Posted on 01/19/2006 1:33:32 PM PST by peyton randolph
PARIS (Reuters) - The Roman Catholic Church has restated its support for evolution with an article praising a U.S. court decision that rejects the "intelligent design" theory as non-scientific.
The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano said that teaching intelligent design -- which argues that life is so complex that it needed a supernatural creator -- alongside Darwin's theory of evolution would only cause confusion...
A court in the state of Pennsylvania last month barred a school from teaching intelligent design (ID), a blow to Christian conservatives who want it to be taught in biology classes along with the Darwinism they oppose.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Has evolution happaned in this planet?
I believe that it has...and in no way does that belief interfere with my belief in Biblical Creation.
Romans 5:12-21
12. Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned--
13. for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law.
14. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.
15. But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!
16. Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.
17. For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.
18. Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.
19. For just as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.
20. The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more,
21. so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
HMmm...
Early Evolutionist...
Do you believe that everything in the Bible is to be taken literally?
Is there no symbolism in the Bible at all?
Don't you agree that some parts of the Bible are symbolic, whereas others are meant to be taken literally?
Post 330???
Phantom's homepage doesn't indicate she's a Creationist.
What are you talking about???
AHhh..
The welfare state to the Nth power!
Then how many steps WOULD it take?
<snip>
In my humble opinion, four things account for this lack of interest. First, it appears that the biological community considers this a settled question. Many researchers feel that there are already ample reports in the literature. Few of these folks have actually looked closely. To test this idea, I asked about two dozen graduate students and faculty members in the department where I'm a student whether there were examples where speciation had been observed in the literature. Everyone said that they were sure that there were. Next I asked them for citings or descriptions. Only eight of the people I talked to could give an example, only three could give more than one. But everyone was sure that there were papers in the literature.
Second, most biologists accept the idea that speciation takes a long time (relative to human life spans). Because of this we would not expect to see many speciation events actually occur. The literature has many more examples where a speciation event has been inferred from evidence than it has examples where the event is seen. This is what we would expect if speciation takes a long time.
Third, the literature contains many instances where a speciation event has been inferred. The number and quality of these cases may be evidence enough to convince most workers that speciation does occur.
Finally, most of the current interest in speciation concerns theoretical issues. Most biologists are convinced that speciation occurs. What they want to know is how it occurs. One recent book on speciation (Otte and Endler 1989) has few example of observed speciation, but a lot of discussion of theory and mechanisms.
</snip>
I don't know if I can STAND any more!
no, no, yes
SO what if some future Pope would welcome homosexual marriages? THEN what would happen? Please..some Catholic enlighten this Protestant! (only in the interest of learning)
Wasn't it College Algebra (1st semester of college) that first introduced the "nth" concept? Or was it Algebra II in high school?
I was just mentioning creationist tactics and you obligingly provide this wonderful example.
One main argument for a heliocentric system is that one can have the law "things further out move slower than those closer in." This law fails in a geocentric system.
Don't forget the lightning bolts.
Yes.
Paul is wrong on so many things, it's amazing that he's even considered a Christian.
Well, if you dispute speciation, then at least we can agree on rejecting the Noah story as babyish nonsense (I originally typed childish, before I remembered that most children see through the story easily by around the age of 8). Even if we disagree on almost everything else.
I may be wrong, but this is rather like my understanding of the parallax argument someone raised earlier -- "If earth's orbit didn't have this particular diameter, then that star wouldn't be x lightyears away."
Yes, everything we've figured out after we had a solar system theory is consistent with the solar system, but I don't know if that proves the solar system. I guess what I'm struggling to say is that we can start with observed data and reach great conclusions, but does the reasoning work backwards? Do the conclusions somehow validate the original observations?
I know my limitations, and I shouldn't argue an issue like this with you, as you're quite likely to blow me away with something of which I'm unaware.
It's like you tell someone you are painting your house, and they tell you that that's impossible - because you can't build a house.
Never said I was "building" or "creating" anything. I'm only changing what already exists.
I sure wish the flat-earthers around here would give some thought to the concept. Evolution does not negate God. It's that simple
If and only if p, then q.Otherwise, it would be a classic fallacy: "If p then q; and q; therefore p."
And we have q;
Therefore p.
So your point may be spot on, depending ...
Organized matter and laws do not exist by virtue of theological claims. What makes you think such things are inherently "religious?" Is it just because a good many people attribute them to God; just because organized matter and laws concur with certain ideas deemed "religious?"
A government school is not a public forum.
I said public "context." Public schools are paid for by people from all walks of life. The law prohibits any one them to be favored or discriminated against on a religious basis. Public schools are obligated to allow religious viewpoints a hearing, whether it be in a class orientated to one of the sciences, or a class orientated toward sports.
I am arguing against government indoctrination of religion in government schools.
Allowing the presentation of certain points of view is what you call "indoctrination?" You must believe people to be weak-minded. Or maybe you think they need to be controlled lest they hear the wrong ideas. You are not arguing for free inquiry, but against it. You are free to indulge non-theistic notions by themselves in your own little school house. Once you open the doors to the public and have the public pay for them, then their views get to be heard, too, no matter how afraid you are that you and your children might be "indoctrinated."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.