Dinosaurs and faith

[edwest2]

"The Time Question

Much less has been defined as to when the universe, life, and man appeared. The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago."

Source: Catholic Answers

Peace,
Ed

 

[Jim_Baur]

There is alomost an infinite amount of evidence that a Being or Beings created and ordered the solar system and beyond.

We Christians attribute this creation to YHWH.

We believe that the order and “orderer” is YHWH.

We do not know if Moses is correct; we believe and hope he is.

Furthermore human knowledge is incomplete as to the origins of the worlds.

Concerning dinosaurs and the like, we have a great deal to learn, almost an infinite amount to learn.

Back to the Being or Beings that created all that we experience, It or They must have been infinitely powerful and long lasting Being or Beings.

We believe that He is One. We do not know.

I hope our Jewish and Christians hopes and creeds are correct.

 

[AdamP88]

"The Time Question

Much less has been defined as to when the universe, life, and man appeared. The Church has infallibly determined that the universe is of finite age—that it has not existed from all eternity—but it has not infallibly defined whether the world was created only a few thousand years ago or whether it was created several billion years ago."

Source: Catholic Answers

Peace,
Ed

The Church does also teach that truth cannot contradict truth. Science tells us that the world is several billion years old…then that is scientific truth and the Church teaches that this goes hand in hand with faith.

The world was not created only thousands of years ago as science dictates otherwise. This does not conflict with Catholic teaching and neither will any other genuine scientific discovery.

God Bless

 

[edwest2]

The Church does also teach that truth cannot contradict truth. Science tells us that the world is several billion years old…then that is scientific truth and the Church teaches that this goes hand in hand with faith.

The world was not created only thousands of years ago as science dictates otherwise. This does not conflict with Catholic teaching and neither will any other genuine scientific discovery.

God Bless

I have increasing doubts about this:

One: This issue has been propagandized here constantly. I’m tired of secular evangelism telling me I must believe.

Two: New discoveries tell me that if a process occurred, it did not occur as advertised.

Three: Biology textbooks include 100% false information. I can show you examples where they explicitly deny God or any other force acting in Creation.

I only trust the Catholic Church on this subject, not science.

usatoday.com/tech/science/2007-04-12-pope-evolution_N.htm

Peace,
Ed

 

[AdamP88]

I have increasing doubts about this:

One: This issue has been propagandized here constantly. I’m tired of secular evangelism telling me I must believe.

Two: New discoveries tell me that if a process occurred, it did not occur as advertised.

Three: Biology textbooks include 100% false information. I can show you examples where they explicitly deny God or any other force acting in Creation.

I only trust the Catholic Church on this subject, not science.

usatoday.com/tech/science/2007-04-12-pope-evolution_N.htm

Peace,
Ed

With regard to our faith…I, too only trust the Church with my eternal soul.
However the Church, while it preaches the truth, does not guarantee that everyone else will do the same.

I’m sure there are biology (and physics and other) texts that contest the existence of God. But that is totally outside the realm of science to prove or disprove.

Just as biology texts will try to promote the abortion agenda and the culture of death. It does not make them correct.

I do 100% place my trust in science to tell me about the material world.

I just don’t always trust the representatives of science to tell me the full story.

God Bless

 

[edwest2]

With regard to our faith…I, too only trust the Church with my eternal soul.
However the Church, while it preaches the truth, does not guarantee that everyone else will do the same.

I’m sure there are biology (and physics and other) texts that contest the existence of God. But that is totally outside the realm of science to prove or disprove.

Just as biology texts will try to promote the abortion agenda and the culture of death. It does not make them correct.

I do 100% place my trust in science to tell me about the material world.

I just don’t always trust the representatives of science to tell me the full story.

God Bless

You are dodging the subject and my previous quote. The Church is in no rush to decide between thousands of years or billions. That’s where I stand.

My trust in science regarding this issue continues to drop, but there are a few rays of hope that the truth will come out.

Peace,
Ed

 

[M-Dent]

Pope Benedict VXI’s homily at the Easter Vigil (2011) generally touched on this topic.

(I highlighted somethings that may be related to the OP)

At the Easter Vigil, the journey along the paths of sacred Scripture begins with ** the account of creation**. This is the liturgy’s way of telling us that the creation story is itself a prophecy. It is not information about the external processes by which the cosmos and man himself came into being. The Fathers of the Church were well aware of this. They did not interpret the story as an account of the process of the origins of things, but rather as a pointer towards the essential, towards the true beginning and end of our being.

Now, one might ask: is it really important to speak also of creation during the Easter Vigil? Could we not begin with the events in which God calls man, forms a people for himself and creates his history with men upon the earth? The answer has to be: no. To omit the creation would be to misunderstand the very history of God with men, to diminish it, to lose sight of its true order of greatness. The sweep of history established by God reaches back to the origins, back to creation. Our profession of faith begins with the words: **“We believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth”. ** If we omit the beginning of the Credo, the whole history of salvation becomes too limited and too small. The Church is not some kind of association that concerns itself with man’s religious needs but is limited to that objective. No, she brings man into contact with God and thus with the source of all things.

---

The central message of the creation account can be defined more precisely still. In the opening words of his Gospel, Saint John sums up the essential meaning of that account in this single statement: “In the beginning was the Word”. In effect, the creation account that we listened to earlier is characterized by the regularly recurring phrase: “And God said …” The world is a product of the Word, of the Logos, as Saint John expresses it, using a key term from the Greek language. “Logos” means “reason”, “sense”, “word”. It is not reason pure and simple, but creative Reason, that speaks and communicates itself. It is Reason that both is and creates sense. The creation account tells us, then, that the world is a product of creative Reason.

HOMILY OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI
Holy Saturday, 23 April 2011

 

[AdamP88]

I’m not dodging the issue. I’m merely stating where the church stand on this.

I think it’s been summed up pretty well by M-Dent when he referred to Pope Benedict’s Homily…

…sacred Scripture begins with the account of creation. This is the liturgy’s way of telling us that the creation story is itself a prophecy. It is not information about the external processes by which the cosmos and man himself came into being. The Fathers of the Church were well aware of this. They did not interpret the story as an account of the process of the origins of things, but rather as a pointer towards the essential, towards the true beginning and end of our being…

The creation account tells us, then, that the world is a product of creative Reason.

Reason is where science comes into it…the world and the universe is of finite age. But science tells us that as well.
If the universe is created by a logical and reasonable God…he would not merely throw it all together…It makes far more sense that he allow us to use our senses and intellect to discover the infinite wonder of His creativity.

Science is not the enemy here and I don’t believe there is any discovery to be made that can undermine the true and constant teaching of God’s Church.

 

[edwest2]

I’m not dodging the issue. I’m merely stating where the church stand on this.

I think it’s been summed up pretty well by M-Dent when he referred to Pope Benedict’s Homily…

Reason is where science comes into it…the world and the universe is of finite age. But science tells us that as well.
If the universe is created by a logical and reasonable God…he would not merely throw it all together…It makes far more sense that he allow us to use our senses and intellect to discover the infinite wonder of His creativity.

Science is not the enemy here and I don’t believe there is any discovery to be made that can undermine the true and constant teaching of God’s Church.

Science is most definitely the enemy today.

The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins - a scientist.

Or Sam Harris - another scientist.

secularhumanism.org/index.php?page=harris_27_2&section=library

And please don’t offer the “it’s just their opinion” line. Paganism and secular humanism go by one rationale: Nothing created us and nothing happens after we die.

Science is also being used to justify other things the Church is against.

Peace,
Ed

 

[AdamP88]

Science is most definitely the enemy today.

The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins - a scientist.

Or Sam Harris - another scientist.

secularhumanism.org/index.php?page=harris_27_2&section=library

And please don’t offer the “it’s just their opinion” line. Paganism and secular humanism go by one rationale: Nothing created us and nothing happens after we die.

Science is also being used to justify other things the Church is against.

Peace,
Ed

Do these people represent the whole of the scientific community…no.

In the case of Dawkins…I, personally think he’s just used his position to promote book after book about atheism. He claims he’s an agnostic - yet strangely seems to show up at atheist conventions all over the world.
Dawkins does hate religion - but his science cannot prove anything about God and won’t ever be able to. He is not a philosopher or theologian. When debating or speaking he invariably wanders off to these realms of discussion, mixing them with science…That makes for bad science.

Science is not an enemy…today or ever.

It can be used to evil ends but that does not mean fighting against genuine progress. Such a suggestion would be insane.

The Vatican has a council for science and many renowned scientists are part of this group - Including atheist, Stephen Hawking.

Below is a link to their website:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdscien/index.htm

God Bless

 

[M-Dent]

Adam,

I’m not dodging the issue. I’m merely stating where the church stand on this.

I think it’s been summed up pretty well by M-Dent when he referred to Pope Benedict’s Homily…

Reason is where science comes into it…the world and the universe is of finite age. But science tells us that as well.
If the universe is created by a logical and reasonable God…he would not merely throw it all together…It makes far more sense that he allow us to use our senses and intellect to discover the infinite wonder of His creativity.

Science is not the enemy here and I don’t believe there is any discovery to be made that can undermine the true and constant teaching of God’s Church.

The Holy Fathers emerges quite deeply into topics. At times, at the detriment to his audience (myself most certainly included)

His homily does note the exegesis of the early Fathers do not pass on a tradition that supports nor denies evolution. Yet, he explains (as he has on multiple occasions ), while the Church does not deny science - and embraces authentic truth discovered by those who purse the natural sciences, he adamantly and authoritatively denies man is not the product of chance and error. This view is one some have attempted to claim evolution strongly supports.

The Holy Father also expands on fully understanding “reason.” He masterfully states human reason cannot divorce itself from philosophy. And we need to be mindful that human reason is a gift and where we draw our reason from:

“And because it is Reason, it also created freedom; and because freedom can be abused, there also exist forces harmful to creation. Hence a thick black line, so to speak, has been drawn across the structure of the universe and across the nature of man. But despite this contradiction, creation itself remains good, life remains good, because at the beginning is good Reason God’s creative love. Hence the world can be saved. Hence we can and must place ourselves on the side of reason, freedom and love – on the side of God who loves us so much that he suffered for us, that from his death there might emerge a new, definitive and healed life.”

The Pope is most certainly restating a warning about reason (especially applied to the Science) separated from sound philosophy. As has been made quite obvious, many in the field of science have the audacity to claim the pursuits demand a study "as if God does not exist. " This is beyond their actual competence. The Pope has many speeches how this is “harmful to creation.”

He is also recapitulating the Christian reason for ultimate hope.

We celebrate the first day because we know that the black line drawn across creation does not last for ever. We celebrate it because we know that those words from the end of the creation account have now been definitively fulfilled: “God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good” (Gen 1:31). Amen.

Imo, those who pursue the natural sciences can aid us greatly in understanding much of our environment. But they are incapable of defining our purpose or lack or purpose. I believe this is where many find conflict with their faith.

 

[AdamP88]

Personally, I don’t have any problems accepting scientific truths and discoveries and reconciling them with my faith.

I would include evolution in that. While it’s true that the Church doesn’t preach one way or another on this, I think the fact that God created a world and gradually brought everything into existence, shows us the beauty of creation and of God’s creativeness.

Yes…He could have just zapped the world into existence out of nothing - but his plan was to create humans, who He knew would one day study their world and attempt to make sense of it all.

To this end, God, the ultimate master craftsman and artist in my mind, created an interesting and complex universe…Which culminated in humanity.

 

[edwest2]

Do these people represent the whole of the scientific community…no.

In the case of Dawkins…I, personally think he’s just used his position to promote book after book about atheism. He claims he’s an agnostic - yet strangely seems to show up at atheist conventions all over the world.
Dawkins does hate religion - but his science cannot prove anything about God and won’t ever be able to. He is not a philosopher or theologian. When debating or speaking he invariably wanders off to these realms of discussion, mixing them with science…That makes for bad science.

Science is not an enemy…today or ever.

It can be used to evil ends but that does not mean fighting against genuine progress. Such a suggestion would be insane.

The Vatican has a council for science and many renowned scientists are part of this group - Including atheist, Stephen Hawking.

Below is a link to their website:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdscien/index.htm

God Bless

I disagree. All you need is a scientist showing up in a courtroom to tell the judge that based on science, the Church is wrong. It’s happening with more frequency lately.

“genuine progress” Like what? The secular dogma that Catholics cannot treat any part of the Old testament, especially Genesis, literally?

And please tell me about any progress that has been made in science regarding dinosaurs? Where do researchers get their money from? And where do their conclusions always end up today?

I’ve got the biology textbook quotes if you want to see them. They care about God in only one way - to deny Him. Not all, but most.

Here’s a few words from the scientific journal, Nature:

stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html

Peace,
Ed

 

[AdamP88]

So what…some scientists don’t believe in God…It’s not the first time in history (and won’t be the last either) and it still certainly does not mean that we are opposed to science.

We may find ourselves on opposing sides of the debate at times…but to totally reject science because some scientists are atheist - is just plain stupid.

One of my best friends is a recent graduate of Astrophysics in Trinity College Dublin.

He is a devout catholic and we regularly attend mass and adoration together.
We are also both involved in the International Eucharistic Congress in Dublin next week.
This is actually what is becoming typical of young people in my experience - they want to know and experience their faith in everyday life and work.

People like Dawkins will always be around and always will be. I do think it’s part of the time we live in that it’s easier for them to make themselves heard. That said it’s also easier to spread the faith through use of technological tools…

Remember…Those who shout the loudest do not always have the best message.

God bless

 

[buffalo]

So what…some scientists don’t believe in God…It’s not the first time in history (and won’t be the last either) and it still certainly does not mean that we are opposed to science.

We may find ourselves on opposing sides of the debate at times…but to totally reject science because some scientists are atheist - is just plain stupid.

One of my best friends is a recent graduate of Astrophysics in Trinity College Dublin.

He is a devout catholic and we regularly attend mass and adoration together.
We are also both involved in the International Eucharistic Congress in Dublin next week.
This is actually what is becoming typical of young people in my experience - they want to know and experience their faith in everyday life and work.

People like Dawkins will always be around and always will be. I do think it’s part of the time we live in that it’s easier for them to make themselves heard. That said it’s also easier to spread the faith through use of technological tools…

Remember…Those who shout the loudest do not always have the best message.

God bless

Except when a scientist follows this mantra:

Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen. Richard Lewontin

How can we trust them then?

 

[StrawberryJam]

I’m getting pretty tired of two posters on this forum that seem to defend a position that is not the position of the Catholic Church, but their own personal position in spite of the evidence.
There is not a single Catholic that will be considered let alone subject to a heresy verdict for accepting that the earth is not literally 5 or 6 thousand years old.
Not one will be.
Not ever.