Yeah. But then God punished all the snakes for something they had no control over.Actually the devil took the form (or inhabited the serpent). When the devil “spoke” it could have been telepathic. No need for talking parts then.
LOL…I should have known you’d say something like that. You just don’t get it. I guess it’s ok to say that you’re just ignorant, and willfully so.Not true at all. Calling someone stupid is a personal attack but calling them ignorant is not in any way shape or form a personal attack. Stating that because of the evidence from their comments that they don’t understand science is not a personal attack. It is just an observation.
I guess you just don’t understand the difference.
You asked why we can’t accept that evolution created everything without referencing God. So, either you don’t believe in the spirituality of the soul (material causes cannot create spiritual realities), or you don’t believe that evolution created everything. So, how did human beings get a spiritual soul?I don’t reject the spirituality of the soul.
After having explained this to you in detail (do you recall my mention of Captain Ahab?), I’m not sure why you’re repeating the same incorrect view. What didn’t you understand about my previous explanation? Please reply to that rather than just repeat what you said before. Thanks.I just do not see how a created cause could affect the Transcendent Cause “behind” all causality; that is a bit as though one were to be afraid of being kidnapped by a character in a short-story one has written:
In this case, I can’t follow or understand what you mean. I might agree or disagree, but there’s not enough information to know for sure what you’re asserting.Nor do I believe that there is anything special about lack of an explanation by secondary causes. ISTM that the marvellous & the miraculous are being confused.
Both men and serpents were punished.Yeah. But then God punished all the snakes for something they had no control over.
It just don’t add up some how.
I think we have to just accept what is obviously the case. The snake is a metaphore for the temptation of sin or the devil. The author used the concept of a snake becuase its bite is poisonous and leads ultimatley to death. The path of sin leads to death; hence the talking snake.
Its quite simple really.
Peace.
**
But God often punishes people (or otherwise harms them) in the Old Testament for things for which they had no responsibility. So why shouldn’t She curse the poor old snakes?
Where did you study theology?But God often punishes people (or otherwise harms them) in the Old Testament for things for which they had no responsibility. So why shouldn’t She curse the poor old snakes?
Science has become an ultra-orthodox religion. The supernatural cannot “defile” it. But, supernatural events do happen. A person under consideration for becoming a saint must have at least two miracles attributed to them. Doctors, scientists and other experts are called in to examine the evidence all the time. It may take years to evaluate all of it. Those who treat science as a caste or religious sect refuse to see this. I can understand why the secular media would ignore it as well. But the impossible does happen in reality, and that is what I want to emphasize. While the scientific method is fine for studying objects and processes, the people involved must hear about the rest of the story.STM that Gould wins on points:
God is irrelevant to science, because He is not restricted to its data: He is too big for it. Only things of the natural order can be completely contained with the natural order; He Who is “beyond” it & “greater” than it, cannot. The antisupernaturalism comesfrom those who want God to be a scientifically significant entity.
- man is an animal - whereas:
- God is not anthropomorphic
Science is not atheistic - it avoids the mistake of treating God as a methodically appropriate explanatory device. God-talk has no explanatory value in science: “God created whales” may be sound theology, but as science it is useless, because it is completely about whales. “God did it” is not only worthless for the purposes of science as the sort of study that it is: it is as good as meaningless, because scientists do not have the same ideas about God.
(1) I am glad I can still amaze!Your comments amaze me. They are typical of a student of modernism (a heresy by the way). Why are you Catholic?
Ed, why do miracles have to be subject to science? Aren’t miracles by definition things that science cannot touch? If science could “prove” a miracle it wouldn’t be a miracle.I say, let just one of them examine a miracle or the image of Our Lady of Guadelupe on the cloak. But they don’t want to.Peace,Ed
Our Blessed Lady came to Fatima to save us from scientism. She also appeared to St. Bernadette to save us from atheistic materialism.Catholics do not have a make-believe God, but there are a number of scientists who are promoting exactly that right now. They write books using science to say: See. No god. But they cannot prove it. I say, let just one of them examine a miracle or the image of Our Lady of Guadelupe on the cloak. But they don’t want to.
Because evolutionism claims it can explain the nature of human beings.Ed, why do miracles have to be subject to science?
But miracles can touch the “things of science”.Aren’t miracles by definition things that science cannot touch?
This is the 150th anniversary of the publication of Darwin’s essay On the Origin of Species. All that’s happened in that 150 years is increased strengthening and corroboration of the theory by allied sciences.Our Blessed Lady came to Fatima to save us from scientism. She also appeared to St. Bernadette to save us from atheistic materialism. So, this topic is of great concern to God and Darwinism will be defeated by His power.
(1) Evolution can explain important things about human nature.Because evolutionism claims it can explain the nature of human beings. But miracles can touch the “things of science”.
Quite true!The gospel is the truth of God made man. Peace,Ed
Jesus Christ is a historical fact. The disciples told the people at the time that Jesus was God, for real, or the faith would be pointless. Don’t you get it? The people searched the Scriptures diligently to see if what they said was true, i.e. for real.Quite true!
“Can” meaning “it might be possible”, but in my view “doesn’t” is a better word. Human nature cannot be separated from the spiritual-supernatural dimension.(1) Evolution can explain important things about human nature.
A miracle is (but not limited to) God’s action on the material world.(2) How do miracles touch the things of science? The miracles I’ve seen don’t.
Perhaps this will help to explain the OT for you:(1) I am glad I can still amaze!
(2) Do you deny that either God inflicted suffering on innocent people in the Old Testament, or the Old Testament writers imagined God as doing so?
(3) I am Catholic because I love God and I love serving my parish and teaching theology and philosophy. Why are you Catholic?
StAnastasia
And the dates for the rocks. I’m very, very skeptical.
If you want a whole lot of information about radiometric dating from a Christian perspective, use this link.Peace,
Ed