[_ Old Earth _] Evolution Confirmed by Pope

[ProfessionalPersonThing]

The pope has recently confirmed the existence of evolution.
As you may no the pope is considered infallable when it comes to things of this nature. Does this mean we need a new pope?

By the way if you want to see the message your self my geocities site has a bit of it, and it also has a link to a video file of the pope confirming evolution.

 

[Barbarian]

The Pope has acknowledged that evolution is more than just a theory. However, it should be kept in mind that the Pope was not speaking ex cathedra, nor is this something that has become official Catholic doctrine.

He's just acknowledging what science has learned about evolution, and has cautioned Christians about seeing the soul as a "mere epiphenomenon" of the body.

Nothing really changed, except that the Pope summed up the finding of scholars regarding evolution.

 

[Rebecka]

"Does this mean we need a new pope?" someone asked.

A pope isn't needed, period!

Never in the history of the world has there ever been a need for a pope.

PS.....If the pope is infallible, then so is Daffy Duck.

"Daffy, oh Daffy, where are you, little duckie, listen, it is now understood by the sane and civilized world that you and the pope are infallible"

Daffy said it sounds right to him.

 

[Barbarian]

The Pope is merely the vicar of Christ. He's not a substitute. When God gave to Peter the responsibility, he gave Peter (and all the other apostles) the right to select successors as needed.

And the Pope isn't infallible except under very exacting conditions. He must be speaking to a matter of faith and morals, and doing so Ex Cathedra.

Hence, no possible statement about evolution as such could be considered infallible.

 

[Rebecka]

Pope is the antichrist

Evil would not be embraced if it appeared as evil, but Satan comes as an angel of light. Satan takes on the appearance of good to decieve. Satan is disguised as good.

The antichrist usurps the place of Christ and appears as the leader of all christians, and gives the appearance of good, that he is "for" not "against" Christ.

"Anti" means "taking the place of" or usurping; the pope apears as the vicar of Christ, vicar meaning the same as anti; "taking the place of" but in truth he is Satan in disguise..

Satan in the pope appears as the vicar of Christ when in reality he is the antichrist.

The Scripture is clear that the pope is a sinner like everyone else.

 

[Barbarian]

Evil would not be embraced if it appeared as evil, but Satan comes as an angel of light. Satan takes on the appearance of good to decieve. Satan is disguised as good.

The antichrist usurps the place of Christ and appears as the leader of all christians, and gives the appearance of good, that he is "for" not "against" Christ.

"Anti" means "taking the place of" or usurping; the pope apears as the vicar of Christ, vicar meaning the same as anti; "taking the place of" but in truth he is Satan in disguise..

No, "anti" means "against". And "vicar" means "acting for another". It has the same root as "vicarious", i.e. acting through an agent. The Pope is merely God's agent. So are a lot of us in other ways.

The highest goal for Satan is to get Christians to hate each other. Don't fall for it.

The Scripture is clear that the pope is a sinner like everyone else.

So was Peter. But Jesus picked him anyway. There's two lessons there. An obvious one, and another, more important one hiding beneath.

Think about it.

 

[serapha]

The arguments for/against evolution should not be based upon what one man thinks or teaches, but as Christians, on what God tells us in His Word.



On the sixth day of "evening and morning", the Lord reflected upon His work, and did He say it was "good"?

No, He said it was "very good".


Keep the main thing, the main thing. God said it and that makes is so, regardless of what anyone with a personal interpretation presents.


~malaka~

 

[Barbarian]

The arguments for/against evolution should not be based upon what one man thinks or teaches, but as Christians, on what God tells us in His Word.

God doesn't say anything in the Bible about evoution, one way or the other. There is no guidance from Christian tradition. It's a scientific question, one that can only be answered by the evidence.

On the sixth day of "evening and morning", the Lord reflected upon His work, and did He say it was "good"?

No, He said it was "very good".

Yep. From man's error-prone perspective, the way living things are might seem icky or awful to us. But God assures us that it is good.

 

[serapha]

The arguments for/against evolution should not be based upon what one man thinks or teaches, but as Christians, on what God tells us in His Word.

God doesn't say anything in the Bible about evoution, one way or the other. There is no guidance from Christian tradition. It's a scientific question, one that can only be answered by the evidence.

[quotea2ef]On the sixth day of "evening and morning", the Lord reflected upon His work, and did He say it was "good"?

No, He said it was "very good".

Yep. From man's error-prone perspective, the way living things are might seem icky or awful to us. But God assures us that it is good.[/quotea2ef]



Hi there!

:angel:

God didn't need to say anything about evolution, He said, and the evening and the morning was a day.... there wasn't any evoluntion. God created man on the sixth day, and then God "rested from His work", for God certainly had no need of rest, for His power is unlimited...

but after man was created, there was no "evolving' God said it was all very good... that means that when man was created He just couldn't get any better than it was then.


That's what the Word of God says,


~malaka~

 

[Barbarian]

God didn't need to say anything about evolution, He said, and the evening and the morning was a day....

The notion that these allegorical "days" were real, 24 hour ones, has never been accepted Christian belief.

there wasn't any evoluntion.

That is man's "adjustment" to Scripture, which says no such thing.

God created man on the sixth day, and then God "rested from His work", for God certainly had no need of rest, for His power is unlimited...

It is figurative. God didn't really "rest" from labors. God does not labor.

but after man was created, there was no "evolving' God said it was all very good... that means that when man was created He just couldn't get any better than it was then.

No, that's contradicted by scripture, since God expected man to multiply and have children. Nature changes things, because nature is God's tool in creation.

That's what the Word of God says,

No, that's what man says, when he is dissatisified with what God says.

 

[serapha]

God didn't need to say anything about evolution, He said, and the evening and the morning was a day....

The notion that these allegorical "days" were real, 24 hour ones, has never been accepted Christian belief.

According to who?




[quote:97420]there wasn't any evoluntion.

That is man's "adjustment" to Scripture, which says no such thing.



I don't have a clue what you are talking about when you reference man's "adjustment", so please clarify

God created man on the sixth day, and then God "rested from His work", for God certainly had no need of rest, for His power is unlimited...

It is figurative. God didn't really "rest" from labors. God does not labor.



We can agree that God doesn't labor nor rest, but can we agree on the sixth day?

but after man was created, there was no "evolving' God said it was all very good... that means that when man was created He just couldn't get any better than it was then.

No, that's contradicted by scripture, since God expected man to multiply and have children. Nature changes things, because nature is God's tool in creation.

What scripture says man evolved?

That's what the Word of God says,

[/quote:97420]

No, that's what man says, when he is dissatisified with what God says



Perhaps you need to tell me what God did say, and quote it from your favorite translation

 

[Soma-Sight]

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.


Adam and Eve may have been in the garden for a billion years before the fall. There is no way for us to know and the Bible does not clarify it.

Evolution and Creation may both be true and what is the big deal if it is!!!

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
The notion that these allegorical "days" were real, 24 hour ones, has never been accepted Christian belief.

According to who?

Early Christians. Origen, Augustine, and others. Augustine repeatedly tried to get a literal interpretation of Genesis to work and finally gave up. Neither did medieval or modern Christians consider a literal Genesis to be a fact.

Prior to the 1960s, when Seventh-Day Adventist ideas were introduced to evangelicals, most fundamentalists were OE creationists. William Jennings Bryan, for example was an OE creationist.

there wasn't any evoluntion.

That is man's "adjustment" to Scripture, which says no such thing.

I don't have a clue what you are talking about when you reference man's "adjustment", so please clarify

Adding ideas to Scripture such as "there wasn't any evolution" is what some consider "Godly adjustments". I say it's a bad idea.

We can agree that God doesn't labor nor rest, but can we agree on the sixth day?

Since a literal sixth day is inconsistent with Genesis, that isn't possible.

but after man was created, there was no "evolving' God said it was all very good... that means that when man was created He just couldn't get any better than it was then.

No, that's contradicted by scripture, since God expected man to multiply and have children. Nature changes things, because nature is God's tool in creation.

What scripture says man evolved?

What scripture says that there are neutrons, or that humans have a hippocampus, or that mountains are caused by plate movement? Some things that aren't necessary for salvation, God expects us to work out for ourselves.

That's what the Word of God says,

Barbarian observes:
No, that's what man says, when he is dissatisified with what God says

Perhaps you need to tell me what God did say, and quote it from your favorite translation

Let's go back to a version that precedes this controversy, so we avoid texts which have been "adjusted" to make a point.

KJV:
Genesis 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

 

[serapha]

Barbarian,

I disagree about 95 percent with your postings. I have no reason NOT to accept a literal translation of the Bible.


Therefore, I cannot agree with the majority of your comments. You are entitled to your opinion and interpretation.


~malaka~

 

[Barbarian]

Of course there are good people on both sides of the argument. But it is not possible to get a literal version of Genesis that is logically consistent.

 

[serapha]

Of course there are good people on both sides of the argument. But it is not possible to get a literal version of Genesis that is logically consistent.

Hi there!

8)


So, what's not consistent?


~malaka~

 

[Barbarian]

As the early Christian like Augustine and Origen noted, one cannot logically assert mornings and evenings without a Sun.

God tells Adam that he will die the day he eats from the tree, but he eats and lives on for many years after.

Things of that sort.