[Merged] God was behind Big Bang, universe no accident: Pope

triadboy · 6th January 2011, 07:20 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110106/...s_pope_bigbang

Quote:

The Catholic Church no longer teaches creationism -- the belief that God created the world in six days as described in the Bible -- and says that the account in the book of Genesis is an allegory for the way God created the world.

So if Adam and Eve are allegorical - there is no original sin. Who needs Jebus?

sphenisc · 6th January 2011, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by triadboy

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110106/...s_pope_bigbang

So if Adam and Eve are allegorical - there is no original sin. Who needs Jebus?

"A implies B" does not imply "not A implies not B".

Cainkane1 · 6th January 2011, 08:15 AM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40945242...cience-science

Catholics getting religion into science.

Agular · 6th January 2011, 08:21 AM

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=196841

Where it belongs.

Checkmite · 6th January 2011, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by triadboy

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110106/...s_pope_bigbang

So if Adam and Eve are allegorical - there is no original sin. Who needs Jebus?

Not necessarily. Adam and Eve being an allegory for "Man's fall from grace" doesn't mean said fall is itself an allegory, nor imply that the consequences of said fall are nonexistent.

Nay_Sayer · 6th January 2011, 08:39 AM

"The Catholic Church no longer teaches creationism" 2011 is starting off very well, very well indeed.

triadboy · 6th January 2011, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Not necessarily. Adam and Eve being an allegory for "Man's fall from grace" doesn't mean said fall is itself an allegory, nor imply that the consequences of said fall are nonexistent.

Yes, but in this light - explain the 'fall from grace'.

Moon-Spinner · 6th January 2011, 08:50 AM

Another example of religion still trying to be relevant - Yawn...

In other news, it's cold today, brrr...

Dinwar · 6th January 2011, 09:17 AM

I agree--without the Adam/Eve thing the whole Fall becomes vastly more difficult to justify. You're left with a general "People are bad, because they make bad choices, because they have Free Will, which is a gift from an omnicient God". It's really all they had to begin with (and getting a Catholic to make that argument is a fun way to kill an evening), but now they have really nothing hiding it.

Also, it's somewhat annoying that someone who's only qualifications are being elected bishop of Rome feels qualified to comment on cosmology. I'm married to someone who studied physics, and have read a fair number of books on the subject, and still don't feel comfortable discussing it. I've met physicsts--the full-blown Ph.D. kind, who have labs and university possitions and everything--who were equally hesitant to comment on it, and put a huge number of caveats in their statements to let me know that this wasn't their field and that if I really want to know, talk to Dr. So-and-so who's been doing some really interesting research. Why, exactly, should we CARE what the pople thinks happened back then?

TragicMonkey · 6th January 2011, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by Nay_Sayer

"The Catholic Church no longer teaches creationism" 2011 is starting off very well, very well indeed.

I was raised Catholic, and there was never any attempt to teach creationism to me. Catholics aren't big on creationism, any more than they are big on Biblical literalism--or the Bible itself, for that matter. Creationism is much more of a Protestant thing, especially the "evangelical" denominations. What the Bible says isn't that important to Catholics--they have a whole church to figure it out for them, what's the point in having a hierarchy of professionals if everybody has to read the source material and figure it out for themselves?

Bikewer · 6th January 2011, 10:01 AM

The whole "garden" scenario does get a little odd if we postulate Sapiens instead of Adam & Eve.
Ooog..."Ungh. Snake talk to me today."
Goog...."You on funny mushrooms again?"

Ooog...."No. Snake talk. Say eat fruit."
Goog.... "Fruit? Me like mastodon. Plenty in cave from last kill."

And so on....

Foster Zygote · 6th January 2011, 10:05 AM

And he made it all so he would have a place for us to live. That was awfully sweet of him.

triadboy · 6th January 2011, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Dinwar

Why, exactly, should we CARE what the pople thinks happened back then?

I think it's because of his hat.

Gord_in_Toronto · 6th January 2011, 10:27 AM

This one? I like it too.

Crossbow · 6th January 2011, 11:04 AM

My oh My!

First, one Pope admits that the Earth really does go around the Sun.

Then some other Pope admits that it wrong to blame Jews for the death of Jesus.

And now, the current Pope admits that science is right about something else too!

Oh well! At least the Catholic Church still has the good sense to provide those exorcism classes, so the good old days are not entirely gone.

Checkmite · 6th January 2011, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by triadboy

Yes, but in this light - explain the 'fall from grace'.

Well I dunno. If Adam and Eve were allegorical, then so would their surroundings be; the "Garden" would be the state of humanity before the fall - relatively peaceful and perfect. The taking of the fruit might represent man's eventual dissatisfaction with his state and his decision to take by force of will something that otherwise naturally would not have been his. Knowledge? God was supposed to provide everything; the pride of Man in thinking he could fulfill his wants and needs by himself without relying on God would be the "fall". The alteration of his environment to suit his needs, i.e. agriculture? It's actually a fun thing to ponder, I think.

Checkmite · 6th January 2011, 11:10 AM

And by the way, the Catholic Church publicly accepting the fact of the Big Bang and the scientific development of the universe is a tremendous and welcome step in the right direction that I'm personally not keen on scoffing at.

Denver · 6th January 2011, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

And by the way, the Catholic Church publicly accepting the fact of the Big Bang and the scientific development of the universe is a tremendous and welcome step in the right direction that I'm personally not keen on scoffing at.

I don't think this is anything new: my sense of the article is that he is (re-)emphasizing that the universe was not created by chance, rather than that he is suddenly accepting the big bang theory. I can't remember them ever not accepting it. Wasn't it a Catholic priest who first proposed the idea of the big bang as the origin of the universe?

lionking · 6th January 2011, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

I was raised Catholic, and there was never any attempt to teach creationism to me. Catholics aren't big on creationism, any more than they are big on Biblical literalism--or the Bible itself, for that matter. Creationism is much more of a Protestant thing, especially the "evangelical" denominations. What the Bible says isn't that important to Catholics--they have a whole church to figure it out for them, what's the point in having a hierarchy of professionals if everybody has to read the source material and figure it out for themselves?

Seconded. I was taught about the Big Bang in a catholic school, but never creationism.

DC · 6th January 2011, 11:21 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lemaître

the Big Bang theory is from a Catholic.

Skwinty · 6th January 2011, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by Denver

I don't think this is anything new: my sense of the article is that he is (re-)emphasizing that the universe was not created by chance, rather than that he is suddenly accepting the big bang theory. I can't remember them ever not accepting it. Wasn't it a Catholic priest who first proposed the idea of the big bang as the origin of the universe?

Yes, it was Georges Lemaitre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

TragicMonkey · 6th January 2011, 11:30 AM

My mother went to Catholic school in the 1950s and was taught evolution. By a nun.

Fredrik · 6th January 2011, 11:30 AM

Deleted... I misread the post I was replying to.

Denver · 6th January 2011, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by Fredrik

Actually it does.

The two statements are exactly equivalent (the former is true if and only if the latter is true). This can be verified using a truth table.

Nope.

If it is Raining, then the Ground is Wet.

That does not equate to:

If it is not Raining, then the Ground is Not Wet.

Checkmite · 6th January 2011, 11:38 AM

Originally Posted by Denver

I don't think this is anything new: my sense of the article is that he is (re-)emphasizing that the universe was not created by chance, rather than that he is suddenly accepting the big bang theory. I can't remember them ever not accepting it. Wasn't it a Catholic priest who first proposed the idea of the big bang as the origin of the universe?

Indeed? Then I stand corrected; I was aware that evolution was taught in Catholic schools but was unaware of the Big Bang's acceptance.

Bishadi · 6th January 2011, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by triadboy

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110106/...s_pope_bigbang

So if Adam and Eve are allegorical - there is no original sin. Who needs Jebus?

here is the clip from the vatican

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/po...ewpdf/es36.pdf

Quote:

The Academy, however, is not only the mirror of science and
research as well as a place where science deals with its problems and
insights. It also engages in questions of the institutional role of science
in society and issues of great social importance. Scientific research not
only gives expression to the strength of rationality in explaining the
world and the way in which this is done. The application of scientific
knowledge can induce changes of environmental and thus living conditions.
It is these aspects, the interrelations between scientific progress and social development, which together with insights into the epistemological
structure and the ethical implications of science play an important
role in the life and the work of the Academy. Recent meetings on
science for man and man for science (1999), on the cultural values of
science (2002), on the signs of death (2005) and on transgenic plants for
food security in the context of development (2009) testify to this persistent
engagement. Also in this respect, the Academy is unique in its structure,
in its membership, in its aim, and in its efforts which are always
directed at promoting the progress of the mathematical, physical and
natural sciences, the study of epistemological and ethical questions and
issues, the participation in the benefits of science and technology by the
greatest number of people as well as at the interaction between faith
and reason, encouraging the dialogue between science and spiritual,
cultural, philosophical and religious questions. The plenary session on
the scientific legacy of the 20th century demonstrated afresh the
strengths of these objectives and of the way the Pontifical Academy of
Sciences in its constitution and activities is realizing them.

have any of you ever written a letter to the pope?

this practically a quote from my letter..........."encouraging the dialogue between science and spiritual, cultural, philosophical and religious questions."

as far as the thread claim in the OP........ welli doubt if the pope is ready to accept that 'existence itself' (all mass, all energy, all time; trinity) is god 'itself'

but we can hope he steps up, real soon!

i mentioned in the letter, that there is only one idiot with the name of the boss (between the ears) upon the head. Rev 22:4

DC · 6th January 2011, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by Bishadi

here is the clip from the vatican

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/po...ewpdf/es36.pdf

have any of you ever written a letter to the pope?

this practically a quote from my letter..........."encouraging the dialogue between science and spiritual, cultural, philosophical and religious questions."

as far as the thread claim in the OP........ welli doubt if the pope is ready to accept that 'existence itself' (all mass, all energy, all time; trinity) is god 'itself'

but we can hope he steps up, real soon!

i mentioned in the letter, that there is only one idiot with the name of the boss (between the ears) upon the head. Rev 22:4

oh now i feel sorry for the pope, you troll him in real life?

Dinwar · 6th January 2011, 01:04 PM

I'm impressed. It's hard to make atheists feel sorry for the Pope. I think only Bishadi could do it.

Mashuna · 6th January 2011, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

My mother went to Catholic school in the 1950s and was taught evolution. By a nun.

Well of course. Everyone knows that nuns evolved from penguins. It's easy to prove; next time you see a nun, push her in some water and throw fish at her.

KingMerv00 · 6th January 2011, 02:28 PM

Only the Pope can state what is already proven and then bask in his own "progressiveness".

Marduk · 6th January 2011, 02:43 PM

News at 11,
Pope says God was behind child sex scandal

Toontown · 6th January 2011, 04:25 PM

I don't want to be critical of the Pope for thinking about such matters, but my sense is that the Pope hasn't gotten the gist of it.

Acausal events are not "accidental". Acausal events occur as a consequence of the fundamental nature of order.

There is no alternative to the existence of "something". The seemingly alternative "nothingness" is a contradictory human concept. A contradiction which cannot stand. Such is the nature of order. And there is absolutely no reason to assume order is not fundamental. Neither a universe nor a God could exist without a fundamental order to make said existence possible.

If the Pope believes an uncaused universe would be "accidental", then logical consistency demands that he also believe that an uncaused God would also be "accidental". But there is no reason to assume acausality is "accidental".

"Oops! I spilled my coffee!" is "accidental", requiring some kind of botched intention, such as the intention to avoid spilling the coffee, to be thwarted. An acausal quantum fluctuation is neither intentional nor unintentional. It is more fundamental than all that. It just is.

Foster Zygote · 6th January 2011, 06:24 PM

Originally Posted by Bishadi

here is the clip from the vatican

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/po...ewpdf/es36.pdf

have any of you ever written a letter to the pope?

this practically a quote from my letter..........."encouraging the dialogue between science and spiritual, cultural, philosophical and religious questions."

as far as the thread claim in the OP........ welli doubt if the pope is ready to accept that 'existence itself' (all mass, all energy, all time; trinity) is god 'itself'

but we can hope he steps up, real soon!

i mentioned in the letter, that there is only one idiot with the name of the boss (between the ears) upon the head. Rev 22:4

I'm sure the pope sleeps with your letter under his pillow.

Lowpro · 6th January 2011, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by Dinwar

I agree--without the Adam/Eve thing the whole Fall becomes vastly more difficult to justify. You're left with a general "People are bad, because they make bad choices, because they have Free Will, which is a gift from an omnicient God". It's really all they had to begin with (and getting a Catholic to make that argument is a fun way to kill an evening), but now they have really nothing hiding it.

Also, it's somewhat annoying that someone who's only qualifications are being elected bishop of Rome feels qualified to comment on cosmology. I'm married to someone who studied physics, and have read a fair number of books on the subject, and still don't feel comfortable discussing it. I've met physicsts--the full-blown Ph.D. kind, who have labs and university possitions and everything--who were equally hesitant to comment on it, and put a huge number of caveats in their statements to let me know that this wasn't their field and that if I really want to know, talk to Dr. So-and-so who's been doing some really interesting research. Why, exactly, should we CARE what the pople thinks happened back then?

You need to stop worrying so much. Nothing limits free inquiry, and all the data you need can be attainable. There are no experts because anyone's data is free to all to use.

However it's always safe to include caveats, but don't be so hesitant. If you can't afford to do something, you'll never find out how wrong you are.

And even being wrong is a good thing.

fuelair · 6th January 2011, 06:42 PM

God was behind Big Bang, universe no accident: Pope

Pope-pope-a-dope!!: Betty Boop

epix · 6th January 2011, 07:35 PM

The Church seems to be always some 400 years behind. All guys who laid down the foundations of modern science had a pretty good evidence that God arranged the nature quite differently from the way it was heard from the pulpits.

Anyway... It's nice to hear that the mental faculties of the high clergy are approaching those of Copernicus, Kepler and so on.

Bikewer · 7th January 2011, 05:56 AM

The Catholics do have an increasing tendency to accept the findings of modern science, but that acceptance is not without it's warts.
I listened to a couple of Jesuit astronomers speaking on NPR's To The Best Of Our Knowledge a few months ago.
Despite being well aware of modern astronomy and cosmology, they still managed to come up with the silly notion "God is love". This because.... The universe is so well-tailored for us......
I recall as well an interview with a Jesuit archaeologist who had been specifically tasked with investigating a variety of Biblical stories. His research had been uniformly negative, and his superior had complained bitterly about the fact that he was proving that all sorts of things in the Bible were not true.
However, he was allowed to continue his work.....

MattusMaximus · 7th January 2011, 06:40 AM

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

And he made it all so he would have a place for us to live. That was awfully sweet of him.

If God made the entire universe for us, then he did a piss-poor job of it, considering as how we can survive in such a small piece of it.

triadboy · 7th January 2011, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

If God made the entire universe for us, then he did a piss-poor job of it, considering as how we can survive in such a small piece of it.

We are located out in the boondocks of the galaxy. Perhaps we are the unibrowed, buck-toothed cousins no one likes to visit. We all got purdy mouths.

6th January 2011, 07:20 AM	#1
triadboy Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Tucson, Arizona Posts: 2,556	God was behind Big Bang, universe no accident: Pope http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110106/...s_pope_bigbang Quote: The Catholic Church no longer teaches creationism -- the belief that God created the world in six days as described in the Bible -- and says that the account in the book of Genesis is an allegory for the way God created the world. So if Adam and Eve are allegorical - there is no original sin. Who needs Jebus?

6th January 2011, 07:26 AM	#2
sphenisc Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 3,750	Originally Posted by triadboy http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110106/...s_pope_bigbang So if Adam and Eve are allegorical - there is no original sin. Who needs Jebus? "A implies B" does not imply "not A implies not B".
sphenisc Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 3,750

6th January 2011, 08:15 AM	#3
Cainkane1 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: The great American southeast Posts: 7,198	Pope says God behind Big bang. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40945242...cience-science Catholics getting religion into science.
	__________________ If at first you don't succeed try try again. Then if you fail to succeed to Hell with that. Try something else.

6th January 2011, 08:21 AM	#4
Agular Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 258	http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=196841 Where it belongs.
Agular Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 258	__________________ THE most misspelled word on the Internet is "lose" LOOSE (for those who misspell it) = not tight LOSE = to suffer loss

6th January 2011, 08:36 AM	#5
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,886	Originally Posted by triadboy http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110106/...s_pope_bigbang So if Adam and Eve are allegorical - there is no original sin. Who needs Jebus? Not necessarily. Adam and Eve being an allegory for "Man's fall from grace" doesn't mean said fall is itself an allegory, nor imply that the consequences of said fall are nonexistent.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

6th January 2011, 08:39 AM	#6
Nay_Sayer Muse Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Long Island Posts: 747	"The Catholic Church no longer teaches creationism" 2011 is starting off very well, very well indeed.

6th January 2011, 08:43 AM	#7
triadboy Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Tucson, Arizona Posts: 2,556	Originally Posted by Checkmite Not necessarily. Adam and Eve being an allegory for "Man's fall from grace" doesn't mean said fall is itself an allegory, nor imply that the consequences of said fall are nonexistent. Yes, but in this light - explain the 'fall from grace'.

6th January 2011, 08:50 AM	#8
Moon-Spinner Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Within a star too far to dream of Posts: 1,485	Another example of religion still trying to be relevant - Yawn... In other news, it's cold today, brrr...

6th January 2011, 09:17 AM	#9
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,957	I agree--without the Adam/Eve thing the whole Fall becomes vastly more difficult to justify. You're left with a general "People are bad, because they make bad choices, because they have Free Will, which is a gift from an omnicient God". It's really all they had to begin with (and getting a Catholic to make that argument is a fun way to kill an evening), but now they have really nothing hiding it. Also, it's somewhat annoying that someone who's only qualifications are being elected bishop of Rome feels qualified to comment on cosmology. I'm married to someone who studied physics, and have read a fair number of books on the subject, and still don't feel comfortable discussing it. I've met physicsts--the full-blown Ph.D. kind, who have labs and university possitions and everything--who were equally hesitant to comment on it, and put a huge number of caveats in their statements to let me know that this wasn't their field and that if I really want to know, talk to Dr. So-and-so who's been doing some really interesting research. Why, exactly, should we CARE what the pople thinks happened back then?
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,957	__________________ GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment. Ein krieg ohne feinde.

6th January 2011, 09:58 AM	#10
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 30,096	Originally Posted by Nay_Sayer "The Catholic Church no longer teaches creationism" 2011 is starting off very well, very well indeed. I was raised Catholic, and there was never any attempt to teach creationism to me. Catholics aren't big on creationism, any more than they are big on Biblical literalism--or the Bible itself, for that matter. Creationism is much more of a Protestant thing, especially the "evangelical" denominations. What the Bible says isn't that important to Catholics--they have a whole church to figure it out for them, what's the point in having a hierarchy of professionals if everybody has to read the source material and figure it out for themselves?
	__________________ One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.

6th January 2011, 10:01 AM	#11
Bikewer Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: St. Louis, Mo. Posts: 9,532	The whole "garden" scenario does get a little odd if we postulate Sapiens instead of Adam & Eve. Ooog..."Ungh. Snake talk to me today." Goog...."You on funny mushrooms again?" Ooog...."No. Snake talk. Say eat fruit." Goog.... "Fruit? Me like mastodon. Plenty in cave from last kill." And so on....

6th January 2011, 10:05 AM	#12
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,400	And he made it all so he would have a place for us to live. That was awfully sweet of him.
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

6th January 2011, 10:06 AM	#13
triadboy Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Tucson, Arizona Posts: 2,556	Originally Posted by Dinwar Why, exactly, should we CARE what the pople thinks happened back then? I think it's because of his hat.

6th January 2011, 10:27 AM	#14
Gord_in_Toronto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 13,417	This one? I like it too.
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick

6th January 2011, 11:04 AM	#15
Crossbow Seeking Honesty and Sanity Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,294	My oh My! First, one Pope admits that the Earth really does go around the Sun. Then some other Pope admits that it wrong to blame Jews for the death of Jesus. And now, the current Pope admits that science is right about something else too! Oh well! At least the Catholic Church still has the good sense to provide those exorcism classes, so the good old days are not entirely gone.
	__________________ A man's best friend is his dogma.

6th January 2011, 11:06 AM	#16
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,886	Originally Posted by triadboy Yes, but in this light - explain the 'fall from grace'. Well I dunno. If Adam and Eve were allegorical, then so would their surroundings be; the "Garden" would be the state of humanity before the fall - relatively peaceful and perfect. The taking of the fruit might represent man's eventual dissatisfaction with his state and his decision to take by force of will something that otherwise naturally would not have been his. Knowledge? God was supposed to provide everything; the pride of Man in thinking he could fulfill his wants and needs by himself without relying on God would be the "fall". The alteration of his environment to suit his needs, i.e. agriculture? It's actually a fun thing to ponder, I think.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002 Last edited by Checkmite; 6th January 2011 at 11:07 AM.

6th January 2011, 11:10 AM	#17
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,886	And by the way, the Catholic Church publicly accepting the fact of the Big Bang and the scientific development of the universe is a tremendous and welcome step in the right direction that I'm personally not keen on scoffing at.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

6th January 2011, 11:16 AM	#18
Denver Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 6,603	Originally Posted by Checkmite And by the way, the Catholic Church publicly accepting the fact of the Big Bang and the scientific development of the universe is a tremendous and welcome step in the right direction that I'm personally not keen on scoffing at. I don't think this is anything new: my sense of the article is that he is (re-)emphasizing that the universe was not created by chance, rather than that he is suddenly accepting the big bang theory. I can't remember them ever not accepting it. Wasn't it a Catholic priest who first proposed the idea of the big bang as the origin of the universe?

6th January 2011, 11:17 AM	#19
lionking In the Peanut Gallery Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 29,667	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey I was raised Catholic, and there was never any attempt to teach creationism to me. Catholics aren't big on creationism, any more than they are big on Biblical literalism--or the Bible itself, for that matter. Creationism is much more of a Protestant thing, especially the "evangelical" denominations. What the Bible says isn't that important to Catholics--they have a whole church to figure it out for them, what's the point in having a hierarchy of professionals if everybody has to read the source material and figure it out for themselves? Seconded. I was taught about the Big Bang in a catholic school, but never creationism.

6th January 2011, 11:21 AM	#20
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,674	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lemaître the Big Bang theory is from a Catholic.
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

6th January 2011, 11:21 AM	#21
Skwinty Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The far side Posts: 4,972	Originally Posted by Denver I don't think this is anything new: my sense of the article is that he is (re-)emphasizing that the universe was not created by chance, rather than that he is suddenly accepting the big bang theory. I can't remember them ever not accepting it. Wasn't it a Catholic priest who first proposed the idea of the big bang as the origin of the universe? Yes, it was Georges Lemaitre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre
	__________________ What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch. --Lily Tomlin

6th January 2011, 11:30 AM	#22
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 30,096	My mother went to Catholic school in the 1950s and was taught evolution. By a nun.
	__________________ One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.

6th January 2011, 11:30 AM	#23
Fredrik Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 1,912	Deleted... I misread the post I was replying to.
Fredrik Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 1,912	Last edited by Fredrik; 6th January 2011 at 11:33 AM.

6th January 2011, 11:32 AM	#24
Denver Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 6,603	Originally Posted by Fredrik Actually it does. The two statements are exactly equivalent (the former is true if and only if the latter is true). This can be verified using a truth table. Nope. If it is Raining, then the Ground is Wet. That does not equate to: If it is not Raining, then the Ground is Not Wet.

6th January 2011, 11:38 AM	#25
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,886	Originally Posted by Denver I don't think this is anything new: my sense of the article is that he is (re-)emphasizing that the universe was not created by chance, rather than that he is suddenly accepting the big bang theory. I can't remember them ever not accepting it. Wasn't it a Catholic priest who first proposed the idea of the big bang as the origin of the universe? Indeed? Then I stand corrected; I was aware that evolution was taught in Catholic schools but was unaware of the Big Bang's acceptance.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

6th January 2011, 12:20 PM	#26
Bishadi Banned Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Here Posts: 2,279	Originally Posted by triadboy http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110106/...s_pope_bigbang So if Adam and Eve are allegorical - there is no original sin. Who needs Jebus? here is the clip from the vatican http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/po...ewpdf/es36.pdf Quote: The Academy, however, is not only the mirror of science and research as well as a place where science deals with its problems and insights. It also engages in questions of the institutional role of science in society and issues of great social importance. Scientific research not only gives expression to the strength of rationality in explaining the world and the way in which this is done. The application of scientific knowledge can induce changes of environmental and thus living conditions. It is these aspects, the interrelations between scientific progress and social development, which together with insights into the epistemological structure and the ethical implications of science play an important role in the life and the work of the Academy. Recent meetings on science for man and man for science (1999), on the cultural values of science (2002), on the signs of death (2005) and on transgenic plants for food security in the context of development (2009) testify to this persistent engagement. Also in this respect, the Academy is unique in its structure, in its membership, in its aim, and in its efforts which are always directed at promoting the progress of the mathematical, physical and natural sciences, the study of epistemological and ethical questions and issues, the participation in the benefits of science and technology by the greatest number of people as well as at the interaction between faith and reason, encouraging the dialogue between science and spiritual, cultural, philosophical and religious questions. The plenary session on the scientific legacy of the 20th century demonstrated afresh the strengths of these objectives and of the way the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in its constitution and activities is realizing them. have any of you ever written a letter to the pope? this practically a quote from my letter..........."encouraging the dialogue between science and spiritual, cultural, philosophical and religious questions." as far as the thread claim in the OP........ welli doubt if the pope is ready to accept that 'existence itself' (all mass, all energy, all time; trinity) is god 'itself' but we can hope he steps up, real soon! i mentioned in the letter, that there is only one idiot with the name of the boss (between the ears) upon the head. Rev 22:4

6th January 2011, 12:34 PM	#27
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,674	Originally Posted by Bishadi here is the clip from the vatican http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/po...ewpdf/es36.pdf have any of you ever written a letter to the pope? this practically a quote from my letter..........."encouraging the dialogue between science and spiritual, cultural, philosophical and religious questions." as far as the thread claim in the OP........ welli doubt if the pope is ready to accept that 'existence itself' (all mass, all energy, all time; trinity) is god 'itself' but we can hope he steps up, real soon! i mentioned in the letter, that there is only one idiot with the name of the boss (between the ears) upon the head. Rev 22:4 oh now i feel sorry for the pope, you troll him in real life?
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

6th January 2011, 01:04 PM	#28
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,957	I'm impressed. It's hard to make atheists feel sorry for the Pope. I think only Bishadi could do it.
Dinwar Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 8,957	__________________ GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment. Ein krieg ohne feinde.

6th January 2011, 01:16 PM	#29
Mashuna Ovis ex Machina Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Welsh Wales Posts: 6,581	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey My mother went to Catholic school in the 1950s and was taught evolution. By a nun. Well of course. Everyone knows that nuns evolved from penguins. It's easy to prove; next time you see a nun, push her in some water and throw fish at her.

6th January 2011, 02:28 PM	#30
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Only the Pope can state what is already proven and then bask in his own "progressiveness".
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust? Last edited by KingMerv00; 6th January 2011 at 02:32 PM.

6th January 2011, 02:43 PM	#31
Marduk Banned Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Newbury, Berkshire Posts: 10,242	News at 11, Pope says God was behind child sex scandal
	Last edited by Marduk; 6th January 2011 at 03:29 PM.

6th January 2011, 04:25 PM	#32
Toontown Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 3,557	I don't want to be critical of the Pope for thinking about such matters, but my sense is that the Pope hasn't gotten the gist of it. Acausal events are not "accidental". Acausal events occur as a consequence of the fundamental nature of order. There is no alternative to the existence of "something". The seemingly alternative "nothingness" is a contradictory human concept. A contradiction which cannot stand. Such is the nature of order. And there is absolutely no reason to assume order is not fundamental. Neither a universe nor a God could exist without a fundamental order to make said existence possible. If the Pope believes an uncaused universe would be "accidental", then logical consistency demands that he also believe that an uncaused God would also be "accidental". But there is no reason to assume acausality is "accidental". "Oops! I spilled my coffee!" is "accidental", requiring some kind of botched intention, such as the intention to avoid spilling the coffee, to be thwarted. An acausal quantum fluctuation is neither intentional nor unintentional. It is more fundamental than all that. It just is.
Toontown Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 3,557

6th January 2011, 06:24 PM	#33
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,400	Originally Posted by Bishadi here is the clip from the vatican http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/po...ewpdf/es36.pdf have any of you ever written a letter to the pope? this practically a quote from my letter..........."encouraging the dialogue between science and spiritual, cultural, philosophical and religious questions." as far as the thread claim in the OP........ welli doubt if the pope is ready to accept that 'existence itself' (all mass, all energy, all time; trinity) is god 'itself' but we can hope he steps up, real soon! i mentioned in the letter, that there is only one idiot with the name of the boss (between the ears) upon the head. Rev 22:4 I'm sure the pope sleeps with your letter under his pillow.
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

6th January 2011, 06:41 PM	#34
Lowpro Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 4,526	Originally Posted by Dinwar I agree--without the Adam/Eve thing the whole Fall becomes vastly more difficult to justify. You're left with a general "People are bad, because they make bad choices, because they have Free Will, which is a gift from an omnicient God". It's really all they had to begin with (and getting a Catholic to make that argument is a fun way to kill an evening), but now they have really nothing hiding it. Also, it's somewhat annoying that someone who's only qualifications are being elected bishop of Rome feels qualified to comment on cosmology. I'm married to someone who studied physics, and have read a fair number of books on the subject, and still don't feel comfortable discussing it. I've met physicsts--the full-blown Ph.D. kind, who have labs and university possitions and everything--who were equally hesitant to comment on it, and put a huge number of caveats in their statements to let me know that this wasn't their field and that if I really want to know, talk to Dr. So-and-so who's been doing some really interesting research. Why, exactly, should we CARE what the pople thinks happened back then? You need to stop worrying so much. Nothing limits free inquiry, and all the data you need can be attainable. There are no experts because anyone's data is free to all to use. However it's always safe to include caveats, but don't be so hesitant. If you can't afford to do something, you'll never find out how wrong you are. And even being wrong is a good thing.

6th January 2011, 06:42 PM	#35
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,957	God was behind Big Bang, universe no accident: Pope Pope-pope-a-dope!!: Betty Boop
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,957	__________________ There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed. Wash this space! We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!