- Status
G
grannymh
Guest
Catholicism and the Science of Human Evolution are definitely in conflict over the originating population of the human species.
The science source of the human species is large indiscriminate random breeding humanizing populations in the hundreds to thousands over time. These populations descend from the Homo/Pan split also known as a speciation event. Homo and Pan are not nicknames for Adam and Eve.
Stephen168
New member
Yes, science is in conflict with a specific hypothesis about the origin of homo sapien found in early 19th century “race science.”
R
reggieM
Guest
Not sure if that was a typo there and you meant “Catholicism is is conflict …” - but the way you wrote it is correct also. Science itself is in conflict about that hypothesis.
G
grannymh
Guest
The “specific hypothesis” is a firm, unmovable basic fundamental Catholic doctrine duly defined in a major ecumenical Catholic Church Council with the wisdom of the promised Holy Spirit Who is the Third Person of the Most Holy Trinity.
It is time that Catholics catch up with the correct terminology used in paleoanthropology. Here, the Science of Human Evolution conflicts with a real human Adam and his real human spouse Eve.
Stephen168
New member
No, it wasn’t a typo. As you said, “science itself is in conflict about the hypothesis.”
Pope Paul VI:
There is only one truth.
C
chloride
Guest
The number of areas in which Christian religion and science come into conflict is extremely marginal, and often involves theoretical fields (human evolution, origin of the universe) which are prone to being presented as factual truth instead of (a) potential truth.
Science is the handmaiden of theology, as the saying goes. The Church has long supported the usage of science, particularly practical science that could benefit Christianity. A practical example is advancement in astronomical observation and modeling, allowing for Gregorian calendrical reform and thus more accurate calculation of the liturgical calendar, which was readily adopted by many Catholic countries. St. Augustine championed Christian study of ancient Greek knowledge whoch could prove useful, and was later echoed by Fr. Roger Bacon in the 13th century who is generally seen as an early, pre-modern-era visionary and proponent of “scientific” (although the scientific method as we know it did not yet exist) thinking and learning. Many other great scientists (Descartes, Copernicus, Galileo, Boyle, Kepler, etc) were extremely devout Christians and saw no conflict between science and religion, but rather quite the opposite. The study of natural phenomenon was seen as a way of glorifying God’s creation. This was born out of the Middle Ages concept of nature as God’s second book (the first being holy scripture, the Bible), which really began to pick up steam during the period from the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment, during which time natural theology played an important part in scientific pursuit.
Some, particularly atheists, like to suggest that the Scopes trial and the Galileo trial are proof that science and religion are not just incompatible, but cannot coexist. These however are isolated anomalies (often with other circumstances besides merely a conflict of science and religion). History suggests science and religion can not only be compatible, but even beneficial to one another.
God bless.
Science is the handmaiden of theology, as the saying goes. The Church has long supported the usage of science, particularly practical science that could benefit Christianity. A practical example is advancement in astronomical observation and modeling, allowing for Gregorian calendrical reform and thus more accurate calculation of the liturgical calendar, which was readily adopted by many Catholic countries. St. Augustine championed Christian study of ancient Greek knowledge whoch could prove useful, and was later echoed by Fr. Roger Bacon in the 13th century who is generally seen as an early, pre-modern-era visionary and proponent of “scientific” (although the scientific method as we know it did not yet exist) thinking and learning. Many other great scientists (Descartes, Copernicus, Galileo, Boyle, Kepler, etc) were extremely devout Christians and saw no conflict between science and religion, but rather quite the opposite. The study of natural phenomenon was seen as a way of glorifying God’s creation. This was born out of the Middle Ages concept of nature as God’s second book (the first being holy scripture, the Bible), which really began to pick up steam during the period from the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment, during which time natural theology played an important part in scientific pursuit.
Some, particularly atheists, like to suggest that the Scopes trial and the Galileo trial are proof that science and religion are not just incompatible, but cannot coexist. These however are isolated anomalies (often with other circumstances besides merely a conflict of science and religion). History suggests science and religion can not only be compatible, but even beneficial to one another.
God bless.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
samwiss have you had your questioned answered yet?
There is a level of agenda posting occurng now on this thread that is against CAF rules. There is extensive terminology being thrown around in an attempt
to win an argument that is little understood by its poster , and therefore being grossly misused in posts.
Time for this thread to be closed I beleive.
There were two questions here.
the first question about the compatibility of Abrahamic religions with each other
and the second - their compatibility with science.
you. bring up the answer to religious and scientific compatibility in your second paragraph.
science and religion are not incompatible. As we have seen, Pope Francis is a qualified scientist, St Pope John Paul 11 wrote a wonderful Encyclical on the science of Moral Theology…
who read that link?
The Vatican is extremely active in the Sciences, as we have seen through works of the science institutes of the Vatican.
Pope Emeritus Benedict writes about science too.
The best link between God and His science I have heard is:
God creates His science. Science as a human function, describes God’s Science.
Amen.
G
grannymh
Guest
None of the above mentions what is needed for Original Sin to be a truth of Catholicism. The word Catholicism appears in the thread’s title.
I can assure you that the Science of Human Evolution does not offer what is needed for Original Sin to be a truth of Catholicism. I almost hear laughter.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
please stop this agenda posting grannymh. your other thread was. closed for good reason.None of the above mentions what is needed for Original Sin to be a truth of Catholicism. The word Catholicism appears in the thread’s title.
I can assure you that the Science of Human Evolution does not offer what is needed for Original Sin to be a truth of Catholicism. I almost hear laughter.
Scientists do not study Original Sin. Priests and Theologins do. In fact on another thread here FrDavid and reggie and a few others are having a good discussion on Original Sin and Suffering and evil. and blessing.
grannymh, you yourself do not understand the theory of human evolution. That is evident in your quotes recent on this thread , pulling up the historically inaccurate interpretation of that theory. it is not science, it is theory. Science is a discipline. theories exist within that discipline.
at no time has a discussion on human evolution brought up the DNA of the seven daughters of Eve study, for example.
science has found DNA of all humans goes back to how many women?
science involved in Original Sin would be found in fruit growing, tree orchid growing, reptilian physiology, human desire from hunger and disobedience.
i am sure scientists dealing in Psychology could wax lyrical on why Eve and Adam ate the fruit and disobeyed their creator
G
grannymh
Guest
There are lots of good reasons why a thread is closed.
Now, if people would use Google… I would not have to repeat simple facts.
That reminds me. I like to post this simple link with some interesting science stuff.
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_07
mathematoons
New member
I think science and faith are incompatible, because they teach two opposing worldviews. Science admits nothing that cannot be proven with the scientific method (except the scientific method itself), so God and morality get thrown out; science keeps changing its mind on just about everything, so there’s nothing to trust. Faith, on the other hand, teaches that God is supreme and His truth can never be changed. “What fellowship hath light with darkness?”
I have a dog, so I like to use this analogy: Science is a dog teaching other dogs to open doors, and then calling it “progress” when those dogs get hit by cars. Faith is a dog teaching other dogs to obey their masters in a world full of feral dogs.
I have a dog, so I like to use this analogy: Science is a dog teaching other dogs to open doors, and then calling it “progress” when those dogs get hit by cars. Faith is a dog teaching other dogs to obey their masters in a world full of feral dogs.
R
Rau
Guest
The scope of the two is not opposing - they are simply separate.
mathematoons
New member
Science has definite assumptions about things that we take on faith. Science can’t prove that the Bible is the Word of God, so science assumes it is not true. Science can’t prove that murder is immoral, so science assumes it is not true. Faith may allow science if science does not contradict it, but the reverse is not true; science says if it can’t prove something, it isn’t true.
R
Rau
Guest
Science takes no interest in the Bible, morality, etc. These things are not of science.
mathematoons
New member
Exactly, this silence is a statement in itself.
R
reggieM
Guest
Science cannot even explain why its own findings have any value at all.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
How about you explain it in your own words, like asked about 4 times now. Anyone can google and post links. That means nothing and leads to fruitless discussions.There are lots of good reasons why a thread is closed.
Now, if people would use Google… I would not have to repeat simple facts.
That reminds me. I like to post this simple link with some interesting science stuff.
evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_07
Its ok to ask if you dont truly understand the theory. Or aspects of it.
And arguing science cant prove God, is no argument for the incompatibility of God and His science. Thats like saying this is not a camel because look see, it cant walk on hot sand.
And there is a basic error in holding to the truth of Adam and Eve but then saying Oh Noah is just a story.
because
According to the Bible, we are all descended from 8 people, those who survived the flood.
Now thats a great place to start a discussion on the 7 daughters of Eve DNA research.
m
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
well except if you just found, through scientific research, and extensive study on the nature of a particular virus, or disease, a wonderful cure.
or perhaps a bacterial cleanup for an oil spill, lead contamination remediation, wireless WiFi.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
the absolute beauty of science as a discipline is that it assumes nothing. It observes, forms hypotheses, tests them.
Science as a discipline is not out to prove or disprove the Bible, God. Science, as a discipline studies the creations of God, and little by little adds to human body of knowledge about our world and whats in it.
sometimes for good, sometimes not. depending on human nature.
- Status