Balancing one's faith in relation to science

  • Thread starter Thread starter spunjalebi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

spunjalebi

Guest
I’ve been a Christian for a while, and even before I was Catholic I have had an interest in science. As funny as this sounds, while I strongly rely on evidence and facts, I also believe in having faith and believing in what you cannot always see.

However, there are times where I struggle with balancing scientific thinking with faith philosophy, basically Catholicism. On one hand, I wonder if evolution (macroevolution specifically) has any true merits, and if it’s “just a theory”, or if I would be an idiot to ignore the facts. Flip that over, and I wonder how I take that in stride with my faith as a Catholic Christian, and how this relates to understanding what the Bible says about creation. After all-- did God really create everything in what we know to be as 7 days-- 24 hours in a day, 60 minutes per hour? There are plenty of non-Catholic faiths out there that believe so. And is the earth really that old, or am I just being dismissive with the Bible’s timeline?

Is it truly possible to accept and understand science, scientific thinking, and empirical evidence while being a Christian? Or is it just contradictory?

For instance, can I truly say that I believe in Creation and God’s intervention in the universe and still believe that there are natural processes which drive nature? Is it feasible to state that I am a Catholic, believe in God, and also believe that dinosaurs existed??
 
spunjalebi said:
For instance, can I truly say that I believe in Creation and God’s intervention in the universe and still believe that there are natural processes which drive nature? Is it feasible to state that I am a Catholic, believe in God, and also believe that dinosaurs existed??
Click to expand...
Of course it is. The Catholic Church accepts evolution - not by chance but by Design. 🙂
 
Isn’t there a problem with that? For instance, the fact that evolution posits that humans evolved from a common ancestor with primates? To many other Christians this would seem rather contradictory with the Bible.
 
spunjalebi said:
Isn’t there a problem with that? For instance, the fact that evolution posits that humans evolved from a common ancestor with primates? To many other Christians this would seem rather contradictory with the Bible.
Click to expand...
Only if you interpret Genesis literally…
 
Jesus,our Lords peace be with You.
Spunjalebi,are You from Finland? Oletko suomesta? Minä olen.
 
Balancing one’s faith with science is called compromising the faith. As an unending tradition the church taught that God made the heavens and earth in six literal days ex-nihilo approximately 6000 years ago. Vatican 1 teaches us that we may not change the traditional interpretation of scripture when we are faced with oppositions of science or reasoning. And yet this is exactly what Catholics the world over are doing.

Sure the magisterium allows Catholics to compromise the faith on this matter, but that is only because they know how weak the faith of so many Catholic’s is. However as for me and my house, I will believe the scriptures and the traditional interpretations of the Fathers and not the anti-God, anti-church, anti-Scripture lies of those who pass themselves off as scientists. In fact to even discuss this issue is to pay heed to vain babblings and oppositions of science “falsely-so-called” which was warned against in the book of Timothy
1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

This is the way it happened. In six days God made heaven and earth and then he rested on the seventh day. He made the sun and stars on the fourth day, he made man on the sixth day out of the dust of the ground and breathed life into his nostril. He made Eve out of the rib of Adam. Furthermore, 2000 years later there was a global calamity which destroyed the entire world which was the flood of Noah. If any man, woman, scientist, Pope, or even an angel from heaven tells you any different then they are either a liar or else severely deluded.

“I believe” these things and I will die for these beliefs. Will any evolutionist, theistic or otherwise, die for their beliefs? No because they don’t actually believe what they teach. I have proved this time and again in my vain babbling debates with these wretches. They don’t believe, they merely regard their theories as the most probable scenario given the current data which is available to study. They will quite happily teach some other scenario if the data and the fashion changes. Did you know that evolution teaches that dolphins evolved from a small hippo like creature. I challenge these liars to put their hand on their heart and confess. “Do you believe that cetacean mammals evolved from even-toed ungulates?” Not one has yet said “I believe” and yet they are happy to mock and ridicule what “I believe”. This is why I call them liars and hypocrites. They teach these things and overthrow the faith of many when they do not actually themselves believe what they teach.

But the fact is that if you do not believe that cetacean mammals evolved from even-toed ungulates then you must by default in your heart believe that they were created complete and from nothing; for what other plausible reason has ever been suggested to account for the incontestable evidence that cetacean mammals exist and are with us to this day.

So here is my evidence for creation
http://www.answersingenesis.org/assets/images/articles/aqua/Bottlenose_Dolphin.jpg
 
spunjalebi said:
However, there are times where I struggle with balancing scientific thinking with faith philosophy, basically Catholicism. On one hand, I wonder if evolution (macroevolution specifically) has any true merits, and if it’s “just a theory”, or if I would be an idiot to ignore the facts.
Click to expand...
I never understood why people refer to evolution as “just a theory” - as if the colloquial use of “theory” is equivalent to the scientific use of the term.

Other than that, I found that my understanding of science tends to strengthen the understanding of my Christianity, even if ever so slightly. Where I think I may have found a contradiction between the two, I am forced to study further and add to my knowledge. Even if the contradiction is not satisfied right away, I always find reward in the effort.
 
Sonoran_Son said:
I never understood why people refer to evolution as “just a theory” - as if the colloquial use of “theory” is equivalent to the scientific use of the term.

Other than that, I found that my understanding of science tends to strengthen the understanding of my Christianity, even if ever so slightly. Where I think I may have found a contradiction between the two, I am forced to study further and add to my knowledge. Even if the contradiction is not satisfied right away, I always find reward in the effort.
Click to expand...
Sorry to break it to you but evolution is not proven, it is merely regarded as the most probable scenario given the available data. That makes it a theory. In fact it is not possible to prove because nobody can repeat the experiment of evolution which is a foundation rule of science. True science must be repeatable, testable and confirm-able by other scientists. This is a very classical definition of science. What we regard today as science would in previous generations have been regarded as philosophy. In fact we have been hoodwinked into believing that evolution is science when it is in fact pseudo-science or philosophy. The very same claims that evolutionists level at ID proponents and anti-global warmists. Any thought process which conflicts with the conventional theory is pasted as being pseudo-science. Of course ID is pseudo-science, but this is only because it is a polemic against the grand poobaa of pseudo-sciences; evolution.

So the pseudo-science of evolution which is “just a theory” and a “joke” is set against the irrefutable evidence of faith.

*Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance [1] of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good report. 3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
*
So who is going to get a good report card for following after the pseudo-science of evolution? NOBODY. Because it is not borne of faith.
“Romans 14:for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.”

*1 Corinthians 2:5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,*
 
spunjalebi said:
I’ve been a Christian for a while, and even before I was Catholic I have had an interest in science. As funny as this sounds, while I strongly rely on evidence and facts, I also believe in having faith and believing in what you cannot always see.

However, there are times where I struggle with balancing scientific thinking with faith philosophy, basically Catholicism. On one hand, I wonder if evolution (macroevolution specifically) has any true merits, and if it’s “just a theory”, or if I would be an idiot to ignore the facts. Flip that over, and I wonder how I take that in stride with my faith as a Catholic Christian, and how this relates to understanding what the Bible says about creation. After all-- did God really create everything in what we know to be as 7 days-- 24 hours in a day, 60 minutes per hour? There are plenty of non-Catholic faiths out there that believe so. And is the earth really that old, or am I just being dismissive with the Bible’s timeline?

Is it truly possible to accept and understand science, scientific thinking, and empirical evidence while being a Christian? Or is it just contradictory?

For instance, can I truly say that I believe in Creation and God’s intervention in the universe and still believe that there are natural processes which drive nature? Is it feasible to state that I am a Catholic, believe in God, and also believe that dinosaurs existed??
Click to expand...
If you read the thread above, you’ll see that evolution is a forbidden topic in this forum. You have to go to the “Back Fence” forum to discuss it. That being said, there are pronouncements by Popes Pius XII and John Paul XII, that tell us that we can accept the fact that our bodies descended physically from other forms, i.e. that the notion of common descent is valid, but that we cannot accept that evolution is a random, purposeless process or that our souls are not instilled by God. Please see the following link:

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP961022.HTM:
anselm
 
Hi, Spunjalebi,

I’ve been Christian since '54 and Catholic since '68 and my two introductions to science were a good Physical Science teacher in public school and reading Science Fiction.

I put the Bible first, and exercise my reason as handmaiden to my faith. Then, comes Church teachings of dogma, doctrine, and Tradition.

When science contradicts faith, I start checking to see if it’s really science. Evolution, I think, is philosophy based on very few facts, not science.

In my opinion, history shows that human knowledge has risen and fell with human civilizations but the Word of God has endured through it all. I think that in the future, the knowledge our young sciences prate about will be lost, as the historical cycle repeats itself, again. But, I believe that the Word of God will endure through it all.

You see, ma’am, this earth and all on it are temporary but the Kingdom of God is forever and the Holy Roman Catholic Church is a wonderful portal into that kingdom.

That’s my two cents’ worth.

God loves you and your husband,
Don
 
Anselm33 said:
If you read the thread above, you’ll see that evolution is a forbidden topic in this forum. You have to go to the “Back Fence” forum to discuss it. That being said, there are pronouncements by Popes Pius XII and John Paul XII, that tell us that we can accept the fact that our bodies descended physically from other forms, i.e. that the notion of common descent is valid, but that we cannot accept that evolution is a random, purposeless process or that our souls are not instilled by God. Please see the following link:

ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP961022.HTM:
anselm
Click to expand...
That is not a fact.

timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article1645453.ece

God bless,
Ed
 
I didn’t start this thread to talk specifically about evolution, but cited it as an example of something in science which tends to be backed by physical evidence with various hypothesis which have been observed.

Where in Catholic teaching does it say that we are supposed to take the Bible literally? Or that God really formed everything in what we literally know to be a day?
 
spunjalebi said:
I didn’t start this thread to talk specifically about evolution, but cited it as an example of something in science which tends to be backed by physical evidence with various hypothesis which have been observed.

Where in Catholic teaching does it say that we are supposed to take the Bible literally? Or that God really formed everything in what we literally know to be a day?
Click to expand...
If you are walking on the beach and only see left footprints as far as you can see, what should you conclude?
 
spunjalebi said:
I didn’t start this thread to talk specifically about evolution, but cited it as an example of something in science which tends to be backed by physical evidence with various hypothesis which have been observed.

Where in Catholic teaching does it say that we are supposed to take the Bible literally? Or that God really formed everything in what we literally know to be a day?
Click to expand...
What is the problem with taking the Bible literally? What will happen if anyone does?

God bless,
Ed
 
Yes that’s great but it doesn’t really address the question of whether we take the Bible literally, we accept physical, measurable evidence, etc. I for one, will admit that I find it ridiculous when people say that there’s no way the universe can be old, despite the fact that it can take tens of thousands of years for the light from stars to reach us. Or carbon-dating.

Do I accept everything from science point-blank? No. And I don’t take the Bible literally. Maybe I should stop while I’ve still got my dignity?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top