Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What was infused? | Acts 1:3 | Morant61 | 44663 | ||
Greetings Steve! Thanks for the input my friend! Allow me to comment briefly on your points! 1) I disagree mildly! I really wasn't trying to use this as a straw man my friend. In my experience, every person who believed in Theistic evolution also did not believe in a real Adam and Eve - at least not as presented in Scripture. The whole point behind making a 'day' mean more than a day is to accomodate evolution. Once this is done, then none of Genesis can be literal. So, I believe this is a valid point. 2) I agree. However, one should note that nothing in Galileo's theories contradicted any Scripture. His theories only contradicted the offical teachings of the church. 3) I agree. The problem is not science, but the assumptions behind much of the science. 4) I agree. I really have no concern over the age of the earth personally. I would probably lean toward the younger earth, at least in comparison to evolution. But, my primary concern is the trend to spiritualize all of Genesis when it purports to be history. Does the creation account give every scientific detail? No! But, when it says that God created Adam as a fully fuctional adult male, I believe it. Weather!!! We are drowning right now! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | What was infused? | Acts 1:3 | Emmaus | 44710 | ||
Tim and Indiana, You might find this opinion of interest in the context of your discussion. It is from a Catholic perspective, but relevent to the current conversation. "It remains for Us now to speak about those questions which, although they pertain to the positive sciences, are nevertheless more or less connected with the truths of the Christian faith. In fact, not a few insistently demand that the Catholic religion takes these sciences into account as much as possible. This certainly would be praiseworthy in the case of clearly proved facts; but caution must be used when there is rather question of hypotheses, having some sort of scientific foundation, in which the doctrine contained in Sacred Scripture or in Tradition is involved. If such conjectural opinions are directly or indirectly opposed to the doctrine revealed by God, then the demand that they be recognized can in no way be admitted. For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faithful Some however rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question. When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which through generation is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own. 38. Just as in the biological and anthropological sciences, so also in the historical sciences there are those who boldly transgress the limits and safeguards established by the Church. In a particular way must be deplored a certain too free interpretation of the historical books of the Old Testament. Those who favor this system, in order to defend their cause, wrongly refer to the Letter which was sent not long ago to the Archbishop of Paris by the Pontifical Commission on Biblical Studies. This Letter, in fact, clearly points out that the first eleven chapters of Genesis, although properly speaking not conforming to the historical method used by the best Greek and Latin writers or by competent authors of our time, do nevertheless pertain to history in a true sense, which however must be further studied and determined by exegetes; the same chapters, (the Letter points out), in simple and metaphorical language adapted to the mentality of a people but little cultured, both state the principal truths which are fundamental for our salvation, and also give a popular description of the origin of the human race and the chosen people. If, however, the ancient sacred writers have taken anything from popular narrations (and this may be conceded), it must never be forgotten that they did so with the help of divine inspiration, through which they were rendered immune from any error in selecting and evaluating those documents. Therefore, whatever of the popular narrations have been inserted into the Sacred Scriptures must in no way be considered on a par with myths or other such things, which are more the product of an extravagant imagination than of that striving for truth and simplicity which in the Sacred Books, also of the Old Testament, is so apparent that our ancient sacred writers must be admitted to be clearly superior to the ancient profane writers." Pius XII, Humani Generis, 1950 Emmaus |
||||||
3 | What was infused? | Acts 1:3 | Morant61 | 44748 | ||
Greetings Emmaus! Interesting quote my friend! Thanks for providing it! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||