Questions that evolutionists and billions of years proponents cannot answer but disprove their theories.

[shunyadragon]

So then seems you agree that saying evolution is true and factual but Mary said by many to be the eternal virgin clashes with the theory of evolution.

IT seems . . . is not based on my posts, but your imagination. Please reread my posts and respond context.

 

[shunyadragon]

They never had any intention on learning anything about evolution.

They?!?!? Yes in the ancient past there was no interest in basic sciences, The goal at that time was the engineering of gret buildings and the technology of war, Beginning with the Natural Philosophy of Lucretius you have the beginning of the desire of knowledge of the natural world separate from religious beliefs.

 

[YoursTrue]

Sciences of evolution only applies to the physical history of life on earth nothing more and nothing less. The Pope completely realized this.

So then he must think like you do... it's magic.

 

[YoursTrue]

IT seems . . . is not based on my posts, but your imagination. Please reread my posts and respond context.

So you say evolution and the dogma that Mary is eternal virgin are not related, right?

 

[McBell]

They?!?!? Yes in the ancient past there was no interest in basic sciences, The goal at that time was the engineering of gret buildings and the technology of war, Beginning with the Natural Philosophy of Lucretius you have the beginning of the desire of knowledge of the natural world separate from religious beliefs.

Yes "they".
Given there is more than one in this very thread...

 

[McBell]

So you say evolution and the dogma that Mary is eternal virgin are not related, right?

Harry Potter being a wizard is more closely related to the Virgin Mary than is evolution.

 

[YoursTrue]

IT seems . . . is not based on my posts, but your imagination. Please reread my posts and respond context.

I'm asking you...but you seem to have answered, although illogically...that religion and science do not mix even though many firmly believe (including the Pope) that evolution is true and it's also true that Mary is the eternal virgin. I can't ask the Pope now but I guess he believes evolution is the way things came about except in some instances.

 

[shunyadragon]

I'm asking you...but you seem to have answered, although illogically...that religion and science do not mix even though many firmly believe (including the Pope) that evolution is true and it's also true that Mary is the eternal virgin. I can't ask the Pope now but I guess he believes evolution is the way things came about except in some instances.

The conclusion by the Pope is that indeed the consideration of the sciences of evolution is based on science, and separate from religous beliefs. You apparently will not accept what the believes. It is not a matter "of some instances." it is a matter of what the Pope specifically believes.

 

[YoursTrue]

The conclusion by the Pope is that indeed the consideration of the sciences of evolution is based on science, and separate from religous beliefs. You apparently will not accept what the believes. It is not a matter "of some instances." it is a matter of what the Pope specifically believes.

And the Pope is supposed to "specifically believe" that Mary is the eternal virgin. Along with evolution. Thank you for helping me with this.

 

[shunyadragon]

Yes "they".
Given there is more than one in this very thread...

Not that many, Need to be specific. Those that accept the sciences as an understanding of the knowledge of the physical universe without a religious agenda, and those that determine that they will only accept the science that conforns with their ancient religious genda,

 

[McBell]

Not that many, NEed to be specific. Those that accept the sciences as an understanding of the knowledge of the physical universe without a religious agenda, and those that determine that they will only accept the science that conforns with their ancient religious genda,

It is against the forum rules to call members out like that.
I even have the points to prove it....

 

[shunyadragon]

And the Pope is supposed to "specifically believe" that Mary is the eternal virgin. Along with evolution. Thank you for helping me with this.

Please respond completely to what the Pope believes concerning the scientific understanding of the physical world versus the religious beliefs of the Roman Church. The Pope sees no conflict.

 

[John53]

They never had any intention on learning anything about evolution.

They don't even want a discussion on it. They just want to try and find things that they interpret as "gotcha's".

 

[Valjean]

So then seems you agree that saying evolution is true and factual but Mary said by many to be the eternal virgin clashes with the theory of evolution.

They don't clash. They're not even related. They involve two entirely different things.

 

[Valjean]

So then he must think like you do... it's magic.

Again, how are you defining magic?
An observed, understood, empirically evidenced sequence of related events is not magic. The steps are known understood, and explained. How is that magic?

 

[Valjean]

I'm asking you...but you seem to have answered, although illogically...that religion and science do not mix even though many firmly believe (including the Pope) that evolution is true and it's also true that Mary is the eternal virgin. I can't ask the Pope now but I guess he believes evolution is the way things came about except in some instances.

They are not logically related beliefs!

 

[Valjean]

Either evolution is true for all or not.

For all of what? You're comparing apples and oranges. Please outline your reasoning, here.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Sure it's in harmony with the topic. Evolution is the topic and it's also involving logic about also the "eternal virginity" of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Would you say that is in line with the theory of evolution, especially since the Pope, a rather major figure, declared evolution to be ok, and also agrees that the eternal virginity of Mary, the mother of Jesus, is true as well. Do you see that according to the theory of evolution she could have conceived a child and still e a virgin?

It seems to me that both you and the pope have beliefs in the magical claims of the bible.
The main difference is that the pope next to that also accepts evidence of reality.

So he accepts science + adds magical biblical beliefs.
Whereas you only accept magical biblical beliefs while rejecting science.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The two intertwine to a large degree. Many people say evolution is true, yet belong to a religion they say that claims adherence to myths. Church dogma has it that Mary was unequivocally the "eternal" virgin. So on one hand they say evolution is true. And on the other hand they profess a belief that Mary was a virgin always. Recognizing that you do not believe Mary was the eternal virgin. Many do. Therefore while seemingly inconsistent they still say that Mary was the eternal virgin and that evolution is true as well.

I would say that beliefs in magical claims are inconsistent with reality.
They are instead just not supported by the evidence or observations of reality.

Rejecting evolution on the other hand, IS inconsistent with reality.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So then seems you agree that saying evolution is true and factual but Mary said by many to be the eternal virgin clashes with the theory of evolution.

No, it doesn't.

There's nothing about evolution theory which positively excludes such magic from occurring.

It doesn't even need to be magical. We can in fact do this today...
We can take a virgin and implant an embryo through IVF. She would give birth to a child and still be a virgin.