- Status
R
Rau
Guest
The Catholic Church makes no assertion that the number means what Glark accepts that it means. The Catholic Church takes no issue at all with its schools teaching the science that observes a far greater age for life on earth.
G
Glark
Guest
But karma requires intelligence in order to work; gravity doesn’t.
G
Glark
Guest
“there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables” - 2Tim 4:3-4
“Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition … Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders” - 2 Thess 2:3-9
G
Glark
Guest
You forgot to add that sometimes the Church makes mistakes interpreting Scripture - ever heard of Galileo?
Last edited:
T
Techno2000
Guest
Is there a official Church interpretation for Revelation 12:9 ?Techno2000:
CCC119 “It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgement. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God.”
E
edwest211
Guest
Scientific inquiry does not include the supernatural. God has done what He wanted without scientific instrumentation as demonstrated by the literal miracles of Jesus Christ. Pope Benedict “…added that the immense time span that evolution covers made it impossible to conduct experiments in a controlled environment to finally verify or disprove the theory.”
E
edwest211
Guest
E
edwest211
Guest
"The Time Question
“Much less has been defined as to when the universe, life, and man appeared. The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago.”
Source: Catholic Answers
“Much less has been defined as to when the universe, life, and man appeared. The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago.”
Source: Catholic Answers
R
Rau
Guest
I’ve no problem with any of that. I assume you’re not seeking to rebut anything I’ve said with those words.
R
Rau
Guest
No idea. Glark may know.
R
Rau
Guest
This is simple fact. It supports the view that man’s salvation is unconnected with this question, and likely that the 5778 year age date for the creation of all life on earth that has ever existed is not divinely revealed.
E
edwest211
Guest
If the Church is still undecided then I am undecided. The Bible contains truths, historical truths. In the end, God was the author of the Bible who inspired the writers.
“Pius XII stated that the Vatican I passage cited above was a “solemn definition of Catholic doctrine, by which such divine authority is claimed for the ‘entire books with all their parts’ as to secure freedom from any error whatsoever.” He repudiated those who “ventured to restrict the truth of Sacred Scripture solely to matters of faith and morals” (Divino Afflante Spiritu 1).”
“Pius XII stated that the Vatican I passage cited above was a “solemn definition of Catholic doctrine, by which such divine authority is claimed for the ‘entire books with all their parts’ as to secure freedom from any error whatsoever.” He repudiated those who “ventured to restrict the truth of Sacred Scripture solely to matters of faith and morals” (Divino Afflante Spiritu 1).”
J
jas84173
Guest
Buddhism has different branches and schools just like Christianity does. Some Buddhists are just philosophical, others put the Buddah on a divine plane. See it’s something I can’t stand is how we act like Christianity is the only religion that has differences. Every world religion has different sects and beliefs and other groups who condemn those beliefs.
G
Glark
Guest
Don’t ever find yourself on an atheist forum - you’re way too sensitive! They’d eat you for breakfast!
“Evo-Catholic” sounds like “evil Catholic”? Yes, I suppose it does a bit, but it would never have occurred to me if you hadn’t mentioned it. You are barking up the wrong tree … an evo-Catholic is simply a Catholic who believes in evolution. Although the theory of evolution is an evil invention of Satan, Catholics who accept evolution aren’t necessarily evil; they’re just deceived and misguided … in my opinion. So “evo-Catholic” is not an insult, but simply a descriptive.
Huh?
If memory serves, this is the fourth time on this thread that a Darwinist has invented a falsehood about something I’ve allegedly said. Now isn’t that an interesting trend? When I challenged the authors of these falsehoods to provide evidence of their accusations, none of them responded - funny that.
So for the sake of your credibility, what you need to do is show me where I said EVERYONE HAS TO ACCEPT A LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF GENESIS.
In other words, you are embarrassed by the Church’s teaching that the faithful are free to accept a literal interpretation of Genesis. What sort of Catholic disrespects a Church teaching like that?
Your (unsurprising) contempt for the authority of Scripture has been duly noted.
“For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? or am I striving to please men? if I were still pleasing men, I should not be a [a]servant of Christ” - Galatians 1:10.
Last edited:
G
Glark
Guest
This might help …
Here’s God, actually defining what “one day” is: “And there was evening and there was morning, one day” (Genesis 1:5).
And here’s God again, directly comparing six literal days of human work to the six days of creation: “Six days you labour and do all your work … for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them” - Exodus 20:9-11.
God apparently used billions of years of evolution to finish creation, but for some reason he wants us to believe it only took six days - pretty weird, eh?
Last edited:
G
Glark
Guest
I’d never heard this interpretation before, but it actually makes a lot of sense. Thank you.
Last edited:
R
rossum
Guest
An eternal immaterial universe needs no creator, have a look at the Kalaam argument.
rossum
R
rossum
Guest
No more than gravity must be omnipotent and possess vast intelligence to know exactly how each individual molecule of water must move when water flows downhill.
rossum
R
rossum
Guest
Devas, asuras, mahoragas, kinnaras, nagas and various others listed in Buddhist scriptures. In your terms, angels and devils is close enough.
rossum
- Status