The Vatican set to embrace Evolution

#1
Sabanocchio

Sabanocchio

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
17,286
Likes
1
#1
The Vatican has admitted that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution should not have been dismissed and claimed it is compatible with the Christian view of Creation.

They argued that militant atheists are turning people away from evolution by using it to attack religion while they also urge believers in creationism to acknowledge the overwhelming body of evidence that now exists to support Darwin's theory.
Click to expand...

The Vatican claims Darwin's theory of evolution is compatible with Christianity - Telegraph
 
#9
#9
if the vatican does accept this, then it will confuse many catholics and cause them question their beliefs.
Click to expand...

I'm still not seeing why evolution is such a fiery issue.
 
#11
#11
Vol_4_Life said:
I'm still not seeing why evolution is such a fiery issue.
Click to expand...

it's a big issue, becuase if evolution is disproved, then one would have to consider the world was created by Intel Design. if that happens, then the thought that God created the world suddenly becomes very real to people who don't believe in God.
 
#12
#12
At that point they have to embrace the concept they aren't the all encompassing geniuses they always took themselves for, in fact, they find themselves in a horrible position...they are bought with a price made, supported and saved by a higher being that doesn't care if they are attractive, have money, and from a ''good'' family that has money.
 
#13
#13
joevol320 said:
it's a big issue, becuase if evolution is disproved, then one would have to consider the world was created by Intel Design. if that happens, then the thought that God created the world suddenly becomes very real to people who don't believe in God.
Click to expand...

It must be nice to have views that can't be disproven.
 
#14
#14
I guess I'll never understand why the theory of evolution versus the theory of intelligent design is such a fiery issue.
 
#15
#15
Vol_4_Life said:
I guess I'll never understand why the theory of evolution versus the theory of intelligent design is such a fiery issue.
Click to expand...

It becomes a fiery issue when one takes a philosophical and religious-based worldview, and tries to package it along side a scientific-based theory as an equally scientific point of view.
 
#16
#16
Why is it such an issue? I believe in evolution, but I didn't hear any of the more ardent supporters offer any answer to this simple question. Why all the homework on the issue if it's not about our origins?
 
#18
#18
BigPapaVol said:
Why is it such an issue? I believe in evolution, but I didn't hear any of the more ardent supporters offer any answer to this simple question. Why all the homework on the issue if it's not about our origins?
Click to expand...

You don't think it is worthwhile to understand how we got to where we are today? Without modern evolutionary theory the advances in the life scieneces, medical, and dental fields wouldn't have been possible.
 
#19
#19
rjd970 said:
You don't think it is worthwhile to understand how we got to where we are today? Without modern evolutionary theory the advances in the life scieneces, medical, and dental fields wouldn't have been possible.
Click to expand...
that's entertaining.

Now, why is your fervor not about how Alexander is such a greater influence on us today than Confucius might be? Clearly that has more bearing on our daily lives than whether birds are descendants of velociraptors.
 
#20
#20
rjd970 said:
You don't think it is worthwhile to understand how we got to where we are today? Without modern evolutionary theory the advances in the life scieneces, medical, and dental fields wouldn't have been possible.
Click to expand...

See, I don't really see it quite that way. I don't mind to let people believe whatever they want about how we came to be what we are. I take issue with trying to pass off faith-based beliefs as having equal scientific validity of observation-based beliefs, which is what one is attempting to do by advocating teaching Intelligent Design (which while it incorporates observations of sorts, it couples them with the assumption that there is a higher power) in a science course.
 
#21
#21
IPorange said:
See, I don't really see it quite that way. I don't mind to let people believe whatever they want about how we came to be what we are. I take issue with trying to pass off faith-based beliefs as having equal scientific validity of observation-based beliefs, which is what one is attempting to do by advocating teaching Intelligent Design (which while it incorporates observations of sorts, it couples them with the assumption that there is a higher power) in a science course.
Click to expand...

100% agree.
 
#22
#22
BigPapaVol said:
that's entertaining.

Now, why is your fervor not about how Alexander is such a greater influence on us today than Confucius might be? Clearly that has more bearing on our daily lives than whether birds are descendants of velociraptors.
Click to expand...

It's probably entertaining to you because you don't understand the implications the theory has on research in these fields. I took two semesters of college level biology in school and the entire year was devoted to understanding the theory. It is the basis of everything in the biological field, and hence, the medical and dental fields. The next time you need a surgery of some sort, you can thank Darwin for providing the framework for doctors to understand how and why the body works the way it does.
 
#23
#23
IPorange said:
See, I don't really see it quite that way. I don't mind to let people believe whatever they want about how we came to be what we are. I take issue with trying to pass off faith-based beliefs as having equal scientific validity of observation-based beliefs, which is what one is attempting to do by advocating teaching Intelligent Design (which while it incorporates observations of sorts, it couples them with the assumption that there is a higher power) in a science course.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

People can believe what they want, but I am going to call it like it is when they try to place ID on equal playing field as real science.
 
#24
#24
Again, I don't know what ID claims so I can't really comment about that. I sympathize with Vols 4 Life in that evolution is clearly scientific inquiry and bounded by the rules of scientific inquiry. What the Catholic church or any religion believes is more spiritual inquiry with a different set of rules. Of course they cross but often they are tangental or even complimentary. In other words, they aren't directly competing theories.

Using Evolution to disprove God is as futile as using God to disprove Evolution.
 
#25
#25
rjd970 said:
It's probably entertaining to you because you don't understand the implications the theory has on research in these fields. I took two semesters of college level biology in school and the entire year was devoted to understanding the theory. It is the basis of everything in the biological field, and hence, the medical and dental fields. The next time you need a surgery of some sort, you can thank Darwin for providing the framework for doctors to understand how and why the body works the way it does.
Click to expand...
sweet. You took biology classes and I still don't buy it. Pretending that evolution is the basis of medical study is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Biology and anatomy are biology and anatomy. Evolution is a related field, to be sure, but calling it the basis is nothing more than entertainment.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top