B
buffalo
Guest
Please list the sources of truth that you use.
- Status
R
RACJ
Guest
Code:
You say you are Catholic. When exactly do you think that God injected Himself into the universe, and for what purpose, since naturalism explains it all? You seem to have a very low opinion of the Bible. I think that even if the Adam and Eve story is not literally true, it CONTAINS essential truth, such as the centrality of man to God's creation. As well, it renders silly the notion that we are all developed bacteria, as Richard Dawkins logically conjectures. Blessings, Bob :ehh:
P.s. To get to your question, YES, I think that local communities and parents will make better decisions for their children than faceless bureaucrats who don't care if I live or die. In ancient times, long before the Department of Education was a gleam in Carter's eye, giant turtles and vomiting universes were not taught. Surprisingly.
T
TMC
Guest
Evolution/Creationism is not a left/right issue. Most of my friends and family are conservative to very conservative. Nearly all are Christians, mostly Catholics. None of them are YEC or ID creationists. The idea that Creationism is naturally aligned with either Christianity or conservatism is nearly as wrong-headed as the philosophy itself.Ah yes, that is the way of the left, to IMPOSE its agenda through coercion. It’s none of the federal government’s business what local districts do. The Education Department does not educate a single child, but they HAVE successfully used the force of law to dumb down education. I’m old enough to know that schools were 100% better 40 years ago, when locals made their OWN determinations for their OWN kids!Rob.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
True – Roman Catholic theologian.
God did not inject Godself into the universe. The finite universe exists within the infinite divine reality; God is ever present to the universe.
“Where can I run from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.” (Psalm 139)
Allâh is “closer to him (the human) than [his] jugular vein.”(Quran 50.16)
False – I have a very exalted opinion of the Bible, especially because I am not a Fundamentalist biblical literalist.
I completely agree with you.
No, Genesis does not render that notion silly at all.
G
grannymh
Guest
I never mentioned classrooms. So I cannot answer your question. Actually, I was referring to a “who” as in person not as in where. I am not into “creationist” politics.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
And, of the right. Didn’t Gingrich say that, were he elected, he was going to abolish a lot of programs put into place by the Democrats? Sounds like IMPOSITION of a right wing agenda to me.
G
grannymh
Guest
I hope my answer will also satisfy your question from post 81: "So if DNA is not passed on by descent, does God create each individual fungus, elephant and person? Is there evidence for this, rather than the much more obvious path of descent? "
Basically, one needs to distinguish the scientific opinions of Catholic individuals, including high ranking clergy, from the official doctrines of the Catholic Church. Catholic doctrines are theological, that is they pertain to God and to human relationships with God. This is often referred to as the domain of faith and morals.
Science is in the separate domain of the natural world. This is often referred to as the material/physical domain.
Questions about DNA, fungus, the path of descent of material anatomies etc., are all part of the scientific natural world and therefore there are no official doctrines about these. But there are millions of opinions expressed by Catholic individuals and lots of interesting arguments. Eventually, because these things are part of the material/physical domain, science will offer possible theories.
When it comes to the person, the material/physical domain can intersect with the spiritual domain. This is because human nature is *both *rational and corporeal, *both *spiritual soul and material body.
The Catholic Church has declared that God is the Creator of the human person. It has not declared the exact scientific way the person’s material anatomy came about. Nor has the Catholic Church declared the exact scientific way that animals and other living organisms came about. The Church has declared that God is the Creator of all.
Thus, the human anatomy could have come about instantly from the dirt of the earth or through some kind of developmental process. What is key, as far as Catholic teaching, is that the soul is not some special kind of DNA and is not produced by the parents through generation. The spiritual soul is directly created by God. It is because of the spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body. Basically, the loving parents do cooperate with God.
Catholicism encourages scientific exploration in the material/physical world. It is clear about the importance of both the material anatomy and the spiritual soul.
Once you understand the difference between the material and spiritual domains, then you will understand that the answer to your question --So why do we share genetic material (such as DNA), which is passed on only by descent, with bacteria? – has to come from science because both DNA and bacteria are in the material domain. In this domain there are legitimate discussions about descent versus a different process.
The answers to questions about eternal life have to come from Catholicism because eternal life is part of the spiritual domain.
H
Hokomai
Guest
Thanks Granny for a thoughtful exposition and PM. I think your response is a clear explanation which allows both science and religious thought to develop without conflict. It is when, in the name of spiritual thought, that people make claims about the material world, that people like me challenge them to provide material proofs.
R
RACJ
Guest
Please realize that the TOE posits that every organism *evolved* based upon modification through descent. A "god" has *nothing* to do with any of it. How do you suppose, based upon your theology, that man is any more special in God's plan than a mosquito, or a bacterium? In the eyes of most naturalists, we are not, our existence being no more than an accident of nature. TOE is downright hostile to Christianity and other religions. For the time being, most evolutionists are willing to humor your view of a "god", but it is the goal of theirs to take down ALL faiths, and replace them with a Utopian world where every rat fends for himself, and there is no hope for anything beyond which our rulers can provide. Nothing but despair regarding our ultimate fate of sharing the soil with the earthworms. :shrug:
R
RACJ
Guest
Code:
First, I think that Gingrich is a big government guy. Conservatives such as Santorum and I believe in *imposing* as little of the state as necessary for an orderly, compassionate and safe society. You can impose a tax, but if you take the tax away, you are imposing nothing. You are still able to pay more tax, if you desire.
Notice that the Obamas gave 1% to charity, and Romney 15%, for example. Biden and Gore willingly surrendered but $300 bucks apiece to charity. Confiscating money from OTHERS to redistribute is theft, not charity. Blessings, Rob :)
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Science is not in a position to say that God has nothing to do with it.
Because God is infinitely wise.
What “most naturalists” believe is irrelevant to my theology,
This is quite false.
G
grannymh
Guest
My apology, but apparently while I was working off line on a post, I missed a lot of this conversation.
Because of the challenges to Catholic doctrines regarding human origin, original sin, and the necessity of a Redeemer, which, unfortunately, are coming from theologians within the Church, there is a major effort off line to publish Catholic theology as it really is. While Catholic sources are used for these papers, all Christians can benefit from the research.
Currently on CAF regarding Catholic theology and the reality of Adam and Eve, a good source is the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraphs 355 - 421 plus their footnotes. I have been told that the Scripture footnotes serve as an excellent resource for Protestant homilies.
Coincidentally in regard to God injecting Himself into the universe, one of the theology drafts refers to God’s direct self-insertion into human history when Jesus Christ was incarnate of the Virgin Mary and became man. This, of course, is tied to an actual original sin and an actual first sinner. (Romans, Chapter 5)
Blessings,
granny
“The shepherds sing; and shall I silent be?”
From the poem “Christmas” by George Herbert
R
ringil
Guest
Isn’t it ironic that kids in these public schools would have to sit through ID silliness in a science class, but they likely wouldn’t in an area Catholic school?
I would be furious if my daughter heard this c*(p in a science class, and my wife, a scientist, would be livid!!
Catholics are smarter than this.
I would be furious if my daughter heard this c*(p in a science class, and my wife, a scientist, would be livid!!
Catholics are smarter than this.
B
buffalo
Guest
R
ringil
Guest
It’s clear. ID, Creationism, whatever bull malarkey we want to call it, shouldn’t be presented in a science class. It’s maddeningly stupid and shows that whoever approved this is grossly ignorant of the basics of science and of public education.
I am surprised this isn’t being done in TX or in AL though. I guess IN has some real characters. . . .
B
buffalo
Guest
I asked for specific line items.It’s clear. ID, Creationism, whatever bull malarkey we want to call it, shouldn’t be presented in a science class. It’s maddeningly stupid and shows that whoever approved this is grossly ignorant of the basics of science and of public education.
I am surprised this isn’t being done in TX or in AL though. I guess IN has some real characters. . . .
R
ringil
Guest
Sorry, It’s not worth my time. I know enough to have an opinion. I certainly know enough of what is pertinent in it.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
ringil, fortunately the educated world enjoys the support of a strong ally in our fight to preserve the integrity of science education: the National Center for Science Education (www.ncse.com). I know they are closely monitoring this problem in Indiana, providing legal, scientific, and educational support to those on the ground in Indiana fighting to preserve science teaching.It’s clear. ID, Creationism, whatever bull malarkey we want to call it, shouldn’t be presented in a science class. It’s maddeningly stupid and shows that whoever approved this is grossly ignorant of the basics of science and of public education. I am surprised this isn’t being done in TX or in AL though. I guess IN has some real characters. . . .
B
buffalo
Guest
I conclude you have no interest in really digging into this.
- Status