god is not a magician

[mossy]

Gotta give it to the pope. When he wakes up and wants to cause a controversy, boy does he know how to kick off a controversy. The big bang and evolution do not contradict the Bible according to the pope.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/10/28/pope-francis-evolution-big-bang/18053509/

I guess this is what my mom meant when she told me this pope was new age. I would imagine some people in the vatican are not happy now.

[sl0re10]

Gotta give it to the pope. When he wakes up and wants to cause a controversy, boy does he know how to kick off a controversy. The big bang and evolution do not contradict the Bible according to the pope.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/10/28/pope-francis-evolution-big-bang/18053509/

I guess this is what my mom meant when she told me this pope was new age. I would imagine some people in the vatican are not happy now.

Did anyone go to Catholic school and know their actual teaching on the matter? Because most of what I know is from Aquinas (vs. from the Catholic Church itself) and this isn't new from that POV. He wrote about creation not being literal and explained what he thought it meant... and/or 'literally' it doesn't even say what many people say it says in the Bible. It didn't say seven 'days' and such...

and/or is this really a big deal for the Church or just for libs who never knew what the Church really taught to begin with.

[Lineman101]

Can any Roman Catholic answer if this was spoken Ex Cathedra? And does the Pope affirm macro or micro evolution with this speech?

[chiliman21]

And the pope is not god.

[RAMCLAP]

God said, "let there be light. And there was light". Doesn't get any more Big Bang than that.

[mif_slim]

I think the pope us aiming for "world peace" by trying to close to door on this matter... it only opens up more doors i think.

[The War Wagon]

Festival Day of the Reformation coming up - 497th Anniversary!

[spamsucker]

VORG: http://archive.wired.com/wired/archi...ope_astro.html

learn first. then discuss.

[texan]

The news coverage is kinda bonkers on this, here's an op-ed I read today explaining the situation well http://time.com/3545844/pope-francis...n-creationism/ This has been the official Catholic position for nearly 75 years, btw.

The crux of the matter IMO is in the common treatment of Genesis as a metaphorical description of history (this allegorical approach is nothing new). To quote Pope Francis "Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve." The only hypothesis I'm aware of which is completely rejected is abiogenesis, which isn't a part of evolutionary theory. However we had a thread about this topic not too long ago HERE and although people repeatedly pointed out how common this view was, the rationality of the position was simply rejected by those who view evolution as fundamentally incompatible with any Biblical worldview. This is in spite of many decades of productive theological discussion on the matter.

The Vatican has for decades maintained a creationist viewpoint on the origins of life while acknowledging the scientific evidence for evolution through natural selection. To quote Francis one last time, "faith enriches reason". Our beliefs should bolster our desire to think logically, not countermand it.

[bigmike82]

Well put.

[Just Dave]

I'll have to disagree with the head of the Catholic church on this.

The news coverage is kinda bonkers on this, here's an op-ed I read today explaining the situation well http://time.com/3545844/pope-francis...n-creationism/ This has been the official Catholic position for nearly 75 years, btw.

The crux of the matter IMO is in the common treatment of Genesis as a metaphorical description of history (this allegorical approach is nothing new). To quote Pope Francis "Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve." The only hypothesis I'm aware of which is completely rejected is abiogenesis, which isn't a part of evolutionary theory. However we had a thread about this topic not too long ago HERE and although people repeatedly pointed out how common this view was, the rationality of the position was simply rejected by those who view evolution as fundamentally incompatible with any Biblical worldview. This is in spite of many decades of productive theological discussion on the matter.

The Vatican has for decades maintained a creationist viewpoint on the origins of life while acknowledging the scientific evidence for evolution through natural selection. To quote Francis one last time, "faith enriches reason". Our beliefs should bolster our desire to think logically, not countermand it.

You're right, allegorizing interpretation is nothing new but it is a form of illiteracy which was started by the Greeks predating the first coming of Christ by about 500 years.

[sl0re10]

The news coverage is kinda bonkers on this, here's an op-ed I read today explaining the situation well http://time.com/3545844/pope-francis...n-creationism/ This has been the official Catholic position for nearly 75 years, btw.

The crux of the matter IMO is in the common treatment of Genesis as a metaphorical description of history (this allegorical approach is nothing new). To quote Pope Francis "Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve." The only hypothesis I'm aware of which is completely rejected is abiogenesis, which isn't a part of evolutionary theory. However we had a thread about this topic not too long ago HERE and although people repeatedly pointed out how common this view was, the rationality of the position was simply rejected by those who view evolution as fundamentally incompatible with any Biblical worldview. This is in spite of many decades of productive theological discussion on the matter.

The Vatican has for decades maintained a creationist viewpoint on the origins of life while acknowledging the scientific evidence for evolution through natural selection. To quote Francis one last time, "faith enriches reason". Our beliefs should bolster our desire to think logically, not countermand it.

A: not Christian
B: not Catholic (of course; see A)

but I'd add; I think may of the totally anti evolution* debaters are not even Catholic right? I don't think Catholicism teaches about the creation of the world in a way that would cause someone to totally reject evolution... and from reading their philosophers I don't think they have for many hundreds of years.

That said; is any of this really new?

* some of us are anti theory of evolution because its simplistic as a theory. We're not against the general idea life evolved. Just that the theory as it stands can't explain evolution itself. Lefties try to rhetorically tie us to the totally against / young earth theory stuff... because they're dishonest thinkers / debaters....

[texan]

A: not Christian
B: not Catholic (of course; see A)

but I'd add; I think may of the totally anti evolution* debaters are not even Catholic right? I don't think Catholicism teaches about the creation of the world in a way that would cause someone to totally reject evolution... and from reading their philosophers I don't think they have for many hundreds of years.

That said; is any of this really new?

* some of us are anti theory of evolution because its simplistic as a theory. We're not against the general idea life evolved. Just that the theory as it stands can't explain evolution itself. Lefties try to rhetorically tie us to the totally against / young earth theory stuff... because they're dishonest thinkers / debaters....

On the first point: I don't like to generalize belief on this particular subject based on denomination, as I've found opinions on the merits of evolutionary theory to be an individual over institutional choice.

One the second: fair enough, though I think if we're going to discuss the necessity of considering an individual's reasons for rejecting something we shouldn't in the same breath generalize what an entire political wing thinks on the subject as though they're monolithic.

Back to the topic at hand: this isn't a new discussion regarding the Catholic church leaders and how they weigh in on this subject but it is an often misunderstood one. I think it's important for everyone to keep in mind that some theologians are also very active within the secular scientific community. Too many approach this topic as a binary choice and that's just a false dilemma.

[Libtard]

Gotta give it to the pope. When he wakes up and wants to cause a controversy, boy does he know how to kick off a controversy. The big bang and evolution do not contradict the Bible according to the pope.

If you believe in G'd then you believe He destroyed the Tower of Babel -- yet, He allowed men to fly into outer space and even send crafts beyond the solar system.

The Big Bang and Evolutionary theories aren't trying to disprove the existence of G'd or the accuracy of the Bible. They simply explain how some of G'd's tools work, and there's nothing wrong with that. And there's plenty of room to believe in the scientific theories while still believing in the Almighty.

Now, if you do happen to believe or know that Creation occurred as explained by the Big Bang theory, and you had to explain it to s primitive people 5,000 years ago, you might give them a story which is very much like the story in Genesis.

[IraCiotog]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

The whole Bible vs. Science thing should never be. Science is the study of HOW, whereas The Bible is a book of WHY. When you look to The Bible for the HOW, you've pretty much missed the boat.