So one of the smartest men in the world "misinterpreted" the Pope? That's the problem with religion. The lord said this and the lord said that and everyone has their own translation.
Go find what the Pope said if you don't believe me. John Paul II was very vocal about his support for science and evolution.
The Vatican s View of Evolution Pope Paul II and Pope Pius
Whatever actually. Does it matter if the Pope said it? Fact is, the Pope is a liar or a fool because he believes the Adam & Eve, Moses, Noah & Jesus stories. He believes those stories LITERALLY!
No he didn't.
If he doesn't he should say so publicly.
He did.
Do you take those stories literally?
No.
At one time people lived to be hundreds of years old? 2 of every species? Jesus performed miracles? Moses parted the sea? REALLY?
I believe the miracles, not much of the rest literally.
So lets not get off topic here. Fact is, you guys have zero proof of god unless you believe the fables in the ancient books??? Do you?
You are free to believe what you want but you're only undercutting your own point of view when you repeat lies about the Catholic Church.
Miracles have not been demonstrated to occur. The existence of a miracle would pose
logical problems for belief in a god which can supposedly see the future and began the universe with a set of predefined laws. Even if a ‘miracle’ could be demonstrated it
would not immediately imply the existence of a god, much less any
particular one, as unknown natural processes or agents could
still be at work.
Most alleged miracles can be explained as
statistically unlikely occurrences. For example, one child surviving a plane crash that kills two hundred others is not a miracle, just as one person winning the lottery is not. In the absence of any empirical evidence, all other claims can be dismissed as the result of
magical thinking, misattribution,
credulity, hearsay and
anecdote. Eye-witness testimony and anecdotal accounts are, by themselves,
not reliable or definitive forms of proof for such extraordinary claims.
Divine intervention claims most often concern systems and events for which we have poor predictive capabilities, for example, weather, sports, health and social/economic interactions. Such claims are rarely made in relation to those things we can accurately predict and test e.g. the motion of celestial bodies, boiling point of water and pull of gravity. If a god is constantly intervening in the universe it supposedly created, then it is with such ambiguity as to appear completely indistinguishable from normal background chance.
Theists often fail to adequately
apportion blame when claims of their particular god’s ‘infinite mercy’ or ‘omnibenevolence’ involve sparing a few lives in a disaster, or recovery from a debilitating disease – all of which their god would ultimately be
responsible for inflicting if it existed. See also:
Euthyphro dilemma,
Confirmation bias,
Cherry Picking.