The Vatican has admitted that Charles Darwin was on the right track when he claimed that Man descended from apes.
A leading official declared yesterday that Darwin‚Äôs theory of evolution was compatible with Christian faith, and could even be traced to St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas. ‚ÄúIn fact, what we mean by evolution is the world as created by God,‚ÄĚ said Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture. The Vatican also dealt the final blow to speculation that Pope Benedict XVI might be prepared to endorse the theory of Intelligent Design, whose advocates credit a ‚Äúhigher power‚ÄĚ for the complexities of life.
Organisers of a papal-backed conference next month marking the 150th anniversary of Darwin‚Äôs On the Origin of Species said that at first it had even been proposed to ban Intelligent Design from the event, as ‚Äúpoor theology and poor science‚ÄĚ. Intelligent Design...
"Conceding that the Church had been hostile to Darwin because his theory appeared to conflict with the account of creation in Genesis, Archbishop Ravasi argued yesterday that biological evolution and the Christian view of Creation were complementary."
Goes to show you, even Archbishops can be really wrong.
"Father Giuseppe Tanzella-Nitti, Professor of Theology at the Pontifical Santa Croce University in Rome, said that Darwin had been anticipated by St Augustine of Hippo. The 4th-century theologian had ‚Äúnever heard the term evolution, but knew that big fish eat smaller fish‚ÄĚ and that forms of life had been transformed ‚Äúslowly over time‚ÄĚ. Aquinas had made similar observations in the Middle Ages, he added."
Big fish eat smaller fish as evidence of evolution? Snicker. As for Aquinas' observations, he never observed a single case of macroevolution. Just like no one else has, either.
It's amazing how the ignorant need to cling to their myths, even dragging in the names of Augustine and Aquinas to lend support.
Genesis 1:27, "So God made man in his own image". Genesis 2:7, "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground." Genesis 2:21-22, "And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, ‚Ä¶the Lord had taken from man, made he a woman, & brought her unto the man". From the above verses, it is obvious that God formed man/woman from dust instead of transforming apes to human beings.
Lance as both you and the deceased Pope are part of the Roman Catholic Church, like the atheists you can make the judgment call of believing in Evolution, again, [URL=http://www.icr.org/article/812/]]]Evolution and the Pope[/URL]. Christians don't have to make wrong choice in this matter, because Christ himself, didn't believe in evolution, but in the Bible, e.g., Matthew 19: 3 And there came unto him Pharisees, trying him, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? 4And he answered and said, Have ye not read, that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, 5and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh?
Since the Romish Church rejects the Bible and so it follows Christ, one can't be very surprised the Romish Church would embrace the religion of Evolution.
No, Lance, you're leadership, which you should ignore, q.v., [URL=http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/catholicscandal.htm]]]The Scandal of the Catholic Priesthood[/URL], the top dog, has accepted Evolution, such as His Unholiness, PPJP II, [URL=http://www.icr.org/article/812/]]]Evolution and the Pope[/URL].
DJC49 wrote: This, too, is probably all mythology and allegory as far as the RCC is concerned now that they've officially jumped onto the Darwinian evolutionary Titanic.
The RCC has not officially jumped on any sort of Darwinian vehicle. The RCC has no official position on evolution. RCs are free to accept it or (as I am inclined to do) reject it.
Likewise, RCs are free to regard Genesis as a literal blow-by-blow account of creation, or to regard its language as in some way symbolic.
Whatever the case, they must believe that God created the universe, that we are all descended from a single pair of first parents, and that those first parents, through some type of disobedience, lost for themselves and their descendants many privileges that they were given, including entrance to heaven.
Lance Eccles wrote: I guess they're just following St Augustine (to whose thinking Calvin owed so much).... However Genesis 1 is to be interpreted, it plainly says that God created the world ‚Äď and that is what is important.
Augustine, was both a good and bad influence, Lance.
John MacArthur wrote: n the theological world where people believe in the doctrine of election more strongly than anywhere else, they are more prone to deny Israel‚Äôs election than anywhere else....because he is such a formidable and shaping theologian who really was the main influence in the lives of people like John Calvin and Martin Luther and John Owen and many other formidable students of Scripture, it has the power of these great names behind it. The idea then, which really began in a formal sense with Augustine, flowed down through these great Reformers and found honor among those who rightly honor the Reformers and so it has long survived.
[URL=http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/90-336.htm]]]Why Every Calvinist Should Be a Premillennialist, Part 3[/URL]
How does she fit into the God-less Darwinian evolutionary picture? Was it perhaps a HUGE stroke of luck & chance that she happened to evolve into the first woman at precisely the same time as Adam evolved into the first man? What's the mathematical improbability of THAT?
Or was she merely one of Adam's "sister" (or cousin) apes whom Adam procreated with, and Genesis 2 has gotten yet another account of "beginnings" all botched up.
Puh! How silly the author of Genesis was to imagine and write that God actually put Adam into a deep sleep, took one of his ribs, and formed Eve from him! This, too, is probably all mythology and allegory as far as the RCC is concerned now that they've officially jumped onto the Darwinian evolutionary Titanic.
Hey, I don't blame them. Afterall, they don't want to seem "stupid" AGAIN. After that whole fiasco re: Copernicus & Galileo, they aren't about to be caught with their pants down when it comes to the truths and SUPERIORITY of Science -- even if the brand of "science" they are now getting into bed with happens to be a specious one!
Being the WHORE that she is, the RCC will get in bed with ANY movement or religion that's on the ascendancy -- just as she did with Islam who supposedly "worship the SAME God!"
Lance Eccles wrote: I guess they're just following St Augustine (to whose thinking Calvin owed so much). Augustine suggested that the six "days" might represent six periods of time. However Genesis 1 is to be interpreted, it plainly says that God created the world ‚Äď and that is what is important.
If Darwinian evolution is to be granted (as per the RCC), Lance, then what are we to make of the Biblical account of Adam being the FIRST man? I suppose that Adam had mama, papa, brother, sister, and cousin apes who hadn't evolved to being "man" as did he. And what then of the account of God's placing Adam in Eden -- an idyllic garden; the Fall of Man; the INTRODUCTION of sin and death into the world; the cursing of the earth by God ...?
Is this all reduced to Judeo-Christian mythology?
And perhaps Luke and Paul, like Moses, were a bit confused concerning Adam when they mentioned him -- Luke in his gospel account and Paul in his epistles.
IOW, how does the RCC account for the Fall of Man if man were nothing more than a decendant of a special ape species? And if there was no REAL Fall of man, then there's no need for any REAL Saviour. Is there. No need for a CROSS. And *PHOOEY!* on a resurrection and all the rest of Christianity's "nonsense." Right?
The Vatican is totally and without a doubt insane and psychotic for stating that the Theory Of Evolution is compatible with the Christian faith. Darwin himself stated that his theory of the origin of man is not compatible with the Christian doctrine of Creation.
The first two sentences of this article add to the compiled heap of evidence the RCC church is apostate, it's the 'harlot'; part of the Laodicean church that will permeate the ends of the earth during the latter days. Let us pray for all who are caught in this delusion, may God have mercy on their souls as they cling to man-made heresies, rituals, traditions, and in so doing override the only source of truth there is, the Holy Bible. To claim Darwin was correct is to say God's creation account in Genesis is a fabricated fable. It doesn't get more heretical than that, yet, millions will STILL call a sinful man 'Holy Father', many will still partake of a false Jesus found in a compressed wafer, washing it all down with wine purchased at a liquor store. All the while, they think the next stop after this life is purgatory, even that isn't a guarantee...how terribly sad.
Ah, considering the bunch of monkeys running the Popish Church, this is not surprising, because they really held this position for a long time, [URL=http://www.icr.org/article/812/]]]Evolution and the Pope[/URL]---[URL=http://www.ihcc.org/images/booklets/pdf/L117.pdf]]]Christian and Catholics -- never together![/URL]