Comments on: The Vatican vs. global warming http://shlog.wordpress.com/2008/03/11/the-vatican-vs-global-warming/ for the short attention span Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:12:31 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: madscientist http://shlog.wordpress.com/2008/03/11/the-vatican-vs-global-warming/#comment-51 madscientist Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:27:53 +0000 http://shlog.wordpress.com/?p=22#comment-51 wow now, hold on a minute. "the church has never claimed to be scientific" are you sure you wanna say that? i seem to remember a couple historical instances where the church made scientific claims. i.e. the world is the center of the universe. and they proved this theory by burning its opponents. i seem to think they occasionally weigh in on the origins of man subject too. so like i said, are you sure you wanna make that statement? wow now, hold on a minute. “the church has never claimed to be scientific” are you sure you wanna say that? i seem to remember a couple historical instances where the church made scientific claims. i.e. the world is the center of the universe. and they proved this theory by burning its opponents. i seem to think they occasionally weigh in on the origins of man subject too. so like i said, are you sure you wanna make that statement?

]]> By: shlog http://shlog.wordpress.com/2008/03/11/the-vatican-vs-global-warming/#comment-19 shlog Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:07:41 +0000 http://shlog.wordpress.com/?p=22#comment-19 If that is the case how can absolution be granted without a definition? Doing so would be applying an unverifiable and scientifically illogical theological paradigm to a scientific matter. If that is the case how can absolution be granted without a definition? Doing so would be applying an unverifiable and scientifically illogical theological paradigm to a scientific matter.

]]> By: Aaron http://shlog.wordpress.com/2008/03/11/the-vatican-vs-global-warming/#comment-11 Aaron Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:47:30 +0000 http://shlog.wordpress.com/?p=22#comment-11 The church has never claimed to be scientific. The church believes that "murder" is wrong. Never have they laid out what it means to be "dead" but murdering is still a sin. The new seven deadly social sins say the same as before. Its up to us to define, truthfully, what pollution is. The church has merely indentified it as a sin. Frankly the new list has been a long time coming due to globalization and the growing impedance of the institution Interestingly enough, the Church as a whole is able to be called a “sinful Church” considering it is an institution. The church has never claimed to be scientific. The church believes that “murder” is wrong. Never have they laid out what it means to be “dead” but murdering is still a sin. The new seven deadly social sins say the same as before. Its up to us to define, truthfully, what pollution is. The church has merely indentified it as a sin.

Frankly the new list has been a long time coming due to globalization and the growing impedance of the institution

Interestingly enough, the Church as a whole is able to be called a “sinful Church” considering it is an institution.

]]>