I agree with the Pope. Science might eventually discover all that is natural but it cannot discover what is supernatural.
Pope Benedict XVI's thoughts parallel Pope John Paul II's Address to the participants in the Vatican conference on Cosmology on Saturday, 6 July 1985 posted on the Vatican's website: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/1985/july/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19850706_conferenza-cosmologia_en.html
The Pope said that he believed that science could not discover everything. That "certain aspects of our lives rise above and move beyond the material dimension and, while having deep roots in the material, surpass the understanding which the natural sciences are capable of providing."
With love in Christ.
2007-04-16 18:38:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by imacatholic2 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Pope... a representative of Jesus Christ on Mother Earth is absolutely ignorant about the relationship between science and religion. It is this ignorance that makes him say that science is too narrow to explain creation! How can we call Pope an ignorant? The one who occupies the highest seat of clergy... how can one be ignorant!
Sacred scriptures are perennial documents... the Wisdom of which is applicable now... it was applicable in the past and would always be applicable in the future. But the application has to be interpolated in respect of the scientific advancements taking place. It was ordained by God Almighty. If it were not so... why not Pope goes to the battlefield and faces the missiles and nuclear weapons of today with bows and arrows.
The Wisdom is always required to be interpreted in the light of day... which the ignorant religious masters of the present era are incompetent to do. They seem to make fun out of everything. In the recent past... the pope ordered searching for God using highly sensitive telescopes. Is that really possible... even a child as young as six years might hollow his claim! It is as if the naked King requiring the power of a child to bring back the community to its senses.
No man god like Mahavira, Gautama Buddha, Jesus Christ or Prophet Mohammed ever stated anything wrong. The essence lies in the wrong interpretations by the so-called spiritual and religious masters to fulfill their vested interests. The Sacred scriptures are absolutely clear about the Wisdom they contain. As many masters... as many interpretations can there be! How to justify the right from wrong! All are powerful claimants... it is not within the power of the masses to affront them. More on creation big bang theory - http://www.godrealized.org/why_god_made_this_world.html
2007-04-16 23:22:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by godrealized 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
>>The pope recently said that science is too narrow to explain creation...?<<
Oh? Did you read this in his book, did you attend his seminar, or are you just going by the Reuters story, which never directly quotes the Pope as saying that? Do you think you know enough about what the Pope actually said to make that claim?
2007-04-15 23:05:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
So, far perhaps. There are things we don't know. There are things we know alot about and have models to represent how they work, knowing those models are imcomple and will be changed when we know more ( sort of like who the ptolomeic system gave way).
Sciencd expands as one discovery gives birth to the next. What is too narrow today may be little tommarow.
Of course he knows knough to make that claim. He holds a position that is only the last step. No one in the college of cardinals is there because they are holier than the guy next to them. They are their becuae they schemed better, were smarter, cut more throats, etc. The only elected position is pope. The cardinals area all where they are becuase of the dog eat dog, survival of the fittest brains and guts that got them there. When you get to the pope himself, it becomes factional wrangling, but it is from a pool where everyone is a survivor.
If you want a holy man look at the local level, they may be rare even there, but it is the only place you will find them.
2007-04-15 22:59:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by Zarathustra 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
no one can know enough about science to make a claim like that. but one can have enough knowledge to say something like that. science in itself has not given us any proof of a creation. most scientists believe in evolution, which in reality is just a clever concept based on evidence. no scientist as ever uncovered data that tells definite information on creation... only information that has to be taken from a certain point of view. science can prove say... gravity. but science cannot explain the spiritual world, and it cannot explain creation.
2007-04-17 11:26:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Justin 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I just heard on TV a scientist saying that science like astrophysics, but not only, can try to explain how something in the universe happened. How creation came to be. Or the way something is.
But they are unable to answer the WHY it happened or WHY something is or even WHY we are what we are. And that is the limit of science and separation between science and God.
Atheists neither believe in God nor listen to science.
The pope is an impostor and a charlatan anyway.
2007-04-15 22:49:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by Mossy 1
·
2⤊
4⤋
I agree completely. Science has no business whatsoever in trying to dream up creation myths and such. Science should stick to facts, like evolutionary theory.
2007-04-16 08:51:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by SomeGuy 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Too narrow in that it doesn't take imagination and wishful thinking and call it "proof" perhaps...? I'm sure the Pope is a learned fellow within his own realm, but I very much doubt he knows much about science.
2007-04-15 22:50:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
Science isn't too narrow to explain it. We just choose to provide evidence and facts as opposed to here say and biblical interpretation.
2007-04-15 22:50:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Lord Gregory 2
·
3⤊
1⤋
the pope is not very bright is he science can explaine creation a 6 day fairy story not true
2007-04-15 23:09:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋