The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

Brian Shanahan

Festus wrote: »

As long as we have Catholic schools and institutions with a Catholic ethos it is highly unlikely that creationism or intelligent design will become part of any science curriculum.

As the country becomes more secular the risk increases as secular society attempts to avoid being "discriminatory".

Given Ratzinger's pronouncements on evolution:

some samples wrote:

to a great extent the theory of evolution cannot be proved experimentally...

[It] is still not a complete, scientifically verified theory

I wouldn't be too sure that the rcc is not rolling back on the Old Earth creationist (with evolution being god's tool) position espoused by Wojtlya before he died.

IF the church were truly behind accepting evolution as fact (and the theory of evoultion's modern descendants as the best current explanators for same) it would remove much of the old testament from the bible (all the bits about how god created the world and everything in it for a start).

Festus

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Given Ratzinger's pronouncements on evolution:


I wouldn't be too sure that the rcc is not rolling back on the Old Earth creationist (with evolution being god's tool) position espoused by Wojtlya before he died.

IF the church were truly behind accepting evolution as fact (and the theory of evoultion's modern descendants as the best current explanators for same) it would remove much of the old testament from the bible (all the bits about how god created the world and everything in it for a start).

A you've taken that quote out of context and B evolution is a theory.

I get the impression you think that the Catholic Church is opposed to science and favours creationism. You are wrong.

brian_t

Festus wrote: »

and B evolution is a theory.

The word "Theory" means different things to different people.

http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

Festus

brian_t wrote: »

The word "Theory" means different things to different people.

http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

I'll go with the same definition Pope Emeritus used. It's a theory.

nagirrac

Evolution is both a scientific fact and a scientific theory. It is a scientific fact in the same way that gravity is a scientific fact, if you doubt gravity then there are some simple but dangerous experiments you can run to confirm it quickly involving tall structures. That does not mean we understand gravity, in fact there are gaping holes still in our theories of gravity. Evolution is a fact because we can observe it, mate two different breeds of dogs, dog with new features emerges, evolution (directed by us, but still evolution, just as genetic engineering is directed by us).

Evolution was known long before Darwin (the Greeks), and theories to try and explain it were proposed before Darwin (Lamark). The theory of evolution is the ongoing work in science to try and explain the underlying mechanisms behind evolution. As it is science, by definition the theory will continue to be modified as we learn more, and there is always the possibility that we are currently spectacularly wrong in our understanding of nature, as we have been many times in the past.

As an aside a key witness in the Dover ID trial was a Catholic theologian who opposed the request to allow ID being taught in schools.

Festus

nagirrac wrote: »

Evolution is both a scientific fact and a scientific theory. It is a scientific fact in the same way that gravity is a scientific fact, if you doubt gravity then there are some simple but dangerous experiments you can run to confirm it quickly involving tall structures. That does not mean we understand gravity, in fact there are gaping holes still in our theories of gravity. Evolution is a fact because we can observe it, mate two different breeds of dogs, dog with new features emerges, evolution (directed by us, but still evolution, just as genetic engineering is directed by us).

Evolution was known long before Darwin (the Greeks), and theories to try and explain it were proposed before Darwin (Lamark). The theory of evolution is the ongoing work in science to try and explain the underlying mechanisms behind evolution. As it is science, by definition the theory will continue to be modified as we learn more, and there is always the possibility that we are currently spectacularly wrong in our understanding of nature, as we have been many times in the past.

As an aside a key witness in the Dover ID trial was a Catholic theologian who opposed the request to allow ID being taught in schools.

mating two dogs of different breeds is not an example of evolution - where is the new species?

As for ID and Catholicism - read this

http://www.templeton.org/templeton_report/20090401/

nagirrac

Festus wrote: »

mating two dogs of different breeds is not an example of evolution - where is the new species? [/QUOTE]

With respect, it most certainly is evolution. "Evolution is the change in inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations". Speciation occurs when these accumulated changes result in biologically different individuals who can no longer reproduce.

A bird's beak getting longer over successive generations is an example of evolution.

Brian Shanahan

Festus wrote: »

A you've taken that quote out of context and B evolution is a theory.

I get the impression you think that the Catholic Church is opposed to science and favours creationism. You are wrong.

A) no I have not, those two quotes are a small sample of quotes signifying Joey's creationist leanings.
You're only half right. There is the phenomenon of evolution (for example the London Underground Mosquito, or Nylon Eating Bacteria {a species which didn't have an ecosystem 65 years ago). Then there is the theory of evolution a slightly outdated (the modern version includes stuff like genetics as well as natural selection) theory describing the mechanisms behind the factual phenomenon of evolution.

So there you have it, both your objections demolished

Safehands

J C wrote: »

The same 'improbability' applies to all of the miracles that Jesus performed while on Earth ... we only have the Word of God and our walk with Jesus Christ and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit for all of these things

A lot of the miracles are exaggerated greatly. For example, one of the most important miracles was raising Lazarus. That guy actually died, stayed dead for four days and was raised again. Now, that is an event which, if true, goes down in the annals of history as one of the greatest events to ever happen to any human being. An ordinary guy, died and came back. Where was he? was he in hell? what was that like? But more importantly, why is it only in one of the Gospels? A miracle like that deserves a mention in all the accounts of Jesus's life. Perhaps (to use one of your favoured expressions), it never happened.

J C wrote: »

we can scientifically evaluate the physical evidence for Direct Creation and Noah's Flood ... as well as having the Word of God on these events.:)

How, JC? How? Show me this evidence please>

J C

Festus wrote: »

As long as we have Catholic schools and institutions with a Catholic ethos it is highly unlikely that creationism or intelligent design will become part of any science curriculum.

As the country becomes more secular the risk increases as secular society attempts to avoid being "discriminatory".

The Roman Catholic Church is on the way out the doors of many of its schools anyway ... and if its 'parting gift' to the Secularists on the way in, as it moves out, is the banning of Creation from its schools and the effective abandonment of the Christian Creeds (that God Created heaven and earth and everything therein) ... then it has more problems than even I thought it has.

Does the Roman Catholic Church still believe its Creeds ... that God Created Heaven and Earth or not?

... and as even a cursory look at this thread shows, the one thing the Secular Atheists have no problem with is discriminating against Creationists.
... and as the American public school experience shows, they will also have no problem expelling all churches from any school under their control as well.

bumper234

J C wrote: »

The Roman Catholic Church is on the way out the doors of many of its schools anyway ... and if its 'parting gift' to the Secularists on the way in as it moves out, is the banning of Creation from its schools and the effective abandonment of the Christian Creeds (that God Created heaven and earth and everything therein) ... then it has more problems than even I thought it has.

Does the Roman Catholic Church believe its Creeds ... that God Created Heaven and Earth?

Do you believe everything that is written in the bible?

J C

bumper234 wrote: »

Do you believe everything that is written in the bible?

Yes.

bumper234

J C wrote: »

Yes.

Even the parts that contradict themselves?

So you believe a woman who gets married but is not a virgin should be stoned to death?

How about the rebellious son? Do you believe killing your own child is the answer to rebellion?

How about rape? Should a woman be forced to marry her rapist after he hands over his 50 bits of silver?

J C

bumper234 wrote: »

Even the parts that contradict themselves?

So you believe a woman who gets married but is not a virgin should be stoned to death?

What did Jesus Christ say about this type of stuff?
He said that such laws reflected the hardness of heart of the people who wrote them ... and He called their bluff ... by challenging those without sin to throw the first stone ... and they all departed without doing so.

Now, can I please get an answer from any Roman Catholics on the thread to my question on whether the Roman Catholic Church has abandoned the Christian Creeds, that proclaim that God Created Heaven and Earth and everything visible and invisible?

Festus seems to be saying that they have.

J C

Safehands wrote: »

A lot of the miracles are exaggerated greatly. For example, one of the most important miracles was raising Lazarus. That guy actually died, stayed dead for four days and was raised again. Now, that is an event which, if true, goes down in the annals of history as one of the greatest events to ever happen to any human being. An ordinary guy, died and came back. Where was he? was he in hell? what was that like? But more importantly, why is it only in one of the Gospels? A miracle like that deserves a mention in all the accounts of Jesus's life. Perhaps (to use one of your favoured expressions), it never happened.

The Bible records it like it happened ... Lazarus died ... and was subsequently raised from the dead by Jesus Christ.
We don't hear anything that happened when he was dead because Lazarus chose not to speak about it. Indeed Jesus Christ also chose not to speak about what happened when He died for three days. The widows son also was raised from the dead and also didn't speak of it.
If the Bible were written by a bunch of self-serving liars there would be sensational stories written about these peoples 'experiences' ... but instead it records nothing ... which is in line with God's focus on life ... and not death.
The fascination with death is of the 'other side'.

Safehands

J C wrote: »

What did Jesus Christ say about this type of stuff?
He said that such laws reflected the hardness of heart of the people who wrote them ... and He called their bluff ... by challenging those without sin to throw the first stone ... and they all departed without doing so.

So the old testament is or is not to be believed? Women be stoned to death, for adultery, yes, no? If a child curses his father he should be put to death??
You believe this JC? Its all in the bible my friend!

Safehands

J C wrote: »

The Bible records it like it happened ... Lazarus died ... and was subsequently raised from the dead by Jesus Christ.
We don't hear anything that happened when he was dead because Lazarus chose not to speak about it. Indeed Jesus Christ also chose not to speak about what happened when He died for three days. The widows son also was raised from the dead and also didn't speak of it.
If the Bible were written by a bunch of self-serving liars there would be sensational stories written about these peoples 'experiences' ... but instead it records nothing ... which is in line with God's focus on life ... and not death.
The fascination with death is of the 'other side'.

There are loads of sensational stories in there. Did Matthew Mark or Luke not know about Lazarus, because they never wrote about it?

Bottom line; the bible is a great book with loads of the best advise one could ever read, but it is not all true.

J C

Safehands wrote: »

So the old testament is or is not to be believed? Women be stoned to death, for adultery, yes, no? If a child curses his father he should be put to death??
You believe this JC? Its all in the bible my friend!

The Bible records the law as promulgated by Moses allright ... I believe that these laws existed as stated in the Bible, because of the hardness of heart of the people at that time ... but I don't believe that such laws should be obeyed ... or indeed implemented at all.


Matthew 19
New International Version (NIV)

19 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the Jordan. 2 Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.

3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”


John 8:1-12
New International Version (NIV)

8 1 but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.

2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

11 “No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

bumper234

J C wrote: »

The Bible records the law as promulgated by Moses allright ... I believe that these laws existed as stated in the Bible, because of the hardness of heart of the people at that time ... but I don't believe that such laws should be obeyed ... or indeed implemented at all.


Matthew 19
New International Version (NIV)

19 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the Jordan. 2 Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.

3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”


John 8:1-12
New International Version (NIV)

8 1 but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.

2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

11 “No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

All you are doing is pointing out that the bible contradicts itself constantly and therefore is wrong. How can you live your life by a book that CONSTANTLY says one thing and a few pages later says another?

Genesis 32:30 I have seen the face of god.

John 1:18 & John 4:12 Nobody has seen the face of God

Safehands

J C wrote: »

The Bible records the law as promulgated by Moses allright ... I believe that these laws existed as stated in the Bible, because of the hardness of heart of the people at that time ... but I don't believe that such laws should be obeyed ... or indeed implemented at all.

So there you are JC. The Old testament should not be totally believed. It was written for the people of a certain time.
Once you start picking holes in certain tracts you must then decide which ones to believe or follow and which ones to ignore because they are not accurate, reliable, believable, use whatever word you want. If you choose to believe the whole thing, warts and all, you can now see JC, that you would be wrong, but you would have to agree with everything in it. And that means doing what Moses instructed. That's what the Taliban do. They, in a similar way to you JC, are convinced they are right. Of course you are a left wing liberal compared to those people and you can see how misguided they are, I'm quite sure.
They take everything literally, you do not! If you were talking to one of their leaders you would try to point out where he is going wrong in his interpretation of the old testament.

Sound familiar JC?

J C

bumper234 wrote: »

All you are doing is pointing out that the bible contradicts itself constantly and therefore is wrong. How can you live your life by a book that CONSTANTLY says one thing and a few pages later says another?

Genesis 32:30 I have seen the face of god.

John 1:18 & John 4:12 Nobody has seen the face of God

There is no inconsistency ... No mortal being has seen the Face of God the Father and lived.

The Genesis account describes an account of Jacob wrestling with a man. Jacob's pride was hurt, when he was injured in the wrestling match ... and quite obviously decided to claim the it was God with whom he wrestled. It goes to show that, even important people can be very venial ... and the Bible records their vanity 'warts and all'.

Genesis 32:24-30
24 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.

25 And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him.

26 And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.

27 And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob.

28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.

29 And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there.

30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

John 1:18 is correct in relation to God the Father ... and co-incidentially John 1:17 confirms what I have said in my previous posting that the Law on stoning was given by Moses to a hard-hearted people while mercy and truth comes from Jesus Christ.:)

John 1:17-18
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Great to see your deep and detailed interest in the Holy Bible. Thanks Bumper.;)

J C

Safehands wrote: »

So there you are JC. The Old testament should not be totally believed. It was written for the people of a certain time.

Where did I say it shouldn't be believed?
I actually said that I believed the laws promulgated by Moses existed exactly as recorded in the Bible.
... but that they no longer applied in the Church era where mercy and grace rule supreme.

Safehands wrote: »

Once you start picking holes in certain tracts you must then decide which ones to believe or follow and which ones to ignore because they are not accurate, reliable, believable, use whatever word you want. If you choose to believe the whole thing, warts and all, you can now see JC, that you would be wrong, but you would have to agree with everything in it. And that means doing what Moses instructed.

... I do believe the accounts to be true ... its just that I disagree with the validityof Mosaic laws ... which were drawn up by Moses for a hard-hearted people ... and were abolished by Jesus Christ when he encountered the woman caught in adultery.

Safehands wrote: »

That's what the Taliban do.

You are correct there ... Sharia Law is indeed grounded on the Mosaic Law.
However, like I have said, the Mosaic Law was promulgated by Moses and it was abolished by Jesus Christ.

Safehands wrote: »

They, in a similar way to you JC, are convinced they are right. Of course you are a left wing liberal compared to those people and you can see how misguided they are, I'm quite sure.
They take everything literally, you do not! If you were talking to one of their leaders you would try to point out where he is going wrong in his interpretation of the old testament.

Sound familiar JC?

Practically everybody is convinced they are right ... otherwise they would change their mind ... and become equally convinced that they are then right!!!

I have no problem with somebody pointing out any error that I may be subject to ... about either faith or science.

Like I have previously said, I used be an Evolutionist ... and when some of the erroneous assumptions and claims upon which my belief in Evoliution was based were pointed out to me, I ceased to be an Evolutionist.:)

bumper234

the king james version of the new testament was completed in by 8 members of the Church of England.

There were (and still are) no original texts to translate, The oldest manuscripts we have were written down HUNDREDS of years after the last Apostle died. There are over 8000 of those old manuscripts with no two alike.

The king James translators used none of these anyway,Instead they edited previous translations to create a version their king and parliament would approve.

So 21st Christians like JC believe the word of "God" is a book edited in the 17th century from the 16th century translations of 8000 contradictory copies of 4th century scrolls that claim to be the COPIES of lost letters written in the 1st century. :rolleyes:

And he wonders why we question the words of the bible

Brian Shanahan

Safehands wrote: »

So the old testament is or is not to be believed? Women be stoned to death, for adultery, yes, no? If a child curses his father he should be put to death??
You believe this JC? Its all in the bible my friend!

It is to be believed and followed if you're a "true" christian. Sure, did not Joshua of Nazareth* himself not say:

Do not think that I have come to revoke The Written Law or The Prophets; I am not come to revoke but to fulfill.

*The proper translation of the Aramaic man we know as Jesus.

Safehands

J C wrote: »

Where did I say it shouldn't be believed?
I actually said that I believed the laws promulgated by Moses existed exactly as recorded in the Bible.
... but that they no longer applied in the Church era where mercy and grace rule supreme.

... I do believe the accounts to be true ... its just that I disagree with the validityof Mosaic laws ... which were drawn up by Moses for a hard-hearted people ... and were abolished by Jesus Christ when he encountered the woman caught in adultery.

So you don't believe in the validity of the Laws of Moses. In other words he was wrong?

J C

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

It is to be believed and followed if you're a "true" christian. Sure, did not Joshua of Nazareth* himself not say:
Quote:
Do not think that I have come to revoke The Written Law or The Prophets; I am not come to revoke but to fulfill.

*The proper translation of the Aramaic man we know as Jesus.

Jesus Christ came to fulfill the Law ... and by His death the Law ceased to apply to all who believe on Him ... as symbolised by the tearing of the curtain in the Holy of Holies in the Temple at the moment when He died.

Matthew 27:50-53
50 And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split
52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.
53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

J C

Safehands wrote: »

So you don't believe in the validity of the Laws of Moses. In other words he was wrong?

They do not apply to anybody under Grace ... and we are all under grace in the Church era..

Safehands

J C wrote: »

They do not apply to anybody under Grace ... and we are all under grace in the Church era..

Yes, so Moses was wrong!

J C

Safehands wrote: »

Yes, so Moses was wrong!

... along with a good few other people in the Bible ... starting with Adam.:)

Safehands

J C wrote: »

... along with a good few other people in the Bible ... starting with Adam.:)

And there you were JC, telling us that his words were inspired by God. Imagine that.