E
edwest21
Guest
As a storytelling device, evolution is infinitely flexible, but after close examination, one realizes that it is this infinite flexibility that makes it useless. The same for any claimed uses in the real world.
- Status
E
edwest21
Guest
I would prefer not being told what to believe by anyone other than the Church.
With all due respect,
Ed
With all due respect,
Ed
R
Rau
Guest
It’s not respectful to misrepresent me Ed. I laid out what I’m ok believing. I didn’t tell you what to believe.
I did tell you not to place limits on God, but I did anticipate you’d disagree with that.
Last edited:
R
Rau
Guest
Nothing is as infinitely flexible as overzealous recourse to “God did it” to force fit physical phenomena to conform to belief (and one not held by the Church). Eg. God kicked off life on earth 5778 years ago one poster tells us. Science certainly can’t hold a candle to that kind of flexibility.
Last edited:
E
edwest21
Guest
Nothing is more strange than for science, which is supposedly silent about the supernatural, seeking a stamp of approval from any religious leader about anything scientific. What is the Church’s position on Dark Matter? Quantum mechanics? I guarantee no one is concerned about that. But this - there will be no end.
S
setarcos
Guest
Thank you for taking the time to “re” answer what has been apparently asked before. The way this system is set up it is difficult to know what’s been answered before and what hasn’t on this thread and I’m not inclined to read through 500 previous posts since I last logged in to determine that.
I too am constantly searching for truth in the various religions. I believe that the truth of a religion has to account for the reality I experience in some fashion and it seems you’ve found a world view that suits your experiences. The only difference in our searching seems to be that you were looking for something that suits your desired expectations as if each individual can pick the religion that most works to create a world view they can accept, I on the other hand simply wish to find not what satisfies me or alleviates my suffering or depression (though that would be a plus) but what actually most closely explains what I personally experience about reality. While I found Buddhism to be attractive as “medication” for what ails me on some levels I simply didn’t find it capable of generally explaining human nature or the reality of experience. While it does acknowledge the obvious, suffering exists, and proposes a way of alleviating it through the 4 noble truths and following the Eightfold path it would seem that its remedy is to become less connected to your fellow human being, even to the point of losing your own self identity. Human nature is such that desire arises from it, good and bad. Love and hate for instance. To be human is at the least a balancing act between these and at its best a movement toward the good desires not a total elimination of them. I wish to explain who I am, not by losing myself to myself and others but by finding myself and my relationship to others in a desire for the truth. Buddhism seems to seek happiness in becoming nothing to everything and thereby having everything be nothing to them. If I were born a rock I could do as much. The only way Buddhists alleviate suffering is by ignoring it, in themselves and in others. This seems not only inhuman but unnatural to reality. A lobotomy of sorts to experience. You are correct though that this is off topic for this thread, perhaps a thread on Buddhism might be started. I’m sure you believe my understanding of Buddhism to be flawed and it may very well be, I just thought I would mention my preliminary assessment of its philosophy.
I too am constantly searching for truth in the various religions. I believe that the truth of a religion has to account for the reality I experience in some fashion and it seems you’ve found a world view that suits your experiences. The only difference in our searching seems to be that you were looking for something that suits your desired expectations as if each individual can pick the religion that most works to create a world view they can accept, I on the other hand simply wish to find not what satisfies me or alleviates my suffering or depression (though that would be a plus) but what actually most closely explains what I personally experience about reality. While I found Buddhism to be attractive as “medication” for what ails me on some levels I simply didn’t find it capable of generally explaining human nature or the reality of experience. While it does acknowledge the obvious, suffering exists, and proposes a way of alleviating it through the 4 noble truths and following the Eightfold path it would seem that its remedy is to become less connected to your fellow human being, even to the point of losing your own self identity. Human nature is such that desire arises from it, good and bad. Love and hate for instance. To be human is at the least a balancing act between these and at its best a movement toward the good desires not a total elimination of them. I wish to explain who I am, not by losing myself to myself and others but by finding myself and my relationship to others in a desire for the truth. Buddhism seems to seek happiness in becoming nothing to everything and thereby having everything be nothing to them. If I were born a rock I could do as much. The only way Buddhists alleviate suffering is by ignoring it, in themselves and in others. This seems not only inhuman but unnatural to reality. A lobotomy of sorts to experience. You are correct though that this is off topic for this thread, perhaps a thread on Buddhism might be started. I’m sure you believe my understanding of Buddhism to be flawed and it may very well be, I just thought I would mention my preliminary assessment of its philosophy.
R
Rau
Guest
I’ve never heard such questions posed to the Church. But I can understand why someone might ask whether the scientific findings about the development of the universe, the longevity of life on earth etc find any conflict with the faith - given the Bible touches on creation.
Last edited:
E
edwest21
Guest
And I will always defer to the Church. To people with real names with full knowledge. The internet is limited.
R
Rau
Guest
Fair enough. Happily in connection with the matter I raised, the Church sees no conflict.
N
niceatheist
Guest
And that is how science must look at all natural phenomenon. It can no more speculate on what God might have done in respect to evolution than it would speculate on which particular thunder storms are caused by Thor. If you want a religious education, a seminary is the place to go, if you want to understand science, then you’re going to have to look at natural processes in a methodoloigically naturalistic way, even if you believe, as one of the greatest of all evolutionary biologist, Theodosius Dobzhansky, an Orthodox Christian, that God’s guding hand was involved.
What is it that would satisfy you in a biology book? What testable hypothesis involving God do you imagine you could formulate?
What is it that would satisfy you in a biology book? What testable hypothesis involving God do you imagine you could formulate?
G
Glark
Guest
Evolution has no plan or purpose and is random and undirected - yet it produced human beings who are made in the image of God? What an amazing stroke of luck!
No, wait; I must be missing something here. No sane Catholic (especially one as intelligent and erudite as Kenneth Miller) could possibly accept such an idiotic idea.
Last edited:
G
Glark
Guest
I bet Eve’s mother warned her time and time again not to talk to strange serpents.
G
Glark
Guest
So does this mean that it’s heresy for a Catholic to deny that Adam and Eve were real, historical people?
T
Techno2000
Guest
Well you know kids never want to listen to their parents, they are just too old fashioned.Techno2000:
I bet Eve’s mother warned her time and time again not to talk to strange serpents.
Last edited:
G
Glark
Guest
I suspect you are referring to speciation - such as Green Warblers speciating to become Green Warblers. Green Warblers becoming more Green Warblers is “macroevolution”?
Just like Little Green Men on Mars is an established scientific fact. Do you really think I’m that gullible?
There is another valid explanation for all these observations - an intelligent Creator decided to use the same molecular “building blocks” to create different forms of life. Makes perfect sense.
Last edited:
T
Techno2000
Guest
Right, God used the earth to create everything in the material world that’s why the DNA is so related.
G
Glark
Guest
Anti-literalist animus poorly disguised as mediocre humour.
E
Emperor_Markus
Guest
Indeed it does.
We must reject evolution. It leads to Protestantism and atheism.
Also, Galileo was wrong, needless to say.
We must reject evolution. It leads to Protestantism and atheism.
Also, Galileo was wrong, needless to say.
G
Glark
Guest
“Evolution is the greatest engine of atheism ever invented” - William Provine. (Personally, I would underline “invented”. The inventors name is Lucifer.)
G
Glark
Guest
Jesus said some things that doubters thought strange too. So you’re in excellent company. And history is littered with strange ideas that turned out to be true. Image how many knockers Einstein had in the beginning.
- Status