Pope Finally Accepts Evolution and the Big Bang as Realities!

[skywake]

Thread has all the clichés, even the bit where an Atheist argues with someone who identifies as an Agnostic about how meaningless that term is. So good job people.

 

Anyways, it's really simple. If your beliefs whether they be religious, political or otherwise can not "bend" to suit reality and instead you accuse reality of being wrong? You go around hunting the corners of the internet for people who agree with you rather than confronting your deeply held beliefs? Then you're doing it wrong. We all do it, we can't avoid it, but we should all be aware of it and try to avoid it.

 

And Evolution and the Big Bang? If you think they're bullshit then you haven't understood it. I mean users of this forum trust the way modern science works. If they didn't they'd think the internet was some kind of witchcraft. So why do they choose to distrust those specific parts of science? Well the only reason I can think of is because it goes against what they want to be true. So sorry, reality isn't going to bend for you. It's great that the Pope has made it clear for his followers. That's a positive step, lets hope for a few more.

[OlekKing]

Thread has all the clichés, even the bit where an Atheist argues with someone who identifies as an Agnostic about how meaningless that term is. So good job people.

If we all sit here quietly, people will continue using that term in a meaningless way, the term itself isn't, but it is in the context of what they trying to twist it into being.

It's very simple, just like the meaning of Atheism/Theism=Lack of belief in a deity/Belief in a deity. If you attempt to twist its meaning or connote anything else to it then you're either intellectually dishonest or outright ignorant.

 

Attempting to hide beneath "Agnosticism" is intellectual cowardice. Even after you explain to these people why they're wrong, they still deny it. Perhaps some might be honest mistakes although i rarely observe that.

[twovaliant2]

Ok.... everybody take breather.....

 

The news outlets, (surprising) took the pope out of context.

 

Taken from time magazine.

 

"Pope Francis’ real role in this evolution hubbub was small. He spoke, as Popes do, to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Monday, which had gathered to discuss “Evolving Topics of Nature,” and he affirmed what Catholic teaching has been for decades. “God is not a divine being or a magician, but the Creator who brought everything to life,” he said. “Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”"

 

http://time.com/3545844/pope-francis-evolution-creationism

 

Last post on this thread... :rolleyes:

[Spongy141]

Not really, this is only one person's take on religion out of billions.

(Sorry a little late to reply) A very important and a very powerful religious figure. Just because someone is just one man doesn't mean he/she doesn't have the power over billions of people.

[skywake]

If we all sit here quietly, people will continue using that term in a meaningless way, the term itself isn't, but it is in the context of what they trying to twist it into being.

It's very simple, just like the meaning of Atheism/Theism=Lack of belief in a deity/Belief in a deity. If you attempt to twist its meaning or connote anything else to it then you're either intellectually dishonest or outright ignorant.

 

Attempting to hide beneath "Agnosticism" is intellectual cowardice. Even after you explain to these people why they're wrong, they still deny it. Perhaps some might be honest mistakes although i rarely observe that.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you and have made the same point plenty of times. Enough that I've come to the conclusion that the argument is counter productive. If I'm going to waste time arguing or trying to correct someone it better be with someone who actually has a different view. Not someone who shares my views but chooses to use a different label.

[Jack.EXE]

I am very much a Christian, and I say that science and religion can co-exist, and the do for me.

 

So shut up this pointless argument.

[OlekKing]

I am very much a Christian, and I say that science and religion can co-exist, and the do for me.

 

So shut up this pointless argument.

You don't understand where the incompatibility lies and you can't just tell everyone who disagrees with you to shut up then present your little personal anecdote as a counter-argument.

 

The reason why science and religion are actually incompatible is that, in the real world, they reach incompatible conclusions. It’s worth noting that this incompatibility is perfectly evident to any fair-minded person who cares to look. Different religions make very different claims, but they typically end up saying things like “God made the universe in six days” or “Jesus died and was resurrected” or “Moses parted the red sea” or “dead souls are reincarnated in accordance with their karmic burden.” And science says: none of that is true. So there you go, incompatibility.

 

Being religious doesn't doesn't prevent you from being a scientist, simply be aware that it makes you a hypocrite and that your faith goes against the foundations of science/vice-versa.

The religious scientists that are out there don't do their job by applying their faith on it, rather the scientific method. As some people like to say: once you enter the lab, you become an atheist.

[brokencross]

So in about a couple dozen of years the Church will accept "God" is just an imaginary friend, right?

[Trik'Stari]

So in about a couple dozen of years the Church will accept "God" is just an imaginary friend, right?

Lol then by what authority would they tell others how to live and what to think and do? (i.e. the whole point of religions)

[Jack.EXE]

You don't understand where the incompatibility lies and you can't just tell everyone who disagrees with you to shut up then present your little personal anecdote as a counter-argument.

 

The reason why science and religion are actually incompatible is that, in the real world, they reach incompatible conclusions. It’s worth noting that this incompatibility is perfectly evident to any fair-minded person who cares to look. Different religions make very different claims, but they typically end up saying things like “God made the universe in six days” or “Jesus died and was resurrected” or “Moses parted the red sea” or “dead souls are reincarnated in accordance with their karmic burden.” And science says: none of that is true. So there you go, incompatibility.

 

Being religious doesn't doesn't prevent you from being a scientist, simply be aware that it makes you a hypocrite and that your faith goes against the foundations of science/vice-versa.

The religious scientists that are out there don't do their job by applying their faith on it, rather the scientific method. As some people like to say: once you enter the lab, you become an atheist.

 

Then I am a hypocrite.

 

Then again, I'm an engineer, rather than a scientist.

[brokencross]

Lol then by what authority would they tell others how to live and what to think and do? (i.e. the whole point of religions)

They have none, not nowadays at least. They just function as a moral advisor, essentially. And you don't need to state the existence of a God for that.

What happened on the middle ages helped a lot on the formation of Europe, and the world honestly, tho. They laid down the values and we followed suit. That and the power plays backed up by the Church that helped the european kingdoms not destroying each other.

[OlekKing]

They have none, not nowadays at least. They just function as a moral advisor, essentially. And you don't need to state the existence of a God for that.

What happened on the middle ages helped a lot on the formation of Europe, and the world honestly, tho. They laid down the values and we followed suit. That and the power plays backed up by the Church that helped the european kingdoms not destroying each other.

Sorry but the Middle Ages is the prime example of how the Church and Religion itself oppressed and persecuted people, the extermination of the Romans by the Catholics was one of the biggest set backs of progress of the human civilization.

It was the bloodiest and most violent era for Christianity, they were pretty much the ones who came up with Nazism and persecuted the Jews pretty horribly, can you imagine if they had modern technology and arsenals back then? Hundreds of thousands were burned alive, accused of Witchcraft, hundreds of thousands were executed for challenging the church or for attempting to make any kind of scientific progress/research, you were obliged to be Christian, it was not a choice, if you refused your faith you'd be persecuted and killed. The Church exterminated many populations, they almost exterminated the Jews to begin with, and they got the military backing from all the different aristocrats at the time, they incited conflicts. Do i even bring up the Inquisition and how they tortured hundreds of thousands?

There's your religious morals in practice, people back then had much, much more faith than anyone today, they were true believers, you'd expect them to be much more peaceful if their morals were superior.

 

We began to be more peaceful thanks to Humanism and later Secular thinking, not religion.

[NeatSquidYT]

This pope is cool. But big bang and evolution are just theories too.

They are just theories, but have a ton of evidence compared to creationism or any other religious beliefs.

[brokencross]

 

Sorry but the Middle Ages is the prime example of how the Church and Religion itself oppressed and persecuted people, the extermination of the Romans by the Catholics was one of the biggest set backs of progress of the human civilization.

It was the bloodiest and most violent era for Christianity, they were pretty much the ones who came up with Nazism and persecuted the Jews pretty horribly, can you imagine if they had modern technology and arsenals back then? Hundreds of thousands were burned alive, accused of Witchcraft, hundreds of thousands were executed for challenging the church or for attempting to make any kind of scientific progress/research, you were obliged to be Christian, it was not a choice, if you refused your faith you'd be persecuted and killed. The Church exterminated many populations, they almost exterminated the Jews to begin with, and they got the military backing from all the different aristocrats at the time, they incited conflicts. Do i even bring up the Inquisition and how they tortured hundreds of thousands?

There's your religious morals in practice, people back then had much, much more faith than anyone today, they were true believers, you'd expect them to be much more peaceful if their morals were superior.

 

We began to be more peaceful thanks to Humanism and later Secular thinking, not religion.

First of all I'm an atheist, so I'm not defending the Church in any way or form.

But anyways, you're overblowing it. Most romans converted and the pagans were persecuted (like the first christians were persecuted by the Roman empire) but comparing it to the Nazi regime is way too much.

I never said the Church didn't do bad things, it's quite obvious they did, but they essentially shaped Europe, helping avoid more wars between crowns by uniting them under the same religion.

 

You're right, Humanism did help us become more peaceful but before that, the Church laid down moral values. Values that we still follow, being christian or not.

[OlekKing]

 

 

First of all I'm an atheist, so I'm not defending the Church in any way or form.

But anyways, you're overblowing it. Most romans converted and the pagans were persecuted (like the first christians were persecuted by the Roman empire) but comparing it to the Nazi regime is way too much.

I never said the Church didn't do bad things, it's quite obvious they did, but they essentially shaped Europe, helping avoid more wars between crowns by uniting them under the same religion.

 

You're right, Humanism did help us become more peaceful but before that, the Church laid down moral values. Values that we still follow, being christian or not.

 

Values which predated Christianity or any other religion by Millennium.

 

The basic tenets which are common to most morally-based religions — “don’t steal, don’t lie, be kind, help others, etc.” — have been around for a long, long time. These precepts predate the rise of the first city-states (~4,500 BC), and are commonly found in hunter-gatherer societies. In all likelihood, these precepts have been present in such societies for at least 50,000 years. The earliest legal codes — which specifically described behaviors to be encouraged-discouraged in the form of do’s and don’ts, predate the rise of the oldest religions.

 

While the Ten Commandments (Jewish) and the maxims of the Rig Veda (Hindu) are respectably old, both dating from around 1,500 BC, the Sumerians had a legal code (which addressed moral and ethical issues) more than a thousand years earlier. The Sumerian code makes no reference to religion and is not based on religion. By the same token, the Babylonian King, Hammurabi formulated his famous law code (based on moral and ethical behavior) hundreds of years before the Ten Commandments or Rig Veda were conceived or written. Hammurabi’s code was neither based on nor grounded in religion.

 

There is, therefore, no historical evidence to support the idea that moral and ethical precepts originate with — or are dependent on — religion.

 

The conflation of morality with religion is a relatively recent development in human history, and it is limited to certain peoples in certain places who practice certain religions.

[The_Strict_Nein]

The Catholic Church has supported evolution since Vatican II in the 1960s. In fact the first person to theorize the big bang was a Catholic Priest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre). 

 

Tell American schools in the south that

[RexinOridle]

Utterly saddening that there are millions upon millions of people out there, just like you, who don't possess the basic understanding of the scientific method then go on to say this kind of shit...

 

Sir, you need to calm down and have a cookie. Or perhaps a bit more education on English too.

[Speedbird]

Awesome!

[OlekKing]

Sir, you need to calm down and have a cookie. Or perhaps a bit more education on English too.

There are no errors in that sentence.

Unless you have something to add to the discussion, feel free to leave.

 

You proved yourself to be an idiot who doesn't understand the basic principles of the scientific enterprise. Instead of admitting the mistake or attempting to argue further, you commit a Red Herring by taking jabs at my English, which was perfect in your quote.

[Inukami7]

Richard Dawkins has been talking about the Vatican having accepted it for a while now. Way before this speech was made. It's pretty cool the Pope publicly said that, though we don't know whether the Vatican will maintain that view on the topic forever.

[RexinOridle]

There are no errors in that sentence.

Unless you have something to add to the discussion, feel free to leave.

 

You proved yourself to be an idiot who doesn't understand the basic principles of the scientific enterprise. Instead of admitting the mistake or attempting to argue further, you commit a Red Herring by taking jabs at my English, which was perfect in your quote.

 

LOL, you need to calm down. You seem to be using foul language with a lot of our members here. This is just a discussion board.

[dalekphalm]

LOL, you need to calm down. You seem to be using foul language with a lot of our members here. This is just a discussion board.

Granted, he's getting a rather bit too excited/agitated over this, but to be fair, he's right.

 

You didn't understand the proper use of "theory" in this context. I don't know if you've accepted that you were wrong and learned from it or not, but hopefully you have

 

Scientific theories are about as rock solid as information gets. They are continually tested and researched by scientists as well for errors or mistakes (both factual and logical). If it turns out we were wrong about something, because of new research or understanding on a particular subject, then we update and move on with life.

 

Theory, in the way you used it, is actually "hypothesis".

[RexinOridle]

Granted, he's getting a rather bit too excited/agitated over this, but to be fair, he's right.

 

You didn't understand the proper use of "theory" in this context. I don't know if you've accepted that you were wrong and learned from it or not, but hopefully you have

 

Scientific theories are about as rock solid as information gets. They are continually tested and researched by scientists as well for errors or mistakes (both factual and logical). If it turns out we were wrong about something, because of new research or understanding on a particular subject, then we update and move on with life.

 

Theory, in the way you used it, is actually "hypothesis".

 

Absolutely agree with you. He is right and learned a lot from your previous explanation. But what I meant in my was that let people have their own belief. People shouldn't get over excited over that.  

[OlekKing]

Absolutely agree with you. He is right and learned a lot from your previous explanation. But what I meant in my was that let people have their own belief. People shouldn't get over excited over that.  

People can believe whatever the fuck they want once they stop using it to mess with the world, once they stop indoctrinating children, once their beliefs stop affecting politics and various policies. I'll stop giving a damn once their belief is reduced to the level of knitting.

 

I'm so tired of people like you who are just completely oblivious to what goes on in the world, who pretend like religion is just wishy-washy happy time and that everyone is getting along just fine.

 

This is the real world here, if you make claims about the universe and can't provide me with any evidence, yet you continue to claim it's true, then you better not be surprised if i criticize and ridicule you.

 

No, you are not entitled to your own opinion until you can back it up and prove that it conforms with reality.

 

Oh, but excuse me for being so passionate for the truth...

[StingBull]

Whatevs