R
rossum
Guest
So, the Rabbi is saying that those pages should be “Expelled”. Hmmm. Now what was that film complaining about?
rossum
- Status
rossum
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
I know that mainstream Jews don’t believe in Genesis as a literal history of the world. Glad to know that all reactionary subsets of the three main religions ALL do agree that science is a joke and that the bible is a history book. Islam,Christianity and Judaism all agree in their fundamentalist sections that creationism is the key. Hey perhaps we can work out a peace plan based on that agreement. Or perchance does it make some just a tiny bit unconfortable to know that they have so much in common with Islam?
R
rossum
Guest
I usually use “Abrahamic Religions” the describe Judaism, Christianity and Islam collectivly. “Dharmic Religions” covers Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism.
rossum
B
Brian_Millar
Guest
Your faith should not be based upon cinema. It should not be swayed because someone was rude to you in church, or that the others in the congregation are not into mass, just getting it over with. It is an individual thing, it’s entirely between you and God and if watching a movie is enough to get you to question his very existance, there clearly wasn’t much there in the first place. You are in a sense going through the motions, saying what you want to feel, but feeling something entirely different, you are not being true to yourself.
I found it’s easier to think as a child in these matters, to rely upon the church and his word over myself or other individuals. We have alot of really screwed up people in this world, many of them claim to be part of a religion and even worse, fool themselves into thinking they have the spiritual keys. When we rely upon our own understandings and feelings and do so exclusively, we have turned away from God, opting to go the direction “we” feel is best, when it’s clear, what “we” decided in the past didn’t work out so well, did it? Why repeat the mistake? How many times must we learn this same lesson.
I haven’t seen the movie, just the trailor online, it seemed to me that it was discussing the closed mindedness of the modern day scientific community. I’m still a die hard creationist, I look to the theories as being just that, theories and the holes are filled with speculation more then anything based upon fact. Science is only a tool, and often it gets misused and is given an exaulted status. It is created by man, so is always going to be limited, the created cannot go beyond the creator, both in it’s understanding of creation and the application behind it all. A farmer will use his tools to till the soil and plant the seed, he cannot ever create the seed itself from base elements, he can only use the tools he has on hand to help it grow. All of the instructions have been layed out from the beginning, we are only observing what God has put in place and we can only form opinions at best as to why and what is going on because our thinking is mortal, thus quite limited, his is infinate.
I found it’s easier to think as a child in these matters, to rely upon the church and his word over myself or other individuals. We have alot of really screwed up people in this world, many of them claim to be part of a religion and even worse, fool themselves into thinking they have the spiritual keys. When we rely upon our own understandings and feelings and do so exclusively, we have turned away from God, opting to go the direction “we” feel is best, when it’s clear, what “we” decided in the past didn’t work out so well, did it? Why repeat the mistake? How many times must we learn this same lesson.
I haven’t seen the movie, just the trailor online, it seemed to me that it was discussing the closed mindedness of the modern day scientific community. I’m still a die hard creationist, I look to the theories as being just that, theories and the holes are filled with speculation more then anything based upon fact. Science is only a tool, and often it gets misused and is given an exaulted status. It is created by man, so is always going to be limited, the created cannot go beyond the creator, both in it’s understanding of creation and the application behind it all. A farmer will use his tools to till the soil and plant the seed, he cannot ever create the seed itself from base elements, he can only use the tools he has on hand to help it grow. All of the instructions have been layed out from the beginning, we are only observing what God has put in place and we can only form opinions at best as to why and what is going on because our thinking is mortal, thus quite limited, his is infinate.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Science is a way of learning about the reality of the physical universe.
Barbarian observes:
I can’t think of any claims of orthodox Judaisim that are inconsistent with anything in science. But then I’m not all that familiar with it. Which ones do you think are inconsistent with science?
Conservative Judaism is not the sum of religion. However, there is this fact for you:
By the early to mid 1900s, the majority of Conservative Judaism and Reform Judaism came to accept the existence of evolution as a scientific fact. They interpreted Genesis and related Jewish teachings in light of this fact.
jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/jewsevolution.html
So, it turns out you were um, wrong. That, apparently, hasn’t prevented you from making sweeping conclusions about “religion” and how it reflects “reality.”
If so, Moshe is trying to lead his people out of conservative judaism, not Egypt.
Oh, and Orthodox Judaism?
**Prominent Orthodox rabbis who affirm that the world is older, and that life has evolved over time, include Aryeh Kaplan, Israel Lipschitz, Sholom Mordechai Schwadron (the MaHaRSHaM), Zvi Hirsch Chajes. To be sure, these rabbis do not accept the views of atheists, such as Richard Dawkins, who hold that evolution has no room at all for God. Rather, each rabbi taking this position proposes their own understanding of theistic evolution, in which the world is older, and that life does evolve over time in accord with natural law, yet also holding that God has a role in this process.
One of the most prominent writers on this subject in the Orthodox Jewish community is Gerald Schroeder, an Israeli physicist. He has written a number of articles and popular books attempting to reconcile Jewish theology with modern scientific findings that the world is billions of years old and that life has evolved over time. (Genesis and the Big Bang: The Discovery of Harmony Between Modern Science and the Bible) His work has received approbations from a number of Orthodox rabbinic authorities.**
(same source; Jewish Virtual Library)
We are all ignorant of some things; the key is to find out, if you want to talk about them. And now you know. I’m pretty sure there isn’t a Jewish Pope, and if there is, it isn’t Moshe.
R
reggieM
Guest
Interesting to read opinions about Judiasm from a guy who admitted that he doesn’t know much about it.
Actually, it’s not that interesting.
If anyone else on this thread can explain what Barbarian is talking about I’d enjoy seeing that. Otherwise, I’ll accept that it’s not worth spending any time on it.
R
reggieM
Guest
There is a conflict between Darwinism and Hindu belief also:
hinduismtoday.com/archives/1991/05/1991-05-06.shtml
hinduismtoday.com/archives/1991/05/1991-05-06.shtml
R
reggieM
Guest
For anyone who wants to follow Barbarian’s method of response I’ll mention that there is no point in saying that “some Hindus, some Jews, some Christians … accept evolution”.
The point here is that science is in conflict with religion – depending on one’s theological standpoint.
Certainly, science is in conflict with Catholicism in the matter of embroyonic stem-cell research, artificial insemination, human cloning, artificial birth control, transexual surgery, scientific development of abortion procedures … and many other “mainstream” scientific practices and research programs.
The point here is that science is in conflict with religion – depending on one’s theological standpoint.
Certainly, science is in conflict with Catholicism in the matter of embroyonic stem-cell research, artificial insemination, human cloning, artificial birth control, transexual surgery, scientific development of abortion procedures … and many other “mainstream” scientific practices and research programs.
R
reggieM
Guest
I’ll take careful notes here. One of the voices of liberal Catholicism here on CAF spreading Islamophobia and a classic us-vs-them theology – with no room for ecumenical understanding (and she employs outright ridicule of religious viewpoints that she doesn’t agree with).
Actually, I didn’t learn much from that because it only affirmed what I already knew about such types. Their talk of tolerance, understanding and peace is even more of a joke than Darwinism itself.
It’s been that way for a long time. “We embrace a diversity of religious views – as long as you agree with us.”
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Actually, that is “most Jews, most Christians.” And it’s worth saying.
Not for a Catholic who accepts the teaching of his Church. “Truth cannot contradict truth.” Not everyone here accepts the Church’s teachings, of course.
No. What is true, is not a matter of values. Transsexual surgery, for example, merely uses what science has discovered, in a way that conflicts with Catholic teaching. The conflict is not with the science, but rather with what doctors do with the things science has discovered.
B
Brian_Millar
Guest
Actually, that is “most Jews, most Christians.” And it’s worth saying.
I can’t speak for the Jews, but keeping into the context of both the Catholics and the protestant denominations, my observations have shown that not most believe in evolution at all. This is why there always conflict between both sides when ever this discussion arrises.
Along the transgender elements, what would be the purpose to develop a science that makes this process allowable. Not everything that can be done in science, should be. Once you cross that line, you are opening pandora’s box and are now responsible for what happens as a result of it. I guess since the majority of the scientific community are athiests, they do not dwell on these matters at all.
I can’t speak for the Jews, but keeping into the context of both the Catholics and the protestant denominations, my observations have shown that not most believe in evolution at all. This is why there always conflict between both sides when ever this discussion arrises.
Along the transgender elements, what would be the purpose to develop a science that makes this process allowable. Not everything that can be done in science, should be. Once you cross that line, you are opening pandora’s box and are now responsible for what happens as a result of it. I guess since the majority of the scientific community are athiests, they do not dwell on these matters at all.
E
estesbob
Guest
Ask the Scientists to answer two simple questions:
How did matter spring from nothing?
How did life spring from non-life?
They can’t answer these questions although the answers have been evident to most of us from an early age.
R
reggieM
Guest
It’s an interesting example to choose among those I offered. Perhaps you just picked one at random since your point is that none of the science I presented conflicts with the Catholic faith.
But for the sake of helping me understand more about this topic, could you take the other examples I offered and explain how the science does not conflict with Catholicism?
For example, with stem cell research, scientists use cells from aborted children. The “truths” of science are obtained through immoral means. In other words, the Holy See has condemned this scientific research as incompatible with the Catholic religion. That is the science itself, not even the application of it, but just the research.
We could look at the scientific research done on artificial insemination – the science itself required the commission of a mortal sins (to obtain the sperm).
Scientific efforts that are designed to create abortion procedures and techniques conflict with the Catholic Faith – and no Catholic scientists can participate in such activities.
Certainly, the scientific experiments done on human beings without their consent (as in the Tuskegee Study) are immoral and in a conflict with Catholic teaching.
Experiments with human cloning are immoral.
The ends (in your words “truth”) do not justify the means. Science is often in conflict with the Catholic faith, as the Holy See has warned.
Of course science can be in conflict with the Catholic faith – Pope Paul VI made that clear.
ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6SCIHUM.HTM
R
reggieM
Guest
Agreed. I would also say that the Catholics who uncritically defend Darwinism (as we see often here on CAF) don’t dwell on these matters either – given how easy it is to refute the ridiculous claim that “there is no conflict between science and religion”.
In fact, we saw a “Catholic theologian” here who claims to specialize in science ask how it was possible that there could be any conflict between religion and science.
G
guanophore
Guest
Clearly you have encountered Wormwood. Read C.S. Lewis Screwtape letters.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Originally Posted by The Barbarian
No. What is true, is not a matter of values. Transsexual surgery, for example merely uses what science has discovered, in a way that conflicts with Catholic teaching. The conflict is not with the science, but rather with what doctors do with the things science has discovered.
Humans have almost certainly not been cloned; the large number of attempts it takes to get one successful cloning of a mammal probably means it hasn’t yet been done. If it has, the knowledge isn’t the problem; it’s the misuse of the knowledge.
I agree with the Pope, who says it’s not the science of stem cell research, but rather the use of embyros.
No. What is true, is not a matter of values. Transsexual surgery, for example merely uses what science has discovered, in a way that conflicts with Catholic teaching. The conflict is not with the science, but rather with what doctors do with the things science has discovered.
I was wondering why you picked that one. Interesting, indeed.
I would, of course, be willing to listen to your point about how it does. But you didn’t offer us any reasons to believe you.
Sure. Let’s take artificial insemination. Science learned that humans reproduce when two haploid sex cells combine to form a single, diploid cell, from which a new individual forms. However, people had figured out that the insertion of semen into the vagina caused pregnancy, well before science explained. As before, the science isn’t the problem, it’s the use it was put to. In fact, I suspect someone had done this long before any of the science was worked out.
In fact, the science was worked out a long time before, on animals. Again, the use to which it has been put is the problem, not science.
Humans have almost certainly not been cloned; the large number of attempts it takes to get one successful cloning of a mammal probably means it hasn’t yet been done. If it has, the knowledge isn’t the problem; it’s the misuse of the knowledge.
Ironically, birth control pills were first used to regulate severe menstrual problems. Again… misuse. A form of IUD was used by Arabs in the middle ages for livestock.
They haven’t changed since long before modern science. Ovid wrote about them, and pretty much the same thing.
I agree with the Pope, who says it’s not the science of stem cell research, but rather the use of embyros.
True. So, you agree, it’s not the science, but the uses to which it is put.
Not science. As the Pope said, truth cannot contradict truth. But it can be abused, as can anything humans do, including religion.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
It didn’t. It condensed out of the energy very early, after the decoupling of the four forces. If you want to go where science can’t, ask them how the universe originated. That one is the province of religion, not science. Don’t be surprised if they tell you that God did it. You see, science can’t go there, but scientists can.
Turns out all the evidence indicates it happened as God said; the earth brought forth living things.
Surprise.
Any other questions?
R
rossum
Guest
There may well be, but the Hindu author you quoted should not have included Buddhism. Buddhism has no concept of a creator God. The Buddha explicitly said that the question of the origin of the universe was not a religious question:[The Buddha said:] “The religious life, Malunkyaputta, does not depend on the dogma that the universe is eternal, nor does it depend on the dogma that the universe is not eternal etc. [many dogmas omitted here] Whatever dogma obtains there is still birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief and despair, of which I declare the extinction in the present life.”
Cula-Malunkyovada sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 63
There is no conflict between Buddhism and evolution.
rossum
R
rossum
Guest
It didn’t. Haven’t you heard of Einstein’s equation E = mc[sup]2[/sup]? Matter arises from energy, it condensed out of the energy of the Big Bang a few minutes after the start of the universe.
The short answer is chemistry. We do not have full details because the problem is still being worked on. Google for “abiogenesis”, “RNA world” and “Miller-Urey experiment” to see something of what we do have.
Creationists have no answer at all to the question of the origin of life. The “evident” answer you are probably thinking of is not correct; read Psalm 42:2 carefully and you will see why. Creationism has even less explanation for the origin of life than science does. Science has part of an answer; creationism has nothing at all.
rossum
E
estesbob
Guest
And the energy came from where? Are Scientists able to duplicate this in laboratories?
And we can find evidence that science has created life from non-life where? Is there evidence that this unknown, no verifiable process continues in nature today? If not why not? Or do we just have to take you word for it (faith?)
of life than science does. Science has part of an answer; creationism has nothing at all.
The obvious answer to both questions is "God’ The only answer science has is “we’ll figure it someday, meanwhile the great unwashed just have to take our word for it.”
- Status