Humans and Stardust

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hope1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hope1960 said:
Because I’m now LCMS.
Click to expand...
Your post history reveals a deep preoccupation with this stuff. You’ve created countless threads asking to be reassured that Catholics don’t require a literalistic interpretation of Genesis. No matter how many times you hear it, you keep asking to be told one more time. Now you’re asking even though you’re not practicing Catholicism anymore.

Why are you so fixated on this?
 
Hope1960 said:
Why are YOU so fixated on what you think I’m fixated on?
Click to expand...
It’s clear that you have some kind of unhealthy preoccupation with getting the same reasssurance for the same question over and over and over and over. Stop feeding this obsession of yours. It’s not good for you.
 
Neither is your preoccupation with my posts and my welfare. You’ve obviously got your own problems to focus on so you don’t need to obsess about me and what I post.
 
Last edited:
Hope1960 said:
Can Catholics believe we’re made of stardust?
Click to expand...
What on earth is stardust? Matter? Yes we are made from matter. Did God scoop if off a star or something? I doubt it. But maybe. He’s God & can get the “dust of the earth” to creat Adam from wherever he wants, right?
 
Hope1960 said:
Neither is your preoccupation with my posts and my welfare. You’ve obviously got your own problems to focus on so you don’t need to obsess about me and what I post.
Click to expand...
It’s also rude, frankly. People have had long, patient discussions with you over whether Catholics have to believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. They’re given you the same answer, over and over and over. And yet you keep coming back, asking people to reassure you of the same thing. Do you not see how inconsiderate that is? Why should people bother to discuss with you? Someone could take the time to write out a comprehensive article for you and you’d just ignore and circle back for Round 5000.

Oh well. Keep refusing to admit you have an issue, I guess. The forums are imploding soon anyway.
 
Last edited:
RolandThompsonGunner said:
People have had long, patient discussions with you over whether Catholics have to believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis.
Click to expand...
The problem is that since her church teaches a literal interpretation she wants to believe it, and expects Catholics to support her in coming to that belief.

@Hope1960, you should take these issues up with those in your church.
 
Hope1960 said:
Read the article I posted.
Click to expand...
What’s so controversial about it? The stuff we’re composed of is more common where there’s more star deaths because it’s released from their cores. I don’t see the issue.

I guess I’m just confused as to why you even asked the question.
 
Last edited:
Capta(name removed by moderator)rudeman said:
Are we composed of stardust? In a way, yes. All the atoms in our bodies that aren’t hydrogen, helium, or Lithium (read: almost every single one) were made by fusion in star cores. Are we literally dust from stars? I don’t even know what that means. If by “dust” they mean “composed of the same material” then I’m partly the food my dad ate which helped create sperm.
Click to expand...
Excuse me. I’m having breakfast here…
 
I’ll be flippant because the board is closing.

Scientists say a lot of things. But do we have to listen them? Is there Scientific Evidence, is there even the Scientific Method? Well, what does it mean to be Star Dust? Is that like the New Age Star Children? Or like David Bowie’s Ziggy Stardust? I think Bowie was the first to come up with this by the way. Sounds cool, I guess…I guess…nah, not my thing.

With the Holy Spirit comes Wisdom and Discernment. Some people are, “Stardust,” some people are, “Children of God.” It’s in Genesis, there was Adam and Eve and then there were other people.

I’m not going to listen to scientists unless they create technology, of which they are handsomely paid. If some weird guy in Academia wants to theorize things that are irrelevant to me based off of things he believes in, I’m not going to listen to him.

So, some guy out there will now have purpose and meaning in life because scientists say they are Stardust…whatever the helk that means. I’m not one of those people. I bravely reject Star Dust…lol!
 
RepetantCatholic said:
I’m not going to listen to scientists unless they create technology, of which they are handsomely paid.
Click to expand...
So you selectively believe scientific progress? Really? You don’t believe certain things based on nothing but choice?

At least you admit it, rather than saying “yeah I believe science” but then pulling out “Oh but that’s just a theory” or “Yeah but what about this study that some random non-scientist did 30 years ago.”
 
Last edited:
RepetantCatholic said:
Scientists say a lot of things. But do we have to listen them? Is there Scientific Evidence, is there even the Scientific Method?

I’m not going to listen to scientists…

I bravely reject Star Dust…lol!
Click to expand...
Some thing I won’t miss about the forum.
 
If I recall correctly–stars begin as mostly hydrogen. Gravitation causes them to compress, heating them hot enough to start a hydrogen fusion process which ends with helium. But during a star’s lifecycle the lighter elements get used up, and nuclear reactions produce the larger heavier elements. Eventually a star may explode in a nova or supernova, spewing all those heavier elements into space. Those coalesce into planets, from which plants and animals arise, or as Genesis puts it, from the dust of the earth, (which came from stars.) I’m sure that’s a gross oversimplification, but that’s the general idea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top