Fact? What fact? The Pope does not accept textbook evolution. Why? Because it does not include God. Haven’t you read “Human Persons Created in the Image of God”? The Catholic Church does not accept any theory of evolution that denies to God any truly causal role.
It’s true that they like to imply that (if not state it outright).
That elicited this blog response …
As you should know, science does not deny supernatural causes. It just can’t make any inferences on those.
No more than chemistry has an explanation for reactions via non-physical processes. Are you now trying to tell us that chemistry denies God?
He says it’s “virtually certain.”
Perhaps we should let him explain why:
Yes, notice that the central claim of Darwinism is said by the Pope to be “virtually certain.”
Another reason the Pope approves of Darwinian theory; as you should know, Darwin attributed the origin of life to God.
I don’t have to offer any details, you can ask God for those when you get to Heaven. HE has ALL the answers you’ll ever want. You just have to be patient. TRUE science can NEVER contradict GOD. If it does, then guess whose wrong and it ain’t GOD.
So by not explicitly including God, plumbing excludes God? You’re a very odd person, Reggie.
Science can’t say that, although you can. You see, science can’t say whether or not God is pulling the strings, merely created the process that runs by itself, or never created anything at all. It can’t (and doesn’t rule out God)
(or a plumbing manual)
(and plumbing!!)
(if one accepts Reggie’s somewhat odd notion that not mentioning God denies Him)
So it doesn’t help that the plumber is a theist? Darn. Atheistic plumbing. Whodda thought?
This is why Pope Benedict says that God can even use contingency in His creation. Hence, random variation can serve His purposes as well as anything else. ( with the direction of natural selection, of course)
And shouldn’t be, as the Pope says. Why don’t you believe him?
Very good. But if you understand that, why all the thrashing and complaining about it? It’s correct as far as it can go. But for the supernatural, you will have to go beyond science. This is what Pope Benedict is telling you. Why not accept the teaching of the church and be done with this foolishness?
You not only like to insult people, you can’t read. You’re responding to a post that I didn’t write. An apology is in order. I’m not sure you’re capable of such.
As above. You might actually want to read the post and figure out who wrote it before mentioning the wrong person’s name.
Um, darn, it was ed that dissented from the magisterium that time. Sorry about that. And yes, I took you to task for accusing me of things I didn’t write, so it’s only fair I apologize to you. You guys tend to make the same sorts of arguments, sometimes it’s easy to confuse you two. Not that it’s a good excuse.
I caught your first version of this post and your edit is an improvement, athough you still have to attack even while apologizing for your error (by saying that my posts are indistinguishable from another person’s). But yes, it’s not a good excuse anyway.
Well, Memaw, that’s a rather odd stance to take. How do you think humanity has managed to make all the discoveries it has since 1660, if it only had waited to ask God in heaven? Or do you not understand how science works?
Barbarian, my Honda needed carburetor work a couple of months ago, so I first prayed over the matter. When nothing happened I took it to our local mechanic, a Honda specialist. I told him in no uncertain terms that I did not want him to approach it from an atheistic viewpoint, but to pray over the matter.
Um, I didn’t say that. I’ll refrain from saying you can’t read, though.
If you don’t want to tell me, that’s O.K. Not everyone wants to make their position clear, nor are you required to do so.
You’ve put your philosophical and theological baggage on it, but it really doesn’t belong there. The point, of course, is that both science and plumbing are methodologically naturalistic, and so they can’t say anything at all about God. This doesn’t make science or plumbing “atheistic.”
Pretty much like your cookbook doesn’t require God, or your plumbing manual doesn’t require God. Your sense of pride is offended that your physical body can be accounted for in naturalistic terms. (even if your soul cannot)
Dodging won’t help you. At this point, some facts are called for.
Hmmm… not when I went to school. Not in any of the schools I know about. Can you name even one such school and the city in which it is located? I’d be very interested in talking to the people there, to see why they are doing that.
I think so. You no longer assert the theory denies God. Now, it seems you no longer assert that textbooks deny God. But you still assert that students are told that. So it’s time to substantiate that allegation.
The Catholic Church is not about science, and is unable to make scientific judgments about biology or other sciences. That’s why we have science. The Church can’t give us those answers.
It’s a fact. And it seems to infuriate you. But that’s how it is. That’s what the Pope says about it. Get with the program.
You seem to find methodological naturalism OK for some science, but not for others. But neither science nor God is compelled to fit your expectations.
I didn’t say that I didn’t want to. I said I didn’t understand your question.
You’re not required to make your position clear. If you don’t want to, that’s OK. I already said that I didn’t understand your question.
Why has the Church warned about evolutionary theory but not about plumbing? Can you show me where the Pope has said anything about plumbing? Also, why do atheists universally cite evolution as a support for their atheistic belief? Where are the atheists or Christians who use plumbing as a support for their belief?
This is a philosophical statement that cannot be proven scientifically.
You used the term Krishna Consciousness “science” already so you’re not consistent. If you can use that kind of modifier on science (where is the Krishna Consciousness plumbing?) then the term *atheistic science *is perfectly consistent.
You’re not a philosopher so I don’t think you can explain it very well. You make philosophical claims about science that you can’t prove.
I would like to see your proof of that.
Again, please prove that point.
As above.
Please explain why the Pope makes this statement again. You appear to be saying that the Pope says this because science cannot speak about God. So, the proof that evolution is “virtually certain” is based on the “fact” that science cannot speak about God.
