Posted on 12/09/2008 12:32:05 AM PST by marthemaria
WASHINGTON (AFP) — US President George W. Bush said in an interview Monday that the Bible is "probably not" literally true and that a belief that God created the world is compatible with the theory of evolution.
"I think you can have both," Bush, who leaves office January 20, told ABC television, adding "You're getting me way out of my lane here. I'm just a simple president." But "evolution is an interesting subject. I happen to believe that evolution doesn't fully explain the mystery of life," said the president, an outspoken Christian who often invokes God in his speeches.
"I think that God created the Earth, created the world; I think the creation of the world is so mysterious it requires something as large as an almighty and I don't think it's incompatible with the scientific proof that there is evolution," he told ABC television. Asked whether the Bible was literally true, Bush replied:
"Probably not. No, I'm not a literalist, but I think you can learn a lot from it." "The important lesson is 'God sent a son,'" he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
In Bible class, we were taught that the CONCEPTS of the Bible have withstood all of the translations of the Bible. Any time something is translated, something is changed - but not what the meaning.
‘Last time I checked, none of you look like monkeys.’
“No, but you and I do look like apes...since humans are apes.”
Now thats funny right there GL...haahaahahaaaaaaa.
Buddy you can call yourself, and your god an ape ALL DAY LONG, but you will not classify me as a part of your ape-dom.
But I do enjoy the ‘Planet of the Apes’ movie series! And I’m certain you do too! haahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
“The both of you agree with Bush, Pope Benedict XVI and myself.” ~ allmendream
And of course, this is also what our Christian President Bush believes:
“Which theory of evolution are you talking about? “...What is the significance of such a theory? To address this question is to enter the field of epistemology.
A theory is a metascientific elaboration distinct from the results of observation, but consistent with them.
By means of it a series of independent data and facts can be related and interpreted in a unified explanation. A theory’s validity depends on whether or not it can be verified; it is constantly tested against the facts; wherever it can no longer explain the latter, it shows its limitations and unsuitability. It must then be rethought.
Furthermore, while the formulation of a theory like that of evolution complies with the need for consistency with the observed data, it borrows certain notions from natural philosophy.
And, to tell the truth, rather than the theory of evolution, we should speak of several theories of evolution.
On the one hand, this plurality has to do with the different explanations advanced for the mechanism of evolution, and on the other, with the various philosophies on which it is based.
Hence the existence of materialist, reductionist, and spiritualist interpretations. What is to be decided here is the true role of philosophy and, beyond it, of theology.
Consequently, theories of evolution which, in accordance with the philosophies inspiring them, consider _the spirit_ as emerging from the forces of living matter or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter are incompatible with the truth about man. Nor are they able to ground the dignity of the person. ...”
Excerpted from:
Theories of Evolution
John Paul II
Copyright (c) 1997 First Things 71 (March 1997): 28-29. Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, October 22, 1996
“They are presented as alternatives (Creation and Evolution) that exclude each other,” the pope said. “This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.” Pope Benedict XVI
“It is indeed remarkable that this theory (Evolution through natural selection) has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory.”
Pope John Paul II addressing the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on October 22, 1996.
Thanks for the additional quotes. I’ll link to this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2145425/posts?page=22#22
More quotes you might find interesting:
May 11, 2007, 10:19 am
Romney Elaborates on Evolution By Michael Luo
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/11/romney-elaborates-on-evolution/
DES MOINES, May 11 Mitt Romney expanded on his belief in evolution in an interview earlier this week, staking out a position that could put him at odds with some conservative Christians, a key voting bloc he is courting.
Mr. Romney, a devout Mormon, surprised some observers when he was not among those Republican candidates who raised their hands last week when asked at the Republican presidential debate if they did not believe in evolution. (Senator Sam Brownback, former Gov. Mike Huckabee and Representative Tom Tancredo said they did not.)
“I believe that God designed the universe and created the universe,” Mr. Romney said in an interview this week. “And I believe evolution is most likely the process he used to create the human body.”
He was asked: Is that intelligent design?
“I’m not exactly sure what is meant by intelligent design,” he said. “But I believe God is intelligent and I believe he designed the creation. And I believe he used the process of evolution to create the human body.”
While governor of Massachusetts, Mr. Romney opposed the teaching of intelligent design in science classes.
“In my opinion, the science class is where to teach evolution, or if there are other scientific thoughts that need to be discussed,” he said. “If we’re going to talk about more philosophical matters, like why it was created, and was there an intelligent designer behind it, that’s for the religion class or philosophy class or social studies class.”
Intelligent design is typically defined as the claim that examination of nature points to the work of an intelligent designer, as opposed to the utterly random, naturalistic processes that are taught as part of evolutionary theory. Critics have called intelligent design a thinly disguised version of creationism, which takes a literal approach to the creation account in Genesis, that the earth was created in six days and is less than 10,000 years old.
Mr. Romney said he was asked about his belief in evolution when he was interviewed by faculty members for highest honors designations before his graduation from Brigham Young University.
He told his interviewers that he did not believe there was a “conflict between true science and true religion,” he said.
“True science and true religion are on exactly the same page,” he said. “they may come from different angles, but they reach the same conclusion. I’ve never found a conflict between the science of evolution and the belief that God created the universe. He uses scientific tools to do his work.”
The Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints has no definitive position on evolution, and church leaders have disagreed on the issue over the years.
Mr. Romney said his answer was satisfactory to faculty members. “They teach evolution at B.Y.U.,” he said.
Psalm 50:10 (New International Version)- 10 for every animal of the forest is mine, and the cattle on a thousand hills.
Taken literally this would mean God owns the cattle on exactly one thousand hills. That is not the meaning. What it means is that God owns EVERYTHING.
G-d says it is probably not literally true that George is saved.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
Bush isnt really a Christian, I already knew that..
clown
The Christian Scholars about whom I refer, agree with all of the basic tenets of the Christian faith that you mention. It's also why all of the ones I am thinking about completely reject the notion that the evolutionary model is compatible with Biblical truth.
Bush is simply wrong when he says that evolution is compatible with Christianity; assuming he wasn't quoted out of context.
I believe the common-sense implied way that most mean when they say they “believe everything in the Bible literally”..pertains to historical events (including the miracles-which only God could preform), not talking about poetry which is obviously (as you pointed) meant as allegory and can be interpreted easily.
Of course BYU teaches evolution. Any religion that claims God was once a man and that a man can become a god can have no other position.
keep insisting the Bible be used as a biology text in science class and the dumbing of America will continue unabated
I prefer to be clearer by stating that I belief the Bible is historically accurate. There has never been a discovery that has contradicted the Biblical record.
And just where did I say the Bible should be used as a biology text?
Stating a belief that the evolutionary model doesn’t really contradict the science of biology. As you must know, biology, micro-biology, or biochemistry has never proven the correctness of evolution.
That is pretty much the view of Sarah Palin, too. Not many politicians are biblical literalists.
The idea of a global flood in historic times has been falsified. Two hundred years ago!
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.