Do All Dogs Go To Heaven? New Books Seem To Think So

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahimsa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
grannymh said:
I am wondering if taking care of our pets, loving and nourishing them, is their heaven on earth.Blessings,granny
Click to expand...
Tough luck for cows and pigs and veal calves. I guess being slaughtered for our feasts is their heaven on earth…
 
StAnastasia said:
So you accept all sciences except genetics? The genetic evidence is that the human population never sank below 3,000-10,000 breeding pairs. The “founder effect” refers to what happens when a small population of animals (e.g. isolated on an island) restarts a population from just a few pairs. Hominids/humans never experienced the founder effect; our species never shrank to a single Adamic pair.
Click to expand...
You can of course reject the science, as is your right. You might not be able to get a science teaching or research position, but to attain “salvation” Catholics are certainly not required to accept evolution or gravity or plate tectonics or cell theory or atomic theory or relativity or quantum mechanics or any other scientific theory.

StAnastasia
 
StAnastasia said:
So you accept all sciences except genetics? The genetic evidence is that the human population never sank below 3,000-10,000 breeding pairs. The “founder effect” refers to what happens when a small population of animals (e.g. isolated on an island) restarts a population from just a few pairs. Hominids/humans never experienced the founder effect; our species never shrank to a single Adamic pair.

You can of course reject the science, as is your right. You might not be able to get a science teaching or research position, but to attain “salvation” Catholics are certainly not required to accept evolution or gravity or plate tectonics or cell theory or atomic theory or relativity or quantum mechanics or any other scientific theory.

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
Of course in an online situation where people do not even reveal their real names you cannot know to whom you speak. I will just say briefly that if you knew me better (obviously we have some degree of acquaintance from our writings here) you would know that such an inference (that I reject scientific evidence) is so ill- founded as to be ludicrous.

On the contrary, the latest genetic evidence is that all human beings are descended from one single woman, who was of course nick-named by atheistic scientists: Eve.

The evidence for this has to do with the fact, not widely known, that the mitochondria in our cells has separate DNA which evolves much more slowly than our normal cellular DNA, and descends only from the mother. If you don’t understand this I for one will not attempt to explain molecular biology on a Catholic online forum. Look it up.

But- no matter what the latest genetic evidence is, you will never find any genetic evidence of the presence or absence of the soul or of free will, because these components of our being do not have any genetics. Many people make a connection between a biological basis for intelligence, or traces of civilization, and the presence of the soul, but I do not think that that connection is established in Scripture, Sacred Tradition, the teachings of the Church, or even frankly, common sense.
 
grannymh said:
Since Post 300 is off topic.:o

Anyone who wishes to discuss questions regarding difficult assumptions which can appear in various natural science research papers can do so in this thread in Back Fence Forum.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=478146

Evolution and atheism discussions are banned in this Forum.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7450766&postcount=14
Click to expand...
Oops, sorry. I guess I was writing my response to #300 while you were writing that reminder. I apologize, and thank you for the reminder.
 
StAnastasia said:
Indeed. The evidence supporting the evolutionary explanation for terrestrial biodiversity (including human) is stronger than the evidence supporting the theory of gravity. That’s why scientists accept evolution as the most coherent explanation, and why every Catholic theologian I know and work and publish with accepts it as well. (There are a few outliers who reject evolution, like Bishop Robert Vasa and Robert Sungenis.)

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
In mystical Judaism, there is the theory proposed that the Creator, withdrew himself from a part of time and space then said let there be light. If you read carefully what they teach, it sounds very similar to the big bang theory. I think our Jewish brother could shed more light. I had to leave an awful lot of books home when I came over here. barely room for my missal, and my bible. Peace 🙂
 
Of course in an online situation where people do not even reveal their real names you cannot know to whom you speak. I will just say briefly that if you knew me better (obviously we have some degree of acquaintance from our writings here) you would know that such an inference (that I reject scientific evidence) is so ill- founded as to be ludicrous.
Click to expand...
Good!
On the contrary, the latest genetic evidence is that all human beings are descended from one single woman, who was of course nick-named by atheistic scientists: Eve.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, we are all descended from many people, including “mitochondrial Eve.” These ancestors include “mitochondrial Eve’s” parents, grandparents, great-great-grandparents, and so on back millions of generations before her. We are also descended from “Y-chromosome Adam” who lived 50,000-80,000 years later than “Eve.” This “Adam” and “Eve” never met nor mated nor had children together.
The evidence for this has to do with the fact, not widely known, that the mitochondria in our cells has separate DNA which evolves much more slowly than our normal cellular DNA, and descends only from the mother.
Click to expand...
Indeed.
If you don’t understand this I for one will not attempt to explain molecular biology on a Catholic online forum. Look it up.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the offer, but I do understand this well, and in fact I teach the material in my university classes, and my publications have included it.
But- no matter what the latest genetic evidence is, you will never find any genetic evidence of the presence or absence of the soul or of free will, because these components of our being do not have any genetics.
Click to expand...
They do have a genetic basis, which gave rise to increased neural complexity, enabling self-consciousness, moral awareness, spiritual awareness at least 40,000 years ago, and even God-consciousness!
Many people make a connection between a biological basis for intelligence, or traces of civilization, and the presence of the soul, but I do not think that that connection is established in Scripture, Sacred Tradition, the teachings of the Church, or even frankly, common sense.
Click to expand...
It’s quite consonant with common sense, but you’re right that you won’t ifnd this connection in scripture.
 
benidict said:
In mystical Judaism, there is the theory proposed that the Creator, withdrew himself from a part of time and space then said let there be light. If you read carefully what they teach, it sounds very similar to the big bang theory. I think our Jewish brother could shed more light. I had to leave an awful lot of books home when I came over here. barely room for my missal, and my bible. Peace 🙂
Click to expand...
Benidict, there is a lively discussion of the very topic you propose here, going on among the fellows of the International Society for Science and Religion (www.issr.uk.org). Some scholars do adopt the Jewish mystcal model of God “withdrawing from a portion of the cosmos,” as it were, to allow room for creation. I regard this as too literalist, in imagining creation as spatially located in a blank space left by God.

I find the panentheist model more coherent and compelling, in which creation is within the divine reality, so that God is intimately present to creation at all moments. If the universe is within God, God suffers with us, uniting Godself to the sufferings of animals and humans through the Incarnation and the redemptive suffering of Jesus. It is precisely because God has become Incarnate, taking on the quarks of the Big Bang, the dinosaur DNA, and the human genome and history, that Creation is united with God. This is not, of course, in a Hindu pantheist way of “identity without difference.” It is in the sense of creator in partnership with creation, as in John 12:32: “When I am lifted up I will draw all things to myself” (καγὼ ἐὰν ὑψωθῶ ἐκ τῆς γῆς, πάντας ἑλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν.)

StAnastasia
 
StAnastasia said:
Benidict, there is a lively discussion of the very topic you propose here, going on among the fellows of the International Society for Science and Religion (www.issr.uk.org). Some scholars do adopt the Jewish mystcal model of God “withdrawing from a portion of the cosmos,” as it were, to allow room for creation. I regard this as too literalist, in imagining creation as spatially located in a blank space left by God.

I find the panentheist model more coherent and compelling, in which creation is within the divine reality, so that God is intimately present to creation at all moments. If the universe is within God, God suffers with us, uniting Godself to the sufferings of animals and humans through the Incarnation and the redemptive suffering of Jesus. It is precisely because God has become Incarnate, taking on the quarks of the Big Bang, the dinosaur DNA, and the human genome and history, that Creation is united with God. This is not, of course, in a Hindu pantheist way of “identity without difference.” It is in the sense of creator in partnership with creation, as in John 12:32: “When I am lifted up I will draw all things to myself” (καγὼ ἐὰν ὑψωθῶ ἐκ τῆς γῆς, πάντας ἑλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν.)

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
What do you think about the gap theory found in Genesis 1. that there was an earth here before our present earth was created. Is it possible that there was a planet with life, before the Genesis account, that could explain the dinasaurs, and other things on our planet that are much older than the supposed Genesis account? Is there any basis to this? Im not a scolar, so I would probably be a hinderance to any scolars forum. My brain is just too small…😉 You who are scientist are Awesome!🙂
 
benidict said:
What do you think about the gap theory found in Genesis 1. that there was an earth here before our present earth was created. Is it possible that there was a planet with life, before the Genesis account, that could explain the dinasaurs, and other things on our planet that are much older than the supposed Genesis account? Is there any basis to this? Im not a scolar, so I would probably be a hinderance to any scolars forum. My brain is just too small…😉 You who are scientist are Awesome!🙂
Click to expand...
Thanks, Benidict – you’re too kind! here is an article on “gap creationism”: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_creationism

There would probably be no trace of a previous Earth still identifiable as “Earth” (the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter is not a candidate).

StAnastasia

PS - sorry you had to leave your collection of books behind; that must have been very hard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top