Pope @ world. "God isn't magic"

[Meresgi]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...d-9822514.html

About damn time. I can't wait to see fox report on this.

[Xajii]

this is the opposite of news, the catholic church has openly supported the theory of evolution and big bang for years and years and years and years

[Guyverarmor]

My dad is a big religious right person... waiting for his head to explode.

[Ksandra]

this is the opposite of news, the catholic church has openly supported the theory of evolution and big bang for years and years and years and years

.


I forgot to post the whole communion thing, that is the only recent suggestion for actual change that may come from the church (they are looking for ways to let divorcees to have communion). Everything else is usually shit the church already believed.

With that said, it's still good for him to say it because while it's something we already believed it was never highlighted, and I've learned over the years people know (or knew) very little about the beliefs of the Catholic Church. So it's nice that people are starting to get what our stances are.

[Ksandra]

My dad is a big religious right person... waiting for his head to explode.

Is he catholic?

Apparently othersects try to say Catholics aren't Christians...rofl

[Priran]

this is the opposite of news, the catholic church has openly supported the theory of evolution and big bang for years and years and years and years

this. the bible-thumpers are protestants, the catholic church has explicitly disavowed the idea that the bible is literal since the 60s

[Quixon]

this. the bible-thumpers are protestants, the catholic church has explicitly disavowed the idea that the bible is literal since the 60s

The difference between what the Pope says, and what the followers believe/are taught can be 2 different things. I'm from southern NY, so not exactly Bible Thumping Country. I went to Catholic School up to 4th Grade, and then took CCD (religious education)up until I made Confirmation. 15 I think? They take literal what they want to take literal lol. Insofar as I had to do projects explaining why the Big Bang was bullshit, and that God himself created all of space and time and the creatures on it.

This was just your regular old Roman Catholic schooling. Also, of all the bible thumpers I know and interact with, the vast majority of them are Roman Catholic.

[Andalusian girls]

Is he catholic?

Apparently othersects try to say Catholics aren't Christians...rofl

some fucking pancake on here tried that once insisting Catholicism and 'Christianity' were two different religions

almost as bad as saying Gone Home isn't a videogame

[Priran]

The difference between what the Pope says, and what the followers believe/are taught can be 2 different things. I'm from southern NY, so not exactly Bible Thumping Country. I went to Catholic School up to 4th Grade, and then took CCD (religious education)up until I made Confirmation. 15 I think? They take literal what they want to take literal lol. Insofar as I had to do projects explaining why the Big Bang was bullshit, and that God himself created all of space and time and the creatures on it.

This was just your regular old Roman Catholic schooling. Also, of all the bible thumpers I know and interact with, the vast majority of them are Roman Catholic.

that's disappointing. I don't suppose francis is gonna make much of a difference with this, then

[Abandon]

some fucking pancake on here tried that once insisting Catholicism and 'Christianity' were two different religions

almost as bad as saying Gone Home isn't a videogame

last i heard, gone home is a walking simulator

[Lyall]

last i heard, gone home is a walking simulator

Forgot a key word.

[Abandon]

my bad. LESBIAN walking simulator

[NynJa]

almost as bad as saying Gone Home isn't a videogame

But its not though.


According to the article, nowhere does it say that the Pope doesnt believe in god, that evolution was part of god's creation process, not that he just waved a magic wand and poof, humans.

[Ksandra]

I don't know what gone home is, but if it's related to gamer's gate then get that fucking shit out of here and back into the thread where it belongs.

[Abandon]

it does, and rofl

[Ksandra]

The difference between what the Pope says, and what the followers believe/are taught can be 2 different things. I'm from southern NY, so not exactly Bible Thumping Country. I went to Catholic School up to 4th Grade, and then took CCD (religious education)up until I made Confirmation. 15 I think? They take literal what they want to take literal lol. Insofar as I had to do projects explaining why the Big Bang was bullshit, and that God himself created all of space and time and the creatures on it.

This was just your regular old Roman Catholic schooling. Also, of all the bible thumpers I know and interact with, the vast majority of them are Roman Catholic.

It does depend, and you are right sometimes the more concervatives will not follow what the pope says. However:

that's disappointing. I don't suppose francis is gonna make much of a difference with this, then

The Pope isn't just speaking to America. So maybe it wouldn't do much difference in the South or more conservative areas here, but there are many places where they eat up whatever the Vatican says. So it can still have an impact.

It could also make those who do believe this stuff but have separated from the church decide to come back.

[Pirian]

Title is misleading. They are still saying it's magic, but they are simply admitting that they accept scientific facts that are known. This is not new, and I think the majority of people here don't need explained the logical hopscotch being played by those that claim this.

[Thunder]

No, the title is fine. He isn't advocating god of the gaps, none of the religious scholars do anymore

I'm not going to pretend to understand their position as well as I do scientists like Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins, Sean Carroll, or the other popular science vs religion guys like Christopher Hitchens so you'd be better off learning about it yourself... but it's pretty difficult to argue against.

Any of the professional debates those guys have vs a William Lane Craig (a pretty sleezy dude imo) show just how unpenetrable the obfuscation is. Plus, in the first 10 minutes of any of those youtube videos both sides illustrate the position they'll be discussing from and their point for/against. It's pretty interesting if you enjoy that kind of thing and you learn a LOT of physics from Krauss and Carroll

[Pirian]

What are you going on about? It is literally the definition of the "god of the gaps". Direct quotes of Francis from the article:

“The Big Bang, which today we hold to be the origin of the world, does not contradict the intervention of the divine creator but, rather, requires it.

“Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”

He's saying that something had to start everything, and that's where Christianity steps in. That is a scientific gap of knowledge that religion is trying to fill. None of the religious scholars advocate it as "god of the gaps" because it's a well known fallacy and easy to argue against, but just because they've abandoned the name doesn't mean they've abandoned the ideas.


I guess as an aside: I've seen the vast majority of the debates by all the big name debaters (including all those listed), and I've read most, if not all, of their books. I'm familiar with many of the current (past 10 years or so) arguments by religious theologians, as presented in debate form. That doesn't make me an expert or even knowledgeable, but it does make me at least generally informed, I think.

[Thunder]

I'd be pretty quick to agree to your sentiments of "they're saying god is RIGHT BEFORE the creation of the universe and god is RIGHT BEFORE chemistry became biology"... until physics has a solid model on the creation of the universe and chem/bio has a solid model on the origins of replicating molecules. But I also don't give a shit about learning where the religious point of view is coming from lol. I don't get that side of the debate so I'm not about to debate something where I don't know both sides just as well


Maybe you're more familiar with this because my only exposure to these religious guys is the debates I watched purely to hear more science so you can help me out - but haven't these guys always refuted those points made by Krauss & co.? They don't even go down that road afaik. I'm under the impression that this argument of ours has been presented to religious guys and it's been refuted, no? I'd just feel like I'm putting words into their mouths if I were to go and say I know all the answers before I took the time to understand theirs