Evolution and the Bible incompatible

  • Thread starter Thread starter twinc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cruciform said:
Sorry, but Sungenis and the Kolbe center can hardly be considered “experts and specialists” in these matters, any more than I myself am. Rather, I’ll stick with Pope Benedict XVI:
"Now, more reflective spirits have long been aware that there is no either-or here. We cannot say: creation or evolution, inasmuch as these two things respond to two different realities. The story of the dust of the earth and the breath of God…does not in fact explain how human persons come to be but rather what they are. It explains their inmost origin and casts light on the project that they are. And vice versa, the theory of evolution seeks to understand and describe biological developments. But in so soing it cannot explain where the ‘project’ of human persons came from, nor their inner origin, nor their particular nature. To that extent we are faced here with two complimentary—rather than mutually exclusive—realities" (In the Beginning, p. 50).

I am surprised by your deductions and conclusions that Pope Benedict is an expert and specialist in the disciplines of science and theology and as an individual compared to a group of all catholic experts and specialists - btw how many all catholic creationists are there in the Pontifical Academy of Science,compared to Atheists and Evolutionists and non Catholics advising the Pope - twinc

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
Click to expand...
 
twinc said:
I am surprised by your deductions and conclusions that Pope Benedict is an expert and specialist in the disciplines of science and theology and as an individual compared to a group of all catholic experts and specialists…
Click to expand...
He’s certainly more an expert than Sungenis and company. Benedict is a supremely qualified theologian and philosopher, not to mention being the Pastor of the Universal Church. I consider the Kolbe Center to represent a fringe reactionary movement in the Church similar to the vocal minority of fundamentalist “creationists” present within Protestantism.
…btw how many all catholic creationists are there in the Pontifical Academy of Science,compared to Atheists and Evolutionists and non Catholics advising the Pope.
Click to expand...
Given that their task is to inform the Pope regarding science (as opposed to theology), it hardly makes a bit of difference what any particular member’s religious views might be.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
twinc said:
so lets not take the words of creationists or phony/pseudo Christian evolutionists seeking to reconcile and compromise.Lets see what the real evolutionists have to say about compromise etc.It seems that real evolutionists have a better grasp as regards what Christianity is and stands for than christian evolutionists do[to be continued] - twinc
Click to expand...
so how about this then from a totally different source - G.Richard Bozarth in an article “The Meaning of Evolution” wrote; "Christianity has fought,still fights and will fight science to the desperate end over evolution,because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly necessary…If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins,and this is what evolution means then Christianity is nothing! “What all this means is that Christianity cannot lose the Gesesis account of creation like it could lose the doctrine of Geocentrism and get along.The battle must be waged for Christianity is fighting for its very life”[Daylight No.23] - more later - twinc
 
twinc said:
so how about this then from a totally different source - G.Richard Bozarth in an article “The Meaning of Evolution” wrote; "Christianity has fought,still fights and will fight science to the desperate end over evolution,because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly necessary…If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins,and this is what evolution means then Christianity is nothing! “What all this means is that Christianity cannot lose the Gesesis account of creation like it could lose the doctrine of Geocentrism and get along.The battle must be waged for Christianity is fighting for its very life”…
Click to expand...
I simply disagree, since this is one extended non sequitur.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
Cruciform said:
Been there. I might take them seriously if their entire position didn’t rest upon a basic category fallacy. As it is, they end up misrepresenting and distorting both religion and science.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
Click to expand...
could it just be that it is you and not them that is distorting both religion and science - this of course is for others to decide for themselves - why ever would they want to distort and misrepresent ? - twinc
 
twinc said:
could it just be that it is you and not them that is distorting both religion and science…
Click to expand...
I can certainly make an excellent case to the contrary.
…why ever would they want to distort and misrepresent?
Click to expand...
It’s doubtful that they would “want to,” or that they think they are. However, because they’ve unwittingly bought into a distorted misrepresentation themselves, it follows that they would disseminate that straw man to others.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
twinc said:
could it just be that it is you and not them that is distorting both religion and science - this of course is for others to decide for themselves - why ever would they want to distort and misrepresent ? - twinc
Click to expand...
Why do you seek to distort and misrepresent what the Catholic Church teaches about the relation of science and religion? Everything that everyone on this thread has posted in response to your ramblings is consistent with what the Catholic Church teaches.
 
Just as an observer, I have asked myself more than once. Is twinc a Catholic?🤷
 
diggerdomer said:
Why do you seek to distort and misrepresent what the Catholic Church teaches about the relation of science and religion? Everything that everyone on this thread has posted in response to your ramblings is consistent with what the Catholic Church teaches.
Click to expand...
 
diggerdomer said:
Why do you seek to distort and misrepresent what the Catholic Church teaches about the relation of science and religion? Everything that everyone on this thread has posted in response to your ramblings is consistent with what the Catholic Church teaches.
Click to expand...
just to claim that this or that is what the Church teaches does not make it so. www.ScriptureCatholic.com clearly shows what the Church teaches,which I accept but you reject so who exactly is rambling nonsense and then asking me to accept this nonsense as Catholic teaching.Having been misled stop trying to mislead me and others - twinc

`
 
twinc said:
just to claim that this or that is what the Church teaches does not make it so. www.ScriptureCatholic.com clearly shows what the Church teaches,which I accept but you reject so who exactly is rambling nonsense and then asking me to accept this nonsense as Catholic teaching.Having been misled stop trying to mislead me and others - twinc

`
Click to expand...
Hiyas twinc:)

You do realize that Scripture.com is not affiliated…or sponsored by / with the Catholic Church don’t you? It isn’t endorsed by the Catholic Church. It is Mr John Salza’s Site Not the Catholic Churchs’.

You using his opinions as evidence…is as good as holding mine. We are NOT the Holy See. We can give apology BUT we can not be taken above the Catholic Church.

Might I suggest not using that site as your only source?

I hope this helps
 
Dirk_Skene said:
So twinc says :hmmm:
Click to expand...
I have no reason to doubt that twinc is a sincere Catholic. Unfortunately, under the influence of Mr. Sungenis, the Kolbe Center and company, he seems to have been caught up in a certain type of Catholic fundamentalism which has become all too popular in the Church.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
twinc said:
just to claim that this or that is what the Church teaches does not make it so. www.ScriptureCatholic.com clearly shows what the Church teaches,which I accept but you reject so who exactly is rambling nonsense and then asking me to accept this nonsense as Catholic teaching.Having been misled stop trying to mislead me and others - twinc

`
Click to expand...
Umm…I refer to the Catechism, the teaching of the Popes and Bishops.

You refer to some website.

Who’s been misled?
 
twinc said:
just to claim that this or that is what the Church teaches does not make it so. www.ScriptureCatholic.com clearly shows what the Church teaches,which I accept but you reject so who exactly is rambling nonsense and then asking me to accept this nonsense as Catholic teaching.Having been misled stop trying to mislead me and others - twinc

`
Click to expand...
The website you hang your hat on for the teachings of the Church is a website set up by a private individual.

The official teachings of the Church are found summarised in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which also references the documentary sources of these teachings.

If a non-Catholic wanted to read the teachings of the Church are you saying you would refer them to a private website instead of official Church sources like the CCC???
 
thistle said:
The website you hang your hat on for the teachings of the Church is a website set up by a private individual.

The official teachings of the Church are found summarised in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which also references the documentary sources of these teachings.

If a non-Catholic wanted to read the teachings of the Church are you saying you would refer them to a private website instead of official Church sources like the CCC???
Click to expand...
Yes if after they were shown or told that the catechism is not a science textbook and that in spite of 282 clearly stating that Catechesis on creation is of major importance etc this is ignored by those for whom the Catechism supposedly means so much that they cannot even see that evolution is not even worth a mention whilst creation is mentioned many times over - twinc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top