tells me.

As in it helps me understand your position better now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[

Well, The Pope might not make a pronouncement, but the fact that the big bang is fought in Catholic schools indicates that the Pope and the Catholic hierarchy supports it. Clearly the church does not support all science, as it rejects any information suggesting that homosexual behavior is normal in a subset of humans.

The church also rejects science showing that there is no physical change made during transubstantiation, when the priest changes bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

Please don't be offended if I suggest that it would be a good idea to learn more about Catholic teachings. Were you brought up as a Catholic? There was a time when Catholic religious-education classes focused exclusively on love and joy -- that's great, but people did come out without a solid understanding of Church doctrine.

Yes, raised Catholic and "love and joy" was not discussed, except in the context that God loved us and wanted us to be happy with him in heaven -- the rest was doctrine on what to do (and not do) to assure a place in heaven and not in hell.

There's no disagreement that there is a scientific basis for the big bang and no scientific basis for transubstantiation. The church accepts one and not the other.

NP. Well, that me something about your viewpoint.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Big Bang theory was developed by a Catholic priest.

Georges Lemaitre

but not until millions of years after the big bang and about 1,500 years after Catholicism was created. If God did it all along, I wonder why it wasn't mentioned anywhere in the Bible? There is so much about God's work in the Bible and so much about the creation of the world, but not a word about the Big Bang until some Catholic priest figured it out.

The bitterness comes through loud and clear (OMG, we can't give the Catholics credit for anything, evah!). But not your point, which is vague and, to the extent there's any "there" there, easily countered. Kudos for keeping on keeping on being yourself, though!

Lemaitre deserves full credit for his scientific work, irrespective of his religion. As for vague points, please feel free to counter whatever there is to counter. Any ideas about why MAN did not mention the big bang in the bible along with his other descriptions of creation is welcomed

Fixed that for you. People wrote the bible, not God. As you noted, science wasn't that far along when the bible stores were written.

NP. It doesn't need to be literal as in God sat down with some paper and ink.

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, raised Catholic and "love and joy" was not discussed, except in the context that God loved us and wanted us to be happy with him in heaven -- the rest was doctrine on what to do (and not do) to assure a place in heaven and not in hell.

There's no disagreement that there is a scientific basis for the big bang and no scientific basis for transubstantiation. The church accepts one and not the other.

No, the Church wouldn't expect transubstantiation to be detected by weighing or chemical analysis or anything like that. If you're interested, there are ways for adults to learn more about Catholic teaching, or, failing that, you might want to read Stephen Jay Gould on the idea of "non-overlapping magisteria". As for what individual Catholics may say, the Church has both simple, ordinary people and sophisticated intellectuals; it sometimes seems that the simpler people are more likely to be saintly.

This isn't really an appropriate forum for getting into further discussions of Catholic teaching, so I'll exit, wishing you well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Big Bang theory was developed by a Catholic priest.

Georges Lemaitre

but not until millions of years after the big bang and about 1,500 years after Catholicism was created. If God did it all along, I wonder why it wasn't mentioned anywhere in the Bible? There is so much about God's work in the Bible and so much about the creation of the world, but not a word about the Big Bang until some Catholic priest figured it out.

The bitterness comes through loud and clear (OMG, we can't give the Catholics credit for anything, evah!). But not your point, which is vague and, to the extent there's any "there" there, easily countered. Kudos for keeping on keeping on being yourself, though!

Lemaitre deserves full credit for his scientific work, irrespective of his religion. As for vague points, please feel free to counter whatever there is to counter. Any ideas about why MAN did not mention the big bang in the bible along with his other descriptions of creation is welcomed

Fixed that for you. People wrote the bible, not God. As you noted, science wasn't that far along when the bible stores were written.

So that's why the big bang wasn't mentioned in the Bible -- people didn't know about it. And God chose not to straighten us out about it until centuries later when he allowed a catholic priest to figure it out.

You really don't get how this all works, do you?

Anonymous wrote:This is oversimplified but Catholics basically believe the big bang was the how and God was the why.

+ 1

This is what I learned in Catholic school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Big Bang theory was developed by a Catholic priest.

Georges Lemaitre

but not until millions of years after the big bang and about 1,500 years after Catholicism was created. If God did it all along, I wonder why it wasn't mentioned anywhere in the Bible? There is so much about God's work in the Bible and so much about the creation of the world, but not a word about the Big Bang until some Catholic priest figured it out.

The bitterness comes through loud and clear (OMG, we can't give the Catholics credit for anything, evah!). But not your point, which is vague and, to the extent there's any "there" there, easily countered. Kudos for keeping on keeping on being yourself, though!

Lemaitre deserves full credit for his scientific work, irrespective of his religion. As for vague points, please feel free to counter whatever there is to counter. Any ideas about why MAN did not mention the big bang in the bible along with his other descriptions of creation is welcomed

Fixed that for you. People wrote the bible, not God. As you noted, science wasn't that far along when the bible stores were written.

So that's why the big bang wasn't mentioned in the Bible -- people didn't know about it. And God chose not to straighten us out about it until centuries later when he allowed a catholic priest to figure it out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[

Well, The Pope might not make a pronouncement, but the fact that the big bang is fought in Catholic schools indicates that the Pope and the Catholic hierarchy supports it. Clearly the church does not support all science, as it rejects any information suggesting that homosexual behavior is normal in a subset of humans.

The church also rejects science showing that there is no physical change made during transubstantiation, when the priest changes bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

Please don't be offended if I suggest that it would be a good idea to learn more about Catholic teachings. Were you brought up as a Catholic? There was a time when Catholic religious-education classes focused exclusively on love and joy -- that's great, but people did come out without a solid understanding of Church doctrine.

Yes, raised Catholic and "love and joy" was not discussed, except in the context that God loved us and wanted us to be happy with him in heaven -- the rest was doctrine on what to do (and not do) to assure a place in heaven and not in hell.

There's no disagreement that there is a scientific basis for the big bang and no scientific basis for transubstantiation. The church accepts one and not the other.

Anonymous wrote:It's called the 'big bang THEORY' for a reason. Because that's all it is. No more fact-based than creationism or anything else.

no, that's absolutely wrong. Creationism is a story made up 1,000's of years ago by a small group of humans in the middle east. There are many creation stories, developed independently by many different cultures through the ages.

The big bang theory is based on scientific evidence developed through scientific means and accepted by scientists worldwide.

It's called the 'big bang THEORY' for a reason. Because that's all it is. No more fact-based than creationism or anything else.

Anonymous wrote:[

Well, The Pope might not make a pronouncement, but the fact that the big bang is fought in Catholic schools indicates that the Pope and the Catholic hierarchy supports it. Clearly the church does not support all science, as it rejects any information suggesting that homosexual behavior is normal in a subset of humans.

The church also rejects science showing that there is no physical change made during transubstantiation, when the priest changes bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

Please don't be offended if I suggest that it would be a good idea to learn more about Catholic teachings. Were you brought up as a Catholic? There was a time when Catholic religious-education classes focused exclusively on love and joy -- that's great, but people did come out without a solid understanding of Church doctrine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Is it possible, then, that the Pope, for instance, could say that the big bang was out and a 6 day creation was back in?

No, no Pope will speak ex cathedra on something like that. Catholics believe that using science to understand the universe is a worthy endeavor, but that technology can be used in good or bad ways. It's that second part that the Church addresses. If a physicist were elected Pope (unlikely as it is) it wouldn't make his research any more or less valuable.

Well, The Pope might not make a pronouncement, but the fact that the big bang is fought in Catholic schools indicates that the Pope and the Catholic hierarchy supports it. Clearly the church does not support all science, as it rejects any information suggesting that homosexual behavior is normal in a subset of humans.

The church also rejects science showing that there is no physical change made during transubstantiation, when the priest changes bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

fought = taught

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Is it possible, then, that the Pope, for instance, could say that the big bang was out and a 6 day creation was back in?

No, no Pope will speak ex cathedra on something like that. Catholics believe that using science to understand the universe is a worthy endeavor, but that technology can be used in good or bad ways. It's that second part that the Church addresses. If a physicist were elected Pope (unlikely as it is) it wouldn't make his research any more or less valuable.

Well, The Pope might not make a pronouncement, but the fact that the big bang is fought in Catholic schools indicates that the Pope and the Catholic hierarchy supports it. Clearly the church does not support all science, as it rejects any information suggesting that homosexual behavior is normal in a subset of humans.

The church also rejects science showing that there is no physical change made during transubstantiation, when the priest changes bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Big Bang theory was developed by a Catholic priest.

Georges Lemaitre

but not until millions of years after the big bang and about 1,500 years after Catholicism was created. If God did it all along, I wonder why it wasn't mentioned anywhere in the Bible? There is so much about God's work in the Bible and so much about the creation of the world, but not a word about the Big Bang until some Catholic priest figured it out.

The bitterness comes through loud and clear (OMG, we can't give the Catholics credit for anything, evah!). But not your point, which is vague and, to the extent there's any "there" there, easily countered. Kudos for keeping on keeping on being yourself, though!

Lemaitre deserves full credit for his scientific work, irrespective of his religion. As for vague points, please feel free to counter whatever there is to counter. Any ideas about why MAN did not mention the big bang in the bible along with his other descriptions of creation is welcomed

Fixed that for you. People wrote the bible, not God. As you noted, science wasn't that far along when the bible stores were written.

Anonymous wrote:
Is it possible, then, that the Pope, for instance, could say that the big bang was out and a 6 day creation was back in?

No, no Pope will speak ex cathedra on something like that. Catholics believe that using science to understand the universe is a worthy endeavor, but that technology can be used in good or bad ways. It's that second part that the Church addresses. If a physicist were elected Pope (unlikely as it is) it wouldn't make his research any more or less valuable.