| Line 361: |
Line 361: |
| | :::::: Like erosion, User:Order, you push for concepts that are logically contrary to [[faith]]. Why don't you disclose your own point of view first, so readers can see where you're coming from? What you say about the Pope, with whom I expect you to completely disagree on almost everything, is false. The Old Earthers reject the [[Flood]] circa 3000 B.C., for example, while the Pope must accept it as the first Pope does. Let's be up-front about that also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:53, 30 November 2007 (EST) | | :::::: Like erosion, User:Order, you push for concepts that are logically contrary to [[faith]]. Why don't you disclose your own point of view first, so readers can see where you're coming from? What you say about the Pope, with whom I expect you to completely disagree on almost everything, is false. The Old Earthers reject the [[Flood]] circa 3000 B.C., for example, while the Pope must accept it as the first Pope does. Let's be up-front about that also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:53, 30 November 2007 (EST) |
| | :::::::The only concept I push is to accept the fact other people can disagree with your views and are still good Catholics, with the popes approval. If anything it is logically contrary to '''your''' faith. Thanks for asking about my views, but I am not the pope, and we were discussing the popes views. There are official documents by the Vatican detailing the popes view, so we don't have to guess what his views are. Why do you have difficulties to accept that the pope allows for views different from yours? If the pope says that people can be good Catholics and believe in theistic evolution, does it make your beliefs less true? [[User:Order|Order]] 17:25, 30 November 2007 (EST) | | :::::::The only concept I push is to accept the fact other people can disagree with your views and are still good Catholics, with the popes approval. If anything it is logically contrary to '''your''' faith. Thanks for asking about my views, but I am not the pope, and we were discussing the popes views. There are official documents by the Vatican detailing the popes view, so we don't have to guess what his views are. Why do you have difficulties to accept that the pope allows for views different from yours? If the pope says that people can be good Catholics and believe in theistic evolution, does it make your beliefs less true? [[User:Order|Order]] 17:25, 30 November 2007 (EST) |
| | + | |
| | + | :::::::: User:Order, you're not fooling anyone here. You don't quote from a pope to support your views, because no pope has supported your views. The first pope, Peter, stated very clearly in the Bible that the [[Flood]] occurred as described in the Bible. Now please show me one -- just one -- Old Earther who accepts that. You won't be able to. Please show me one pope -- just one -- who doubted what Peter said. You can't. So don't pretend that popes support Old Earthism as a way of pulling people away from their [[faith]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:32, 30 November 2007 (EST) |
| | + | |
| | ::::Mr. Aschlafly. In light of this enlightenment I suggest you rewrite the article [[Pangea]], its Old Earthism may erode your visitors faith: it may get them to believe in things from which disbelief in Christianity logically follows. While you are at it, perhaps review all the articles in the [[:Category:Geology]], there may be others amongst them promoting atheistic concepts. Perhaps some of the articles in the [[:Category:Astronomy]] also need rewritten. In the article [[Universe]], a meticulous Old Earthist explanation is set against a marginalised, weak descripton of the true Christian view which follows at the bottom of the page, giving the impression its not to be taken seriously. | | ::::Mr. Aschlafly. In light of this enlightenment I suggest you rewrite the article [[Pangea]], its Old Earthism may erode your visitors faith: it may get them to believe in things from which disbelief in Christianity logically follows. While you are at it, perhaps review all the articles in the [[:Category:Geology]], there may be others amongst them promoting atheistic concepts. Perhaps some of the articles in the [[:Category:Astronomy]] also need rewritten. In the article [[Universe]], a meticulous Old Earthist explanation is set against a marginalised, weak descripton of the true Christian view which follows at the bottom of the page, giving the impression its not to be taken seriously. |
| | ::::[[User:DaleHill|DaleHill]] 08:25, 30 November 2007 (EST) | | ::::[[User:DaleHill|DaleHill]] 08:25, 30 November 2007 (EST) |