Catholic Traditon vs Science - are we looking deep enough

[buffalo]

I

If science is to be believed in its current form then there is no provision for God or miracles or Christ Jesus. That is why science is preferably taught as an atheistic subject.

Either science is to be believed and there is no God or science is wrong.

I believe in God and that we are approaching what should be a miraculous time if as people we can be agreeable and truthful.

This is what I see. It’s an either or proposition. That’s why the question - are we looking deep enough.

It seems to me that for some time Catholics have been backpedaling on Revealed truths. Did we get it wrong? How could that be. I see scientism and syncretism constantly.

Faith and reason cannot be opposed. I submit we are missing an important piece here somewhere.

 

[BRB]

Faith and reason cannot be opposed. I submit we are missing an important piece here somewhere.

Yes …its LOGOS.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

If science is to be believed in its current form then there is no provision for God or miracles or Christ Jesus. That is why science is preferably taught as an atheistic subject.

Either science is to be believed and there is no God or science is wrong.

Yes, there is a lot of ideology that is being taught as science. That is wrong. It is much more convenient for scientists to assume that there is no God, since that can obviously never be proven to their satisfaction. But that is not scientific! There are many scientific reasons toward postulating a God, but that would be violating the scientific “ideology” of avowed atheism.

Likewise theologians and other people of religion try to “scientifically” explain the meanings of the Bible, but they too are promoting their own “ideology” onto science.

Both sides must respect the boundaries of their own discipline, and compromise where they overlap. Faith and reason CAN complement one another. They don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

 

[jcrichton]

With regard to creation the Catholic Church has interpreted Genesis consistently for centuries.

Science has recently challenged much of this with raw data. I have immense respect for science as I have much respect for Tradition.

The question - The Holy Spirit guarantees the Church will be free from error. How could the Holy Spirit let us be so misguided for so long, and only now science is correcting these errors? Was the Holy Spirit sleeping? Why did he let us misinterpet Scripture? This makes no sense.

I submit that the Holy Spirit was not sleeping. There must be something we are missing.

Hi, buffalo!

…you are absolutely correct!

…there’s something missing in them there hills…

The human mind is finite; hence, we know things in a limited scope… I can recall just a few years ago when some scientists were raving about the doomday-end-of-all event that was just around the corner 'cause the universe was so ancient and decrepit that it was folding upon itself… then the hubble telescope (a clear example of our finite capacity) sent pictures that contradicted that theory… just decades ago some governments and their scientists continued to believe that “white” was the superior race… trial and error continues to be science best asset: try something to fit the theory; hide the errors and the obsolete thoughts, if possible…

The Bible does not claim to be a scientifiic record book, though it contains loads of information that can be seen as rudimentary science… just look at the recent scientific statemente about pigs… they are said to be the most similar to humans as far as their inner organs and rib structure–years ago the Bible spoke about not eating pigs because they were unclean… I reason that if pigs are so similar to us any virus or other microscopic lifeform that could affect them would readily transfer to humans with little or no effort (metamorphosis/adaptation); it took science nearly 2000 years to understand that relationship while the Bible was warning against it way back when…

The Creation of the universe is said to have taken place in 6 days… science says the world is older than a few thousand years… is the Bible made obsolete? NO! The Bible states that the there’s a 6-day period not that it took 144 (…interesting number, no?) hours to create the universe; since the Bible also states that to Yahweh God a day is as 1000 years and 1000 years as a day, we can easily surmise that the universe was created in a sequence of steps in which God bombarded the nothingness with His energy and made all that exists, the invisible and invisible… science is still coping with how chaos became order and order gave birth to life…

When you read the Bible… place more Faith in Him and less in our abilities… perhaps things will clear up a little…

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Yes we are definitely missing something. Perhaps we have misinterpreted that the Holy Spirit keeps the Church error free. We have done a great deal of twisting and turning to try to keep that conclusion inviolate. Since we obviously have in the past misunderstood the import of Genesis, perhaps we have failed to understand this concept properly as well. Of course that does open up a rather nasty little basket doesn’t it?

I agree with you, the Holy Spirit is not asleep. She is always present. So it must be us.

Hi!

…could you explain how you came to the conclusion that the Holy Spirit welcomes your female personification?

…is your screen name based on wicca?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[buffalo]

Hi!

…could you explain how you came to the conclusion that the Holy Spirit welcomes your female personification?

…is your screen name based on wicca?

Maran atha!

Angel

Boy - I was going to challenge that but I let it go, to keep the thread on track.

 

[jcrichton]

Catholic Dogma specifically, Adam and Eve and Eve coming from Adam.

Hi, buffalo!

…are you referring to the chicken or the egg syndrome?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[reggieM]

There are many scientific reasons toward postulating a God …

I would like to hear those since these evolutionary threads on CAF tend to be dominated by atheistic-apologists.

 

[jcrichton]

There are no de fide statements here which could really be challenged by science. However, the “sent. certa” statement that “the whole human race stems from a single human pair” will certainly be challenged if this means Adam and Eve are the sole common ancestors. There’s overwhelming genetic evidence this is not the case.

Hi, SeekingCatholic!

…you mean to say that scientist have found the remains of Adam and Eve and that they have extracted uncorrupt DNA from them and they have assembled their exact genome?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[buffalo]

let’s stay on task

Any ideas on how to look deeper and options that can reconcile.

 

[jcrichton]

What is the problem with the following scenario? Adam and Eve were specially created (in some fashion). Later, they, or their descendants, bred with non-human hominid forms which had evolved. This would explain the genetic diversity in humans, as well as the evidence for common descent (such as pseudogenes and retroviruses). This would have Adam and Eve as the common ancestors of all humans, though not the sole common ancestors of all humans.

Hi, SeekingCatholic!

…remember the creation of the ligre?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

The specially created part (I assume you mean supernaturally) is OK.

The second part could as long as polygenism is excluded.

If Adam and Eve were supernaturally created with “pure” genes and then through incest and time mutations developed, wouldn’t that account for the genetic diversity? Is interbreeding with non-humans necessary?

Hi, buffalo!

…here’s a thought…

Do you consider humans to be intellectually superior today than say humans from 1000 years or so ago?

…yet both had answers for what illed them… the difference is knowledge…

We now have, through the wonders of science, time-delaid medicines that, once consumed or implanted, their built-in mechanism releases the exact dosage prescribed for the set time period…

Could Yahweh God not Create a built-in system for the human genome?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[RobbyS]

Yes, there is a lot of ideology that is being taught as science. That is wrong. It is much more convenient for scientists to assume that there is no God, since that can obviously never be proven to their satisfaction. But that is not scientific! There are many scientific reasons toward postulating a God, but that would be violating the scientific “ideology” of avowed atheism.

Likewise theologians and other people of religion try to “scientifically” explain the meanings of the Bible, but they too are promoting their own “ideology” onto science.

Both sides must respect the boundaries of their own discipline, and compromise where they overlap. Faith and reason CAN complement one another. They don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

As I recall, Newman had not trouble with ORIGIN OF SPECIES because he said it dealt with “secondary” causes, the province of natural science. First causes is the province of religion and philosophy.

 

[I_like_Mike]

I would like to hear those since these evolutionary threads on CAF tend to be dominated by atheistic-apologists.

It is the clash between free will and determinism. In quantum the science is determinism (known interactions) otherwise the particle would get lost too quickly. In space general relativity happens as it happens, one step randomly leads to another.

Lets take a fishing trip for example, a fish on a line. The fish knows only the hook in its mouth and turns this way and that so it thinks it has free will. The fisher has ‘control’ to an extent letting line play out or reel in and moving the fishing rod this way and that. In a way each communicates to the other through the line but only the one fishing knows they are joined.

That is not to say the line wont break or the fish slip off the hook and get away (in which case it will be much bigger) but a good fisher will get a meal by rigging a new hook or casting out again.

Science is for totally random or unhindered free will … things just happen randomly. Even the quantum physicists who are coming to the church because of the ‘known’ nature of atomic scale events get a hard time from those who support pure free will.

God knows all and can see the state of the play between fisher and fish and yet does not interfere. That is absolute determinism and is fair, knowing the outcome. The fisher can lead and has a fair idea of what fish is caught and can play it out and that is an assumed knowledge while allowing that even the fisher can cut the line if needed.

Perhaps you could say science is trying to see patterns in the chaos while God is allowing artistry within the picture

 

[Deacon_Joseph]

let’s stay on task

Any ideas on how to look deeper and options that can reconcile.

Hasn’t anyone heard of the theory that Neanderthal man was the end of the evolutionary chain. Cro-Magnon man appeared along side Neanderthal man. Cro-Magnon man is us. I watched this documentary on the History Channel or National Geographic a year or so ago. The first Cro-Magnon man could very easily been Adam from the Bible. Science and Theology would work well together with this theory.

 

[j1s2a3]

This is twist of old hereies.Genesis 1:26 - “Let us make man in our image after our likeness” God is spirit and the MOVER of all substance and your talking about “accidents” in order to discuss these issues please study Scholastic Philosophy.NOT that I know ANYTHING but because its very interesting subject for us GODS CHILDREN.Godbless and keep searching.

 

[I_like_Mike]

Hasn’t anyone heard of the theory that Neanderthal man was the end of the evolutionary chain. Cro-Magnon man appeared along side Neanderthal man. Cro-Magnon man is us. I watched this documentary on the History Channel or National Geographic a year or so ago. The first Cro-Magnon man could very easily been Adam from the Bible. Science and Theology would work well together with this theory.

I believe there is a chain of evolution that led to Neanderthal man and it ended with Neanderthal man. So far there has been no conclusive link to modern man found although in the quest various bone fragments were ‘doctored’ to look like a link was found.

Evidence is there that Neanderthal man was caring and buried their dead with ornaments and flowers and unfortunately they were at times eaten by Cro magnon man. Various examples of people consuming people have been recorded around the world it is sadly true.

A fair bit can be assumed with regard to lifestyle, location of settlement and dating of artifacts can be made. But they ended. That was it for their line. And yes by comparison their brain case was 12% larger than the next biped like them. Maybe the earlier humanoid forms did play a part in ancient buildings or cave drawings. It is a debate that will continue with us and will require respect from all sides … some things have to be accepted as they are presented and some things only God will ever have knowledge of.

Much can be gained through careful study of artifacts but that is where that line of thought needs to find closure. Modern people have no missing link. All efforts to find direct links have failed. Lots of ancient people like forms have been found but not within the time of modern man. A chimpanzee or orangutan is similar to man but they most certainly are not human. They are clever and in time I hope there is still a place for them.

It appears that people as we know by the fossil record are unique and the Bible tells us that we are unique. For some it may be hard to accept but that is the word given to us and it still holds authority.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

I would like to hear those since these evolutionary threads on CAF tend to be dominated by atheistic-apologists.

There was recently a program (a series) by a scientific priest on EWTN. Some of you may know of whom I am talking. He talked about some of the most conclusive scientific proofs for God which relates to the Universal constants. These are known scientific constants which are numbers. E.g. the speed of light, the temperature water freezes, and other physical constants throughout the universe. These numbers are extremely precise, and according to those scientists that study such things, if those numbers weren’t exactly the ones they are, there could never have been a universe as we know it, able to support life, and even able to support its own existence.

How those constants came to be is an unknown, as it is strictly an overlying law, which apparently precedes the creation of the universe.

Some scientist did a statistical study on these constants, and found that if any one of the constants had varied by an almost immeasurably small amount, nothing could exist as the universe does now. Then they did a study on the odds that these constants just happened by random accident. He found that the odds that this could happen by accident is so infinitely improbable, as to completely rule it out scientifically.

Albert Einstein was very familiar with this anomaly with the universal constants. He himself considered this a divine clue.

 

[The_Barbarian]

The Catholic Church teaches that Adam and Eve were real people, a conclusion that is not inconsistent with anything science has learned. It does not teach that Eve was literally made from a rib God took from Adam.

BTW, I would certainly be interested in the data showing that Neandertals were occasionally eaten by Cro-Magnons. It might have happened (we do have evidence that Neandertals occasionally ate each other), but I don’t know of any evidence for it.

 

[buffalo]

I believe there is a chain of evolution that led to Neanderthal man and it ended with Neanderthal man. So far there has been no conclusive link to modern man found although in the quest various bone fragments were ‘doctored’ to look like a link was found.

Evidence is there that Neanderthal man was caring and buried their dead with ornaments and flowers and unfortunately they were at times eaten by Cro magnon man. Various examples of people consuming people have been recorded around the world it is sadly true.

A fair bit can be assumed with regard to lifestyle, location of settlement and dating of artifacts can be made. But they ended. That was it for their line. And yes by comparison their brain case was 12% larger than the next biped like them. Maybe the earlier humanoid forms did play a part in ancient buildings or cave drawings. It is a debate that will continue with us and will require respect from all sides … some things have to be accepted as they are presented and some things only God will ever have knowledge of.

Much can be gained through careful study of artifacts but that is where that line of thought needs to find closure. Modern people have no missing link. All efforts to find direct links have failed. Lots of ancient people like forms have been found but not within the time of modern man. A chimpanzee or orangutan is similar to man but they most certainly are not human. They are clever and in time I hope there is still a place for them.

It appears that people as we know by the fossil record are unique and the Bible tells us that we are unique. For some it may be hard to accept but that is the word given to us and it still holds authority.

The burying of the dead by Neanderthals has been debunked recently.