You make it sound as if the Church is condemning those who are outside of her when in actuality Lumen Gentium states that those who live by grace and who through no fault of their own are unaware that the Catholic Church is the Church of Christ can be saved. In fact, the Church condemned Father Feeney for taking such a strict understanding of “no salvation outside the Church” Here’s an excerpt from an article delineating parts of lumen gentium:
What’s wrong with Pascal’s wager?I will have a look at them, but if there all on the same level as “The Design Argument” or “Pascal’s Wager” im not going to expect much. I mean come on, you wonder why i claim “feeble-minded” arguments then you present pascal’s wager.
As an argument for god? Dear me, well for a start a don’t have enough money or enough space in my house to collect all the paraphernalia from every religion proposed in the history of mankind. Also if these gods were true, being omnipotent, would they not know i was faking believe to be on the “safe side”? Also which god should i choose out the 1000’s of monotheistic religions???
Most fundamentalists are fighting to implement “intelligent design” alongside evolutionary theory within schools so as to show another aspect or side of the issue. Not many people are attempting to oust evolutionary theory from being taught. And as for saying there are plenty fundamentalist Catholics, no I don’t think so, unless of course, you are confusing fundies with conservatives. Furthermore, the Church has accepted evolution (though with a theistic understanding) and so has no qualms against it, so why would most if not all Catholics not feel the same way as the Church? You’re better arguing this with those who are at the fore of this issue (and I can assure you it is not Catholics).
That’s not true – there are active movements to ban evolutionary theory. And while intelligent design creationism could have a place in religious schools, it has no place in a science classroom, as intelligent design is not science, but a philosophical view.
Charles Darwin, there are not thousands of Gods. There is only one God, perceived through the many different lenses of human experience. Human perception is fallible, local, and temporal. Human communities have grown in sophistication over the centuries, and only a troglodyte would still say “my view is right and all others are wrong,” and faith to see that every other faith community says the same thing. That doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist; it just means we are still fallible human beings trapped in our own parochial perceptual frameworks
I said there are not many of them, not that there aren’t any. As for intelligent design there is no reason why it shouldn’t be spoken of in a science class room, in fact, it might make people understand evolution much more clearly if people were to see alternate perspectives. Furthermore, the essence of learning is questioning and debating points of view. Evolution if true in all its aspects as nothing to fear from intelligent design (which has not been proven true) but neither should it be treated as if nothing of worth can be derived from it. I think allowing ID would provide students with the occasion to ponder major questions which is good.
Pascal’s wager is about whether God exists or not, period. I’m not asking you to believe in Christianity, Judaism, Islam . . . etc. (what thousands of monotheistic religions do you refer to???). So you deliberate complicate the matter by implying that Pascal’s wager is meant somehow to deliver more than was intended. And furthermore, Pascal obviously wanted people to sincerely believe in God, that he chose to do so in a mathematical/ logical way is testament of his ingenuity. We know for a fact that either one of us as a 50% probability of being wrong, is it me or you? If it is me I have nothing to lose (I won’t exist), if it is you. . . .
NO, that is your opinion. There are many people that will claim you god does NOT exist and their’s does. As a rational thinker whom i’m i to believe, when none of you have a shread of evidence. Would i apply pascal’s wager to Yahweh instead of Allah?
LOL there is no issue, if you had any sort of education you would know this!
We don’t teach astrology in astronomy class, or alchemy in chemistry class, or numerology in math class. Intelligent Design creationism stands in the same relationship to biology.
Yahweh and Allah are the same. The God of Abraham.
Which of course we know where the issue is -
[Muslims Worship the One True God Only Their ‘Receiving Apparatus’ Is Defective](http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0301fea4.asp)LOL NO, you want me to pretend to believe in YOUR god, based on a THREAT! Don’t believe or burn in hell. This stance might work on the feeble minded, some of us require a little thing called EVIDENCE!
As a rational thinker you should do your homework then (like anything else it involves diligence, persistence and a desire to know the truth) because only one God exists, whether he is called Yahweh or Allah he is still only one.
I don’t believe that the sciences will be diluted just because one is discussing ID.
What about Zeus is he that same? Or Apollo? Or Shigidi? Or Horus? Or Prometheus? Or Dionysus???
RIght on StA.
Only empirical science in the science classroom. All philosophies including evolution belong in mandatory philosophy class.