|
|
|
GK Paul
Skeptic Friend
USA
306 Posts |
 Posted - 08/31/2006 : 13:59:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
quote:
In an October 22, 1996, address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope John Paul II updated the Church's position to accept evolution of the human body:
"In his encyclical Humani Generis (1950), my predecessor Pius XII has already affirmed that there is no conflict between evolution and the doctrine of the faith regarding man and his vocation, provided that we do not lose sight of certain fixed points....Today, more than a half-century after the appearance of that encyclical, some new findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than an hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies -- which was neither planned nor sought -- constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory." (John Paul II, Message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Evolution)
quote:
With man, we find ourselves facing a different ontological order—an ontological leap, we could say. But in posing such a great ontological discontinuity, are we not breaking up the physical continuity which seems to be the main line of research about evolution in the fields of physics and chemistry? An appreciation for the different methods used in different fields of scholarship allows us to bring together two points of view which at first might seem irreconcilable. The sciences of observation describe and measure, with ever greater precision, the many manifestations of life, and write them down along the time-line. The moment of passage into the spiritual realm is not something that can be observed in this way—although we can nevertheless discern, through experimental research, a series of very valuable signs of what is specifically human life.
Link1
Link2
Well thank you for bringing that in, but nowhere does it say that the theory is true or correct (that's why its still refered to as a theory). And it bsically goes on to say that the creation of the soul can "not" be observed by science... Christ said in one verse (paraphrasing) Fear not those that can kill the body, fear the One that can kill the soul... Darwin deals with the body, not the soul. And Christ was more concerned with the soul than the body. |
"Something cannot come from nothing" -- Ken Tanaka - geologist
"The existence of a Being endowed with intelligence and wisdom is a necessary inference from a study of celestial mechanics" --Sir Isaac Newton
GK Paul |
| Edited by - GK Paul on 08/31/2006 14:04:29 |
 |
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2006 : 14:01:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
quote:
Originally posted by leoofno
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
I was pretty much an atheist until I read the Bible. Especially the New Testament...
GK Paul, this got my interest. Could you briefly explain what it is about the Bible, especially the New Testament, that convinced you that it was true? What kind of evidence does it provide, in you opinion, that would convince an atheist? That seems like a pretty hard sell, since most atheists got that way by examining, and rejecting, religious arguments. At least thats been my experience.
I am an atheist, but I like to keep an open mind. So when I come across a former atheist who claims to have "seen the light", so to speek, I am very curious as to how this came about.
(edited to fix the quite)
The Power, the Brilliance (that far exceeds anything I've read), the Originality (that far exceeds anything I've read), and the Hope for eternal life, in the words of Christ are what turned me from a nonbeliever to a believer. I would advise someone to get a bible that is easy to read (some bibles have small hard to read print). Also I would recommend having at least 2 Bibles. one King James version, and one everyday language version like The Living Bible, or The Good News Bible. If you've never read the Bible before, I would recommend starting by reading the Gospels (Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John). John is the book that deals mostly with the Divinity of Christ... Or as someone once said, how can anyone go out to a rural area at night and look up at the sky and not believe in God.
Power, brilliance, originality, hope. All these attributes are well within the capability of talented humans. So what must be convincing is that thay exhibit these qualities, as you say, "far in excess" of what an ordinary human could possibly produce. In other words, they show unmistakable signs of divine guidence.
I'm not sure I can agree with you on that. Its fairly safe to say that he four Gospels are often contradictory and get some basic facts wrong. I would expect divinely inspired works, often called the very "word of God", to be free from these kinds of errors. In fact, they make the works seem very human indeed.
Power, brilliance, originality, and hope are fairly subjective things. I don't recall them being such standouts, but its been a long, long time since I've read them in full. I'll have to correct that and see if my opinion has changed any.
As to your last point, when I look up at the night sky and see the enormity of the universe, its wonders and beauty. It is beyond my ability to explain, but I don't just jump to the conclusion that a god must be responsible because of that. Why would I try to explain something beyond my understanding by supposing it was created by something even further beyond my understanding? I would need good evidence for it, which I don't see.
|
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
GK Paul
Skeptic Friend
USA
306 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2006 : 14:17:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by leoofno
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
quote:
Originally posted by leoofno
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
I was pretty much an atheist until I read the Bible. Especially the New Testament...
GK Paul, this got my interest. Could you briefly explain what it is about the Bible, especially the New Testament, that convinced you that it was true? What kind of evidence does it provide, in you opinion, that would convince an atheist? That seems like a pretty hard sell, since most atheists got that way by examining, and rejecting, religious arguments. At least thats been my experience.
I am an atheist, but I like to keep an open mind. So when I come across a former atheist who claims to have "seen the light", so to speek, I am very curious as to how this came about.
(edited to fix the quite)
The Power, the Brilliance (that far exceeds anything I've read), the Originality (that far exceeds anything I've read), and the Hope for eternal life, in the words of Christ are what turned me from a nonbeliever to a believer. I would advise someone to get a bible that is easy to read (some bibles have small hard to read print). Also I would recommend having at least 2 Bibles. one King James version, and one everyday language version like The Living Bible, or The Good News Bible. If you've never read the Bible before, I would recommend starting by reading the Gospels (Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John). John is the book that deals mostly with the Divinity of Christ... Or as someone once said, how can anyone go out to a rural area at night and look up at the sky and not believe in God.
Power, brilliance, originality, hope. All these attributes are well within the capability of talented humans. So what must be convincing is that thay exhibit these qualities, as you say, "far in excess" of what an ordinary human could possibly produce. In other words, they show unmistakable signs of divine guidence.
I'm not sure I can agree with you on that. Its fairly safe to say that he four Gospels are often contradictory and get some basic facts wrong. I would expect divinely inspired works, often called the very "word of God", to be free from these kinds of errors. In fact, they make the works seem very human indeed.
Power, brilliance, originality, and hope are fairly subjective things. I don't recall them being such standouts, but its been a long, long time since I've read them in full. I'll have to correct that and see if my opinion has changed any.
As to your last point, when I look up at the night sky and see the enormity of the universe, its wonders and beauty. It is beyond my ability to explain, but I don't just jump to the conclusion that a god must be responsible because of that. Why would I try to explain something beyond my understanding by supposing it was created by something even further beyond my understanding? I would need good evidence for it, which I don't see.
Even Christ couldn't convince everyone, that's why they tortured Him and nailed Him to the cross... But something happened after that that caused tens of thousands of buildings called chuches to be built and caused your calender to be changed. |
"Something cannot come from nothing" -- Ken Tanaka - geologist
"The existence of a Being endowed with intelligence and wisdom is a necessary inference from a study of celestial mechanics" --Sir Isaac Newton
GK Paul |
| Edited by - GK Paul on 08/31/2006 14:49:04 |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2006 : 14:18:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
Well thank you for bringing that in, but nowhere does it say that the theory is true or correct (that's why its still refered to as a theory). And it bsically goes on to say that the creation of the soul can "not" be observed by science... Christ said in one verse (paraphrasing) Fear not those that can kill the body, fear the One that can kill the soul... Darwin deals with the body, not the soul. And Christ was more concerned with the soul than the body.
Yeah, no one ever said anything about evolution and spirituality except for you in another thread about Coulter which you never addressed.
While it doesn't say "evolution is 100% true" in so many words (and no one would say that since some evidence could come along and totally disprove it. Only certain types of people talk in terms of absolutes), the obvious (at least to me) implication was that evolution has much evidence in favor of it and it is not contradictory to the catholic interpretation of the bible as long as the "body" (or the physical) is dealt with and not the spirtual. And since no one tries to use evolution to say anything about spirtuality, this to me implies a tacit approval. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2006 : 15:17:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Even Christ couldn't convince everyone, that's why they tortured Him and nailed Him to the cross... But something happened after that that caused tens of thousands of buildings called chuches to be built and caused your calender to be changed.
Then the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, slaughter of natives in the New World, Hitler, etc...truly amazing. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2006 : 18:01:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
Well thank you for bringing that in, but nowhere does it say that the theory is true or correct (that's why its still refered to as a theory).
There is a world of difference between the colloquial use of the word "theory" and the scientific use of the word "theory".
Would you like to have the difference explained to you?
I'm asking, because too many people of the Christian ilk does not understand the difference. If you truly understood the difference, then you would have recognised from the context that the pope was referring to the scientific definition of theory.
quote:
And it bsically goes on to say that the creation of the soul can "not" be observed by science... Christ said in one verse (paraphrasing) Fear not those that can kill the body, fear the One that can kill the soul... Darwin deals with the body, not the soul. And Christ was more concerned with the soul than the body.
Then I cannot see the point of supporting an artificially created conflict between science and faith, as Coulter and Dembski has done. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2006 : 18:17:51 [Permalink]
|
Thank you for finally answering at least some of what I challenged you with.
GK: "But something happened after that that caused tens of thousands of buildings called chuches to be built and caused your calender to be changed"
If size and impact are your evidence take a look at Scientology after less than 100 years. There are a number of very large religions measured by number of followers or places of worship. Either they are all "true" religions or the fact Christianity has a lot of followers and a lot of churches doesn't mean any more than the same evidence means for those other religions.
GK: "The previous pope has said Christianity has nothing to fear from science, but do you have any evidence that the Catholic Church has said they believe the "theory" of evolution is true."
What part of, "the recognition of evolution as more than an hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies -- which was neither planned nor sought -- constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory." " do you not understand? Perhaps you just don't grasp what is meant by a "theory" in science, nor what language is used to relay acceptance of a theory. That is common among people who are not familiar with scientific terms and equate theory with hypothesis. In common everyday discussions theory is misused when people should be using the term hypothesis.
"Significant argument in favor of" would be the same language one could also use to describe the theory of gravity. The law of gravity, on the other hand refers to the mathematical formulas that apply to the theory.
Any stretching of the meaning of the Pope's words is just more denial on your part and perhaps a little lack of education in science and science terminology. Why don't you ask a few priests what they think the Pope's message means here instead of making up you own definition?
So, speaking of stretching meanings to fit what you want to believe instead of what the evidence supports,..
GK: "Considering Moses never owned a telescope or probably never took a science course, his descriptiong of creation is amazing and I've heard scientists say that. I believe the Bible uses symbolism just like Jesus used parables. For example, I do not believe in a literal snake tempting Eve. But I believe the truth behind the symbolism of the snake (representing evil) is 100% accurate. Moses and Jesus spoke in ways the illiterate non-educated people could understand. The world being created in 6 days is symbolism that the illiterate people could understand. God doesn't live in time. God created time."
Why then do you claim some Biblical descriptions are literally true and others are not? Who decided? And when it was decided that one description is symbolic because the evidence is obviously not the same as the Biblical description, (the Moon for example, hard to refute what you can so easily see), why then is it so hard to believe something such as the Biblical Creation story is also just symbolic? The evidence evolution is the correct description of how we came to be here is just as easily seen once it is understood. You just have a little less understanding about it than you do of a moon which you observe directly.
The idea, however, that the reason the Bible is so inaccurate is because Moses was ignorant is very problematic. If an infallible God inspired or directed Moses to write Genesis, why would that infallible God have been so imprecise? Remember, it says in Genesis that God walked the Earth and spoke to Moses in person on at least one occasion, that of the Ten Commandments event. (I'm not aware the Bible says Moses wrote Genesis, by the way, but I'll leave that one alone for now.)
You have yet to show the Bible is literal. And if it is a bunch of stories then you have yet to show they are any more real than stories of Zeus or Krishna.
GK: "In answer to your question. I have to believe if they closed every abortion clinic in the U.S. there would be far less abortions. ... If they made murder legal would there be more or less murders?"
Wouldn't it be wiser to see how many abortions occurred when it was illegal in the past rather than make the mistake of assuming this will be effective? Your belief that making abortions illegal actually results in clinics disappearing is a false assumption. There were plenty of places to get abortions when it was illegal in the past.
GK: "If a person "delibertly" lies against a person they accuse of being Godless they are a phony, but even phonies are capable of saying things that are true, and their also capable of becoming better people over time."
So that vile mouthed Coulter's false witnesses against everyone she considers "liberal", and all the inaccuracies in her book which have been pointed out to you with overwhelming evidence provided showing her statements are repeatedly false is not enough to make you reflect on your having been hoodwinked into thinking she had written truths?
You prefer to believe what you like, rather than what the evidence shows. Why not pretend the Moon is a nite light then? When you see it in the daytime and when you see that it reflects the Sun's light, you can just ignore that and believe it is Satan tempting you to disbelieve the Bible.
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2006 : 19:05:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
The Power, the Brilliance (that far exceeds anything I've read), the Originality (that far exceeds anything I've read)...
If you are that easily impressed then I have two suggestions:
1) Pick up a copy of Isaak Asimov's "Foundation".
2) Stay away from anything written by L. Ron Hubbard.
Asimov's book can be a bit slow in the beginning, but hang in there. It will pick up speed.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2006 : 23:38:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
But something happened after that that caused tens of thousands of buildings called chuches to be built and caused your calender to be changed.
Huh?
Go read up on the calander:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_calendar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_Calendar
The church manipulated the calander, but that was in the 1580s. The current (gregorian) calander is basically the same as the Julian calander (with some mathematical corrections for accuracy), which was just a mathematical improvement on the old Roman calander.
The Roman and Julian calanders used to change the year number on Jan. 1st when a new Consul took office. So it was always Year 1 when a new Consul went into power.
The year numbering scheme that we currently use didn't just magically come about. It is an affectation of the church at some point after 500AD.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
GK Paul
Skeptic Friend
USA
306 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2006 : 02:34:43 [Permalink]
|
And than I believe that rationality and the mind is just one part of a human being. You also have feeling and emotion which I believe are just as valuable and important as mental abilities. You also have the soul and the conscious. They say there are some people who don't have a conscious. But I believe the power of Christ can overcome even that.
St.Paul said you can have all the wisdom in the world but without love you have nothing. You can perform great miracles and make great prophesies but without love it is all worthless. I think I'm starting to understand what he means.
Now would a God that we can prove rationally be much of a God. Would a God that our human mind could comprehend be much of a God. What a cold impersonal God He would be. Mother Theresa probably new more about God than hundreds of theologians, even though they knew the bible better.
God is not the Bible. The Bible just gives us minute glimpses of the Omnipotent, Omniscient and most important, the Loving God. If I come back into this forum, it won't be in any kind of a confrontational way. I'm seeing that get's nowhere.
I believe the God of Christianity is tremendously multifaceted. He even changed His mind once or twice when He was pleaded with by humans. The God of Christianity is mostly about Love. There isn't a lot of love in these forums which is partly my fault. I wish you all the best... If you have a non confrontational question I'll try to answer it in a non-confrontational manner if I get the time Good Luck and as Red Skelton used to say, may God Bless.
I'll leave you with a quote that's is on Carl Jung's tombstone. It comes directly from the Bible (1 Corinthians chapter 15 verse 47)
"The first man(Adam) was from the earth. The second man was from above." |
"Something cannot come from nothing" -- Ken Tanaka - geologist
"The existence of a Being endowed with intelligence and wisdom is a necessary inference from a study of celestial mechanics" --Sir Isaac Newton
GK Paul |
| Edited by - GK Paul on 09/01/2006 03:24:11 |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2006 : 05:16:44 [Permalink]
|
| Hmmmm...too bad you can't handle vigorous debate and seem to think that the questions and direct approach we have is "not love." I also find it highly funny that you espouse all this "love" stuff but then call Coulter's book "powerful". You are a hypocrite. So long. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 09/01/2006 05:17:20 |
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2006 : 05:31:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
Even Christ couldn't convince everyone, that's why they tortured Him and nailed Him to the cross... But something happened after that that caused tens of thousands of buildings called chuches to be built and caused your calender to be changed.
Success = Truth?  (There are thousands of Mosques, too.)
I appreciate your answers. |
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2006 : 08:41:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by leoofno
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
Even Christ couldn't convince everyone, that's why they tortured Him and nailed Him to the cross... But something happened after that that caused tens of thousands of buildings called chuches to be built and caused your calender to be changed.
Success = Truth? (There are thousands of Mosques, too.)
I appreciate your answers.
And don't forget Hindu temples and Buddhist temples, too. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2006 : 09:49:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
GK Paul:
There isn't a lot of love in these forums which is partly my fault. I wish you all the best... If you have a non confrontational question I'll try to answer it in a non-confrontational manner if I get the time Good Luck and as Red Skelton used to say, may God Bless.
GK Paul, I don't know if you looked at our mission statement. Perhaps you should read it and consider what it says.
quote:
The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.
If you choose to make a case to a group of skeptics where conflicting evidence exists, you should probably be prepared for a challenge. The idea is to get as close as we can to something resembling what is, which is not necessarily what we would like it to be. And we can be wrong. In fact, we must allow for that. Critical thinking is a method for evaluating claims that relies heavily on empirical evidence in order for us to be able to evaluate a claim and put it in its proper perspective as best we can.
Now, you may see that as confrontational, and sometimes it is. But you would be wrong if you think that we are confrontational for the sake of an argument with no other goal in mind. I couldn't care less what your personal politics are or how you view your relationship to your God. That's your business. But, for example, expecting us to not question the truth-value of claims made about science by professional political pundits would be asking us to turn our backs on the evidence for the sake of a political agenda. How would that serve the truth? Our bias in this area is not the issue. If we lack the tools to evaluate a claim, all claims become equal. And if all claims are equal then no claim has any value.
We welcome opposing viewpoints. We even argue among ourselves and drag out whatever evidence we have to support our particular viewpoint. Based on the strength of evidence presented, we must be willing to change our position accordingly. Sometimes, we just don't agree. But most of those disagreements come from an honest attempt to learn, from every direction possible, the issue that is being debated. I can tell you that I have a deep respect for most the people who post on this forum even when I think they are dead wrong on some subject or other. I do because I know that a critical thinker is usually not just shooting from the hip. One of our goals is to teach those who come to our forums and lay a claim on us to use the methods we use for evaluating that claim. Asking for evidence by way of citing a source that supports the claim is one way we do that. And while we may not articulate the “lesson plan” we do it by example.
And guess what? What we do here is a labor of love. We are promoting a method for evaluating claims using the best tools that we know of in the hope of bringing as much reason and thought that we can to a world rife with credulous and often magical thinking so pervasive that we sometimes (and with plenty of evidence to support us on this) feel that we live in world gone mad. We are not here to tell you what to think. What we offer are tools to cut through any possible bias, yours and ours, to arrive at something usable and of value.
Just so's ya know…
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2006 : 10:35:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
Originally posted by leoofno
quote:
Originally posted by GK Paul
Even Christ couldn't convince everyone, that's why they tortured Him and nailed Him to the cross... But something happened after that that caused tens of thousands of buildings called chuches to be built and caused your calender to be changed.
Success = Truth? (There are thousands of Mosques, too.)
I appreciate your answers.
And don't forget Hindu temples and Buddhist temples, too.
I think I have it figured out. What is True depends on where you are. Mormanism is true in Utah. Hinduism in India. After all, lotsa people can't be wrong. |
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
| Edited by - leoofno on 09/01/2006 10:36:25 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Caesar's Messiah
Topic Locked
