are little more than nice ideas. The Pope should be attempting just what he is being accused of - and us Protestants should take note of those who act out of conviction and do likewise.
 

GBzone

Inactive
as to the desire of influence by the RCC, I do not blame them/it. They truly believe they are the Body of Christ. As such, they are really rather obligated to convince us of the same. We're I convinced they were accurate, I would join them. I don't know if it is an American problem or something more universal, but there has come to be strong pressure and high expectation that those who have beliefs in that which is immutable, or rationally related to it, should act as if those beliefs are little more than nice ideas. The Pope should be attempting just what he is being accused of - and us Protestants should take note of those who act out of conviction and do likewise.

What sayeth the scriptures about "enticing words of mens wisdom" 1Cor 2:14
Let alone that of seducing spirits 1Tim 4:1

Another has said if you use the world to get the world you will need the world to keep them.
Roem has ALWAYS almost from the beginning used /embraced pagan ideas and 'gods' that are not and christianise them so as to be acceptable to pagans . A book worth reading is 'The Two Babylons ' available online or can be read I think .
In rev 2 the first church LEFT its first love . That opened the door to the Laodocians whos PRACTICE God hated .That is the separation and Lording over the 'laity ' by the ministers who in turn became priests .
What became the "WORKS" then by the next church became "DOCTRINE" .Now you had to believe their usurped position and authority . as also the doctrine of Baalam . That opened the door to the teaching of Jezzebel which is idolitory which is spiritual fornication ."Who seduced my servants "
NOTE they are cast into the "great tribulation"
Baalam for money told the enemy of the children of Israel to take their daughters ("the harlot has daughters") and get them to marry the sons of Isreal and by that to draw them into the worship of idols and by that God will judge them and they will then be able to overcome the children of Israel . So then so now . For we are indeed in a reverse reformation where protestant churches and 'leaders' are being seduced to accept what should not be accepted and was proved to be wrong by all means at the reformation .
It is the preaching of Christ and Him crucified and risen form the dead that draws men to GOD .(not a denomination) and through faith in Jesus Christ are men reconciled to God.
Not preaching the delights of A Mary unrecognisable by scripture . and the like .

in Christ
gerald
 

Nintentacle

Inactive
Does he mean macro or micro evolution?

Micrevolution is obviously true (Variations in a single kind), but I feel Macroevolution is way off.

Yeah, everything could be made of similar DNA, but it really doesn't prove we evolved from a single cell (Meaning, that is not the only conclusion you could come up with)
 
GB, please know I was not intending to assert that Protestants should become Catholic, but that we should act out if our conviction as thoroughly as does the Pope when he seeks to recognized as either the head of his church or head of State. Of course, very few denominations have such a central figure, but the Pope is doing his job and we should too.
 
Absolutely not. That is not the agenda nor has it ever been. And Vatican II had nothing to do with the idea of "the ends justify the means" principle. Some people (including some Catholics) thought it was a council to change the way the mass is performed and so forth, but even that isn't true. The idea of Vatican II was to make sure laymen were just as involved with evangelism and holding clergy accountable to their responsibilities as servants of God.

The fact that even some Catholics otherwise is why many loyal bishops have proposed a Syllabus of Errors in response to Vatican II.


I did not mean to imply that Vatican II explicitly taught that the end would justify the means. This is really the informal doctrine of the church if I can call it that. The Vatican II council was put in place to increase the influence of the Catholic Church-- or "Evangelism" as you call it. The goal is global influence in all things w/ all people (religionist or the irreligious). Part of the way this is accomplished is by imparting the teachings of Spiritual Exercises as was founded by Ignatious Loyola to others. This teaching has many names and has may adaptations, but the most popular adaptation of it is spiritual formation (this is not vatican II explicitly). Related to this idea of "evangelism" is the Catholic Liturgy and is found in Vatican II. This is also a means by which the Catholic Church believe they can gain universal influence. But whether you accept it or not, it is all steeped in spiritualism. Finally, you have the concept of ecumenism which in theory can only be achieved by the doctrinal compromises of other faith systems. As the RCC quarterbacks this ecunemical movement, the Catholic Church itself will keep all its fundamental doctrines it retained before the reformation. Yet other faiths (I am thinking protestant) are to BELIEVE that the Catholic church has changed her ways. Its all about perception and deception.

"Evangelism"--Here in lies to motive that drives every statement that leaves the mouth of the pope.

Blessings,
MoG
 
Last edited:
Does he mean macro or micro evolution?

Micrevolution is obviously true (Variations in a single kind), but I feel Macroevolution is way off.

Yeah, everything could be made of similar DNA, but it really doesn't prove we evolved from a single cell (Meaning, that is not the only conclusion you could come up with)

Since you are new, at least newer than me, welcome.

Maybe the first contiguous bunch of chemicals which performed living chemistry might have been in a porous rock with reactants at one end and products at the other, something like a jet engine. :)
 
Top