Proof christianity is "evolving" to accept evolution as FACT!

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: TheTony

It seems to me that all the opposition to the inclusion of Catholicism as a part of Christianity comes from the same source.

This sums it up pretty well, in my opinion.

Not to mention that the hatred towards Catholics in US was reinforced by xenophobia and politics in the early years.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: TheTony

It seems to me that all the opposition to the inclusion of Catholicism as a part of Christianity comes from the same source.

This sums it up pretty well, in my opinion.

Not to mention that the hatred towards Catholics in US was reinforced by xenophobia and politics in the early years.

You Red Commie.

**EDIT**
1000 Years from now, will Catholics and Protestants be at odds just like Muslims and Jews?

I don't believe so (mainly because I am Christian and that doesn't seem to fit what I believe), but I could see it happening.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Luthien
Nope it isnt pretend and nope they don't think they are losing any battle they justify it as now being understood as part of gods plan. However they are going to hell of course according to the fundamentalists.

Considering that the traditional Rabbinical view has been that there is no contradiction between the theory of Evolution and the Torah (or, to use Christian terms, the Old Testament) I would hardly call this a new or even semi-recent development. I would think that Jews know their own books pretty well and if they don't see a problem with Evolution, why should I?

Just because you think that most Christian groups have opposed evolution does not make it so. The Vast majority of Christians today believe in evolution, and in general the vast majority of Christians have always supported science. While the power structure of the church (note the lack of capitalization) has often opposed science, most actual Christians haven't had any issues with new scientific discoveries.

ZV

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Luthien
Nope it isnt pretend and nope they don't think they are losing any battle they justify it as now being understood as part of gods plan. However they are going to hell of course according to the fundamentalists.

Considering that the traditional Rabbinical view has been that there is no contradiction between the theory of Evolution and the Torah (or, to use Christian terms, the Old Testament) I would hardly call this a new or even semi-recent development. I would think that Jews know their own books pretty well and if they don't see a problem with Evolution, why should I?

Just because you think that most Christian groups have opposed evolution does not make it so. The Vast majority of Christians today believe in evolution, and in general the vast majority of Christians have always supported science. While the power structure of the church (note the lack of capitalization) has often opposed science, most actual Christians haven't had any issues with new scientific discoveries.

ZV

Yup, you only find an issue being made in much of the Bible Belt. What is sad is that I know too many people wrestle with the idea of evolution because somehow in the Bible Belt, if you don't follow exactly the same premise of Creationism, somehow you lack faith? :roll: Gets me sick to my stomache sometimes, seeing people I know trying to come to grips with what they beleive just because ignorant people keep making this an issue.

 

[Luthien]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Luthien
Nope it isnt pretend and nope they don't think they are losing any battle they justify it as now being understood as part of gods plan. However they are going to hell of course according to the fundamentalists.

Considering that the traditional Rabbinical view has been that there is no contradiction between the theory of Evolution and the Torah (or, to use Christian terms, the Old Testament) I would hardly call this a new or even semi-recent development. I would think that Jews know their own books pretty well and if they don't see a problem with Evolution, why should I?

Just because you think that most Christian groups have opposed evolution does not make it so. The Vast majority of Christians today believe in evolution, and in general the vast majority of Christians have always supported science. While the power structure of the church (note the lack of capitalization) has often opposed science, most actual Christians haven't had any issues with new scientific discoveries.

ZV

60 percent of Americans who call themselves Evangelical Christians, however, favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools altogether, as do 50 percent of those who attend religious services every week.

LINK

 

[TheTony]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: TheTony

It seems to me that all the opposition to the inclusion of Catholicism as a part of Christianity comes from the same source.

This sums it up pretty well, in my opinion.

Not to mention that the hatred towards Catholics in US was reinforced by xenophobia and politics in the early years.

You Red Commie.

**EDIT**
1000 Years from now, will Catholics and Protestants be at odds just like Muslims and Jews?

I don't believe so (mainly because I am Christian and that doesn't seem to fit what I believe), but I could see it happening.

Actually, they've been at odds for almost two centuries, in Northern Ireland, sadly.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Luthien

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Luthien
Nope it isnt pretend and nope they don't think they are losing any battle they justify it as now being understood as part of gods plan. However they are going to hell of course according to the fundamentalists.

Considering that the traditional Rabbinical view has been that there is no contradiction between the theory of Evolution and the Torah (or, to use Christian terms, the Old Testament) I would hardly call this a new or even semi-recent development. I would think that Jews know their own books pretty well and if they don't see a problem with Evolution, why should I?

Just because you think that most Christian groups have opposed evolution does not make it so. The Vast majority of Christians today believe in evolution, and in general the vast majority of Christians have always supported science. While the power structure of the church (note the lack of capitalization) has often opposed science, most actual Christians haven't had any issues with new scientific discoveries.

ZV

60 percent of Americans who call themselves Evangelical Christians, however, favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools altogether, as do 50 percent of those who attend religious services every week.

LINK

Do yourself a favor and look up what Evangelical Christians are.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Luthien

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Luthien
Nope it isnt pretend and nope they don't think they are losing any battle they justify it as now being understood as part of gods plan. However they are going to hell of course according to the fundamentalists.

Considering that the traditional Rabbinical view has been that there is no contradiction between the theory of Evolution and the Torah (or, to use Christian terms, the Old Testament) I would hardly call this a new or even semi-recent development. I would think that Jews know their own books pretty well and if they don't see a problem with Evolution, why should I?

Just because you think that most Christian groups have opposed evolution does not make it so. The Vast majority of Christians today believe in evolution, and in general the vast majority of Christians have always supported science. While the power structure of the church (note the lack of capitalization) has often opposed science, most actual Christians haven't had any issues with new scientific discoveries.

ZV

60 percent of Americans who call themselves Evangelical Christians, however, favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools altogether, as do 50 percent of those who attend religious services every week.

LINK

Yeah, fundies are totally idiotic. You would think that after Galileo that some of these ignorant people would learn, but that is what makes them ignorant.

Even the last Pope said that evolution had some merits.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: RapidSnail
This saddens me. These supposed Christians don't even get the Bible right. Shame.

<snip>

You can't escape it; there is no middle ground. Accept the Christian faith, and the Bible as its foundation; or accept modern science and its theory.

"True" and "literal" are not synonymous. For example, the parable of the mustard seed is true, but it's not literal.

We don't literally have a mustard seed inside of us that is our faith. Given that the majority of the New Testament lessons are given obliquely at clearest and are almost always hidden even further behind metaphor than simply being oblique references I fail to see how considering the Old Testament in the same way is suddenly wrong. After all, Christ is like His Father, and if Christ speaks in parables then it is reasonable to assume that The Father does as well.

I believe strongly that the creation stories (yes, plural, there are two and they are not perfectly aligning) are absolutely true. HOWEVER, I remain unconvinced that they are literal.

You are free in your opinion, but I cannot agree with you that things are quite so cut and dried.

ZV

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: RapidSnail
This saddens me. These supposed Christians don't even get the Bible right. Shame.

<snip>

You can't escape it; there is no middle ground. Accept the Christian faith, and the Bible as its foundation; or accept modern science and its theory.

"True" and "literal" are not synonymous. For example, the parable of the mustard seed is true, but it's not literal.

We don't literally have a mustard seed inside of us that is our faith. Given that the majority of the New Testament lessons are given obliquely at clearest and are almost always hidden even further behind metaphor than simply being oblique references I fail to see how considering the Old Testament in the same way is suddenly wrong. After all, Christ is like His Father, and if Christ speaks in parables then it is reasonable to assume that The Father does as well.

I believe strongly that the creation stories (yes, plural, there are two and they are not perfectly aligning) are absolutely true. HOWEVER, I remain unconvinced that they are literal.

You are free in your opinion, but I cannot agree with you that things are quite so cut and dried.

ZV

BINGO!!!!

Hermeutics and exegesis FTW!

I am glad someone with some formal training (or at least some training that lets him understand this) is here.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Luthien
Christians do not consider themselves catholics. How do I know this; I have lived with christians my entire life and they think catholics are going to hell. Catholics however it is true do consider themselves christians, lol.

Wrong. SOME Protestants do not believe that Catholics are Christian. Those particular sects represent an infinitesimally small percentage of Christians as a whole.

The mainline Protestant denominations (Lutheran, Methodist, Episcopal, Anglican, Presbyterian, etc) all happily include Catholics within the realm of Christianity. Hell, even the Eastern and Greek Orthodox churches include Catholics as Christians and neither of those churches has historically had a good relationship with Roman Catholicism..

Your sample is flawed.

ZV

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: RapidSnail
He does not provide one hint, at all, that it was a parable or allegory.

Then why is the traditional Jewish view one of an allegorical interprtation? Are you claiming that you know Genesis better than thousands and thousands of years of highly-trained and highly-educated Rabbis?

ZV

 

[miniMUNCH]

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

Originally posted by: miniMUNCH

Originally posted by: RapidSnail

Originally posted by: miniMUNCH
Evolution and creationism are not at odds, as dennifloss alluded to.

Evolution is simply a mechanism and means for creation IMO.

The bible says absolutely nothing about how "creation" was actually accomplished... i.e. by what physical and biological phenomena did creation occur. That man evolved from lesser organisms is no less miraculous to me than if he 'poofed' out of thin air or rose up out of the dust.

Christians run into all kinds of problems when they try to literally interpret GenesiGenesis is metaphor and poetry just like Revelations, many of Psalms, the Song of Solomon, etc.

For instance, to think God literally cast out two people named Adam and Eve out of the 'garden of Eden' for eating a piece of fruit is completely naive. Moreover, it a position which is ignorant of the position and teaching of the early church which is well documented.

The sooner we Christians as a whole gets this through our collective thick heads, the better.

And who are you to say that the account of creation, Adam and Eve, and the garden of Eden weren't literal? Why is there a problem with it?

If you read ANY of the early church 'fathers' or saints on this topic (we are talking 200-400 AD which is before the bible, including the new testament, was deemed "the bible" at the council of carthage in 406 AD), they are very clear on this point.

mini, my ultimate authority is the Word of God; not men or science. What I meant to ask you was what internal evidence you have to believe that those events were not literal. If you can show me clearly that the Bible itself reveals that the accounts of Genesis were allegorical, I will believe you. But until then, I have no reason to believe that they are. The words of God are above the teachings of man.

The Bible is not the Word of God (there, I said it)... Jesus Christ is the Word of God, the gospel of John (in the Bible) is very, very clear about this. So the Bible even says it is not the word of god, yet so many Christians still think it is. Why? Because man always approaches things, and thus reads the Bible, with his/her 'point of view' preprocessing all the data and drawing conclusions that mesh, as much as possible, with their point of view.

Let me point out a brief history of the Bible. The old and new testaments were not accepted as they are (more or less) today until the council of carthage in 397 ( I said 406 above, my mistake... it was 397 AD). This is fact, look it up here or anywhere else you choose if you don't believe me. Bishops, priests, etc. got together and issued a canon of what books were appropriate for reading in the church services, etc. Men decided this!!
And the Church, from that day forward has had 'the Bible'. There are other letters of Paul, and John, and many from the other apostles and the disciples of the apostles, many of whom were the first bishops of the Church in various cities/towns/areas, that were often read in church and used for teaching.

Most Protestants don't know this and I have had some tell me outright they refuse to believe this... that men sat down and chose the books that are in the Christian bible. Well, the historical documentation of the council of Carthage in 397 is absolutely rock solid... there is no historical debate, particularly among Christian historians.

So what did Christians do for those first 300 hundred or so years... how did they know what was right or wrong. How were they able to understand and know 'the true faith'. The answer is... the Church, which is the body of Christ. Faithful bishops, priests, and lay-people protected the teaching of the apostles and handed it down generation to generation through written and oral tradition.

These same people who preserved the teaching of Christ from generation to generation and 'ratified' the Bible also said that Genesis is metaphor and poetry. Protestants have through the years sadly discarded many of these truths and historical facts and, as a result, have theologically lost their way in some regards.

Also, in reference to Genesis... no where does it state that it is factual/actual accounting of 'history'.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Luthien

Originally posted by: miniMUNCH
The 7 extra books used to be in all protestant bibles too until they removed them to reduce printing costs.

To reduce printing costs, yeah right.

Both of my copies of the NRSV include the full Apocrypha. Both are "Protestant" bibles. My Lutheran great Grandfather had an RSV copy of the Apocrypha for the longest time. I inherited it from him and it's sitting on my shelf at home. The Priest at the Anglican church I attend reads from the Apocrypha regularly.

Again, the mainline Protestant denominations have no issue with the Apocrypha. It's only the fringe groups that start making false claims that the Apocrypha "distorts" Christianity.

ZV

 

[Luthien]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: RapidSnail
This saddens me. These supposed Christians don't even get the Bible right. Shame.

<snip>

You can't escape it; there is no middle ground. Accept the Christian faith, and the Bible as its foundation; or accept modern science and its theory.

"True" and "literal" are not synonymous. For example, the parable of the mustard seed is true, but it's not literal.

We don't literally have a mustard seed inside of us that is our faith. Given that the majority of the New Testament lessons are given obliquely at clearest and are almost always hidden even further behind metaphor than simply being oblique references I fail to see how considering the Old Testament in the same way is suddenly wrong. After all, Christ is like His Father, and if Christ speaks in parables then it is reasonable to assume that The Father does as well.

I believe strongly that the creation stories (yes, plural, there are two and they are not perfectly aligning) are absolutely true. HOWEVER, I remain unconvinced that they are literal.

You are free in your opinion, but I cannot agree with you that things are quite so cut and dried.

ZV

BINGO!!!!

Hermeutics and exegesis FTW!

I am glad someone with some formal training (or at least some training that lets him understand this) is here.

You forgot eisogesic, ;-).

 

[TheTony]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: Luthien

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Luthien
Nope it isnt pretend and nope they don't think they are losing any battle they justify it as now being understood as part of gods plan. However they are going to hell of course according to the fundamentalists.

Considering that the traditional Rabbinical view has been that there is no contradiction between the theory of Evolution and the Torah (or, to use Christian terms, the Old Testament) I would hardly call this a new or even semi-recent development. I would think that Jews know their own books pretty well and if they don't see a problem with Evolution, why should I?

Just because you think that most Christian groups have opposed evolution does not make it so. The Vast majority of Christians today believe in evolution, and in general the vast majority of Christians have always supported science. While the power structure of the church (note the lack of capitalization) has often opposed science, most actual Christians haven't had any issues with new scientific discoveries.

ZV

60 percent of Americans who call themselves Evangelical Christians, however, favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools altogether, as do 50 percent of those who attend religious services every week.

LINK

Even the last Pope said that evolution had some merits.

And that's where the thread took a tangent - the line between Christianity and Catholicism. Christianity does include Catholicism, but not all Christians are Catholics. This is especially true in terms of belief creation and evolution. Catholics, as a whole, allow for the theory of evolution. So do many other denominations. The discussions to this effect within the Catholic church have been going on for many years, well before the last Pope. I think what you're referring to are statements he'd made, very likely compelled to reiterate the difference between the point of view some protestants/fundamentalists hold today.

 

[Luthien]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Luthien

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Luthien
Nope it isnt pretend and nope they don't think they are losing any battle they justify it as now being understood as part of gods plan. However they are going to hell of course according to the fundamentalists.

Considering that the traditional Rabbinical view has been that there is no contradiction between the theory of Evolution and the Torah (or, to use Christian terms, the Old Testament) I would hardly call this a new or even semi-recent development. I would think that Jews know their own books pretty well and if they don't see a problem with Evolution, why should I?

Just because you think that most Christian groups have opposed evolution does not make it so. The Vast majority of Christians today believe in evolution, and in general the vast majority of Christians have always supported science. While the power structure of the church (note the lack of capitalization) has often opposed science, most actual Christians haven't had any issues with new scientific discoveries.

ZV

60 percent of Americans who call themselves Evangelical Christians, however, favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools altogether, as do 50 percent of those who attend religious services every week.

LINK

Do yourself a favor and look up what Evangelical Christians are.

Okay here you go but I dont see how this helps:

LINK

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: TheTony
This sums it up pretty well, in my opinion.

It does make one error:

Communion in Protestant churches is merely symbolic whereas the Catholic Church believes in the actual digestion of the true Body and Blood of Christ.

Not so. Anglican and Episcopal belief is essentially identical to Catholic belief with regards to Communion. The reason that the Anglican and Episcopal table is open is because the official position of both churches is that the Communion is between man and God, not man and priest, and that God will handle things if someone takes Communion without understanding. This is because we really don't know what God's reaction would be and the position of the Anglican/Episcopal church is that it's worse to deny communion to someone who does understand it than it is to give communion to someone who doesn't.

I should also note that individual churches may differ from the official position of their denomination. Some Lutheran churches, while technically protestant, do not have an open table.

ZV

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Luthien
60 percent of Americans who call themselves Evangelical Christians, however, favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools altogether, as do 50 percent of those who attend religious services every week.

LINK

And what percentage of Americans call themselves "Evangelical Christians"? Hint: It's a very small number.

ZV

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Luthien

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Luthien

60 percent of Americans who call themselves Evangelical Christians, however, favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools altogether, as do 50 percent of those who attend religious services every week.

LINK

Do yourself a favor and look up what Evangelical Christians are.

Okay here you go but I dont see how this helps:

LINK

And now you see that Evangelical Christians are only a very, very small part of all Christians. If we go with the "born-again" type Christians as Evangelical, you're talking about a group of very few, die-hard, and very vocal Christians. If you're talking about just Protestants, you're also talking about a rather small amount of Christians.

Like Zenmervolt said, most Christians have no problem with science and religion coexisting. Evolution is no different.

 

[dennilfloss]

Originally posted by: TheTony

Actually, they've been at odds for almost two centuries, in Northern Ireland, sadly.

Don't be so anglocentric, there was some nastiness right from the start of the Reformation through the French Wars Of Religion (until the Edit de Nantes) culminating in the horrors of the Thirty Years' War that ravaged the continent while England itself had todeal with similar nastiness against Catholic Royalists during the time of Cromwell and his Puritans. The highly regimented and orderly mode of combat and centralization of command and improved training and discipline that followed during the dynastic wars of the late 1600s and 1700s, reflecting the rationalism of Age of Enlightenment, were a direct response to the horrors of the Thirty Years' War.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: TheTony
This sums it up pretty well, in my opinion.

It does make one error:

Communion in Protestant churches is merely symbolic whereas the Catholic Church believes in the actual digestion of the true Body and Blood of Christ.

Not so. Anglican and Episcopal belief is essentially identical to Catholic belief with regards to Communion. The reason that the Anglican and Episcopal table is open is because the official position of both churches is that the Communion is between man and God, not man and priest, and that God will handle things if someone takes Communion without understanding. This is because we really don't know what God's reaction would be and the position of the Anglican/Episcopal church is that it's worse to deny communion to someone who does understand it than it is to give communion to someone who doesn't.

I should also note that individual churches may differ from the official position of their denomination. Some Lutheran churches, while technically protestant, do not have an open table.

ZV

Damn it, I hit "Quote" instead of "Edit. Sorry.

 

[LordMorpheus]

Originally posted by: Sraaz
So, they know they're losing the battle so they pretend to agree with science?

The fundies were the only ones that stuck with creationism after evolution became widely accepted by the scientific community.

Don't lump everyone in with those crazed bastards.

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: Luthien
Proof christianity is "evolving" to accept evolution as FACT!

LINK


Make sure you check out how many churches near you have converted, lol.

LINK

Proof that churches are evolving into a religion that is not christianity...

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: LordMorpheus

Originally posted by: Sraaz
So, they know they're losing the battle so they pretend to agree with science?

The fundies were the only ones that stuck with creationism after evolution became widely accepted by the scientific community.

Don't lump everyone in with those crazed bastards.

The sad thing is many people think like him.

If a few minorities commit a crime, people shout out cries of racism if you apply that groups' actions to the entire population.

If a few Christians have outrageous beliefs, everyone is fine to bash the hell out of all Christians for the beliefs and apply it to the entire group.