Pope Benedict on evolution

Many Christians do not believe that Scripture supports the Young Earth Creationist position. This moderated forum is for good natured scholarly debate.

Moderator: Moderators

Pope Benedict on evolution

Postby Anonymous » Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:00 pm

Watch the creationists pick up on this first in America and then, as is the want, in the UK:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20070411/ ... d299d.html
Anonymous
 

Postby Peter Henderson » Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:21 pm

seem to have entered this one twice.
Last edited by Peter Henderson on Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4348
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Postby Peter Henderson » Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:30 pm

It sounds like he's a bit naive Mike, especially on his knowledge of the views of the Young Earth Creationists,by far the largest group in the US and one which seems to be growing rapidly in both the UK and mainland Europe. This appeared on Ham's blog today :

http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/aroun ... ite-radio/

Not sure if it is related or if, along with your link, it indicates a shift in the views of the Catholic church
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4348
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Postby Timothy Chase » Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:04 pm

The author wrote:The Pope also says the Darwinist theory of evolution is not completely provable because mutations over hundreds of thousands of years cannot be reproduced in a laboratory.

If this is accurate, then the Pope is on the slippery slope which descends into the "Omphalosian" theory that the universe didn't exist five seconds ago, but was created with all the evidence (including memories) which create the appearance of age.

I hope that he will give this point a little more thought - or otherwise clarify his position...
User avatar
Timothy Chase
 
Posts: 532
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Postby psiloiordinary » Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:04 am

Well we could get into the debate about science proving anything 100%.

In my view we can get pretty damn sure about some things - like apples moving downwards when you drop them - so that we can agree to adopt them as a decent description of reality for the time being.

Religion claims absolute knowledge and facts.

Science doesn't claim anything in this same sense. Einstein proved Newton wrong but in a way which matched Newtons claims about motion to many decimal places.

The apple still moves down but we understand more about it now.

By way of contrast;

Catholics claimed unbaptised babies went to Limbo - no question about it.

But I think they have recently changed their mind on this, but by having a chat about it, not looking at evidence in any way.

This difference in the use of the words truth and proof goes to the very heart of the difference between the religious and scientific outlooks.

It makes it all the more fascinating that people can hold both types of beliefs at the same time.

I just finished Louis Wolpert's "Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast" - a very interesting read.

I would be interested in the opinion of others on this forum on this book. I think it gives us an insight into the motivations and ways of thinking of some of the YEC fundies.

It would appear that the ability to understand causality can perhaps start to explain a lot.
User avatar
psiloiordinary
 
Posts: 798
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:03 am
Location: Yorkshire


Return to Scripture Debate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron