RE: Science + Creation
June 12, 2012 at 9:11 am
(This post was last modified: June 12, 2012 at 9:48 am by The Grand Nudger.)
-"The early Church Fathers taught creationism—though there was debate over whether God created the world in six days, as Clement of Alexandria taught,[8] or in a single moment as held by Augustine,[9] and a literal interpretation of Genesis was normally taken for granted in the Middle Ages and later, until it was rejected in favour of uniformitarianism (entailing far greater timeframes) by a majority of geologists in the 19th century."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Ch..._evolution
Eat crow. Not only has the catholic understanding of our origins changed, it has been changing, for centuries.
-LOL, OH? They never changed codified or swapped one tradition for another? So, elaborate on what those "variety of things" were then, if you please? Bonus points if you can eliminate the above. They wouldn't have :gasp: altered canon, would they? Popes don't reverse the churches position on matters decided upon by a previous Pope, now do they?
-Yes, catholic history, as opposed to any other history, the difference being that catholic history must toe the party line, and that's an article of faith.
-No Aiza, nothing makes them demi-gods, because there is no such thing as a demi-god, there are no miracles either, but that doesn't stop you people from printing saints.
-And? Many different traditions also believe in stories of Uncegila and that has precisely zero effect on whether or not sea monsters exist. You don't have to choose between either, and no one asked you too, but I am giving you a factually accurate account of the rise of Rome (as it pertains to what would eventually become the religion you recognize) and establishment of the papacy, and I could be more detailed about it if you really wanted to dive in. You are offering me fairy tales as though there were some choice to be made between them and history, there isn't.
-Oh, excellent, then you are prepared to definitively show that the Petrine passage is a part of the original manuscript whilst simultaneously removing any doubt as to the entire books authorship and dating? You know we don't often get scholars of your caliber here with such momentous and important discoveries to share, and to think that it will be shared with us, that we will be the first to see this accomplishment in action...I'm very very flattered that you've chosen to grace us with your opus, now lets see it?
-"Our magic isn't magical...it's miraculous"
You know, that's a part of the catholic persuasion that I just don't understand, and perhaps you could help me with that. You guys really love magic, you perform it weekly, and it is codified as an article of your faith. So why do you cringe away the moment someone asks you about the magic? Why does it become less magical in the asking?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Ch..._evolution
Eat crow. Not only has the catholic understanding of our origins changed, it has been changing, for centuries.
-LOL, OH? They never changed codified or swapped one tradition for another? So, elaborate on what those "variety of things" were then, if you please? Bonus points if you can eliminate the above. They wouldn't have :gasp: altered canon, would they? Popes don't reverse the churches position on matters decided upon by a previous Pope, now do they?
-Yes, catholic history, as opposed to any other history, the difference being that catholic history must toe the party line, and that's an article of faith.
-No Aiza, nothing makes them demi-gods, because there is no such thing as a demi-god, there are no miracles either, but that doesn't stop you people from printing saints.
-And? Many different traditions also believe in stories of Uncegila and that has precisely zero effect on whether or not sea monsters exist. You don't have to choose between either, and no one asked you too, but I am giving you a factually accurate account of the rise of Rome (as it pertains to what would eventually become the religion you recognize) and establishment of the papacy, and I could be more detailed about it if you really wanted to dive in. You are offering me fairy tales as though there were some choice to be made between them and history, there isn't.
-Oh, excellent, then you are prepared to definitively show that the Petrine passage is a part of the original manuscript whilst simultaneously removing any doubt as to the entire books authorship and dating? You know we don't often get scholars of your caliber here with such momentous and important discoveries to share, and to think that it will be shared with us, that we will be the first to see this accomplishment in action...I'm very very flattered that you've chosen to grace us with your opus, now lets see it?
-"Our magic isn't magical...it's miraculous"
You know, that's a part of the catholic persuasion that I just don't understand, and perhaps you could help me with that. You guys really love magic, you perform it weekly, and it is codified as an article of your faith. So why do you cringe away the moment someone asks you about the magic? Why does it become less magical in the asking?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
