hes all about not being curious about god returning (end of days fanatics), and not trying to force your belief with conjecture seems legit to me
According to their doctrine, the Pope is the closest thing to God they have on Earth. Ignoring him would be heresy.
I didn't get that at all in his message This explains that our curiosity of "flesh" is what takes us further away from God. Understanding the natural world, as in the Universe or evolution, doesn't involve the "flesh of cursed Adam" as he was explaining in his message
The pope discouraging curiosity, in his homily, to his followers. I'm willing to accept that I will get push back from you or another person saying it is only within very specific context that he discourages curiosity but I don't find that convincing. Denouncing the spirit of curiosity seems to suggest a broader context than the specific examples cited in the homily. I don't think he is fixated on something as simple as gossip, I mean.
Oh no, I have no intention of giving you any push back. I will just observe that you find fault where I do not. Neither of us is Catholic I expect, but apparently you find fault in the pope where I do not. Perhaps you seek out fault, I tend to look intent.
It's possible I misinterpreted something benign as nefarious. It's also possible that I'm a flawed and deeply cynical man.
Ok, back on track. (I am removing my personal feelings about the topic from this thread henceforth.) Question to anyone who can answer: as a Catholic, is it possible to reconcile the BBT and evolution with Genesis?
The concept of theistic evolution is well-established. I don't see how they are incompatible at all. The conflict that most creationists have comes from either a literal interpretation of the word "day" in Genesis 1 (which in my mind is silly, since Genesis has God creating the sun, moon, and stars on day 4; how were the first three days marked with no sun?), or with the phrase "after their own kind", which some suggest means that one species cannot come from another. I, of course, contend that with God, all things are possible, even macroevolution.
It seemed as though you were implying that his recommendation to not be curious had something to do with being open minded about issues like evolution and science.
The issue is not light. The issue is "morning and evening". How can there have been a literal morning and evening with no sun?
Theism and evolution are logically compatible, but the implications of evolution certainly undermine the tenets on which Catholicism and other traditional theistic religions are based.
That depends on what type of theism. God of the gaps can work well with evolution: God set forth the laws of nature in the early or pre-big bang which is his way of guiding us all. By the way, I think this pope is the bees knees.
There are gaps in our understanding of the evolutionary mechanism itself that God could still be hiding in. It's possible God could have been or still is intervening in/directing evolution. There is no evidence whatsoever for that, and given what we otherwise know about the mechanistic operation of nature it's an impractical hypothesis, but it's at least not a logical impossibility.
