My two objections to Christianity

  • Thread starter Thread starter SebastianTorres
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SebastianTorres said:
I know that catholics don’t read the Bible literally, and that the Church accept the evolution theory as a “God’s ghided evolution”.
Click to expand...
Sebastian,

I think I’d disagree with both of those premises, or at least, nuance them somewhat!

There are parts of the Bible that Catholics would take as being literal, historical narrative. However, the Bible is a collection of books, not just a single monolithic entity, so there are some books that fall under the literary genre of ‘narrative’ (whether historical or not), and others that are poetry. There are sections that are allegorical, and sections intended to be taken literally.

However, what I think you’re saying here is that “Catholics don’t take the creation stories of the first chapters of Genesis as literal, historical, scientifically accurate narration.” Even here, I would disagree: Catholics may hold to a literal interpretation of the creation epic, but they are also free to interpret it allegorically.

Your second assertion, too, needs a bit more fleshing out: the Church accepts the possibility of evolution being true. But, we have to make a few caveats in that assertion:
  • we’re talking about a scientific theory, not the more-relatively-recent emergence of a philosophy and world view that sees everything as undirected and refuses to believe in ‘souls’ or anything else that isn’t empirically measurable
  • we will not and can not accept any scientific theory that suggests polygenism (that is, that humanity sprang from hundreds or thousands of “true humans”). We believe that there were two first “true humans” (i.e., human body and soul given by God), from whom all of humanity has its origin.
  • the Church accepts the possibility of this scientific theory being true, but does not assert its truth.
  • the Church does not talk about science, but rather, about theology. So, it contends that the two are not in conflict, and does not ‘pass judgment’ on scientific theories.
I can’t get past your initial assumptions, but even so, I’d reject some of your later assertions about the nature of the Bible and the implications of what Darwinian evolution (as opposed to materialistic evolutionary philosophy) are… 😉
 
Last edited:
The Bible is a library of books. Poetic, historical, law, teachings etc. Some texts are to be read literally and some need to be interpreted to the time and situation they were written in. Scientific texts are not sung and we sing the readings during Mass.

If you are married and want to tell your wife that you love her you would use poetic language like: “My darling, I love you.” Now, imagine using scientific language when telling your wife that you love her: “Woman, I have chemical reactions in my brain when I look at you.” Your wife is not likely to feel loved at all and appreciated as your wife.

The Bible is to be read as a love letter from God to human beings. The relationship between God and man is the prime focus and second focus is the relationship between human beings.

Science asks the question “How?” and you can repeat experiments and come up with the same result. Theology asks the question: “Who is God?”. Two totally different questions that don’t interfer with one another.

Whatever you do, don’t read the Bible as a science book and try to prove science from it.
 
Thanks HeDa, great answer. You’re right, I am aware the Bible is not one book but a collection of several books with houndreds (or tousands) of years of writings between them, and of course should not be readed as an “Ikea manual of instructions”.
Now an ugly question: Why should I put my faith in this collection of ancient books more than in other ancient books? Or in no ancient books at all? Or why should I trust the christian interpretation of those books more than in the interpretation of other peoples, say for example the Pharisees, saducees or other jewish division?
 
My two objections to those who reject Christianity:
  1. They are all, 100% of them, just great big goofballs.
  2. Secondly, they dress funny.
Oh! Wait a minute!

That’s not fair for either one of us to do, is it?

Stop looking at Christians and focus on Christ. Christians do not save you. Only Christ does. Christians do not promise you eternal life. Only Christ does that. The sin you see in Christians is the sin in YOU. Since there is no sin in Christ, let us cast our gaze upon Him.

Look up to perfection, not left or right only to see other sinners. That is the devil’s trick.
 
SebastianTorres said:
guidance
Click to expand...
Catholics believe in providence. Regarding evolution: Catholics must believe that humans have souls that are created immediately by God.

Catholic Encyclopedia
Providence in general, or foresight, is a function of the virtue of prudence, and may be defined as the practical reason, adapting means to an end. As applied to God, Providence is God Himself considered in that act by which, in His wisdom, He so orders all events within the universe, that the end for which it was created may be realized.
Click to expand...
Walker, L. (1911). Divine Providence. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12510a.htm
 
you have a strange sense of humor po18guy, and I don’t see how your post is related to my 2 questions, but thanks for comment.
By the way I don’t reject Christianity, just have to know if it is true before I jump in, there are too many extraordinary things that the Church askes me to believe and I cannot do it just by blind faith.
 
If you want to be a Christian… you have to focus on the life of Christ… the Old Testament is shared among Jews… to be Christian is to follow Christ…
Christ was someone Ghandi looked up to… Christ was a figure like Socrates, one who died for what He believed in…
 
Here’s a quote Galileo used from a Cardinal, “" The bible teaches us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go"… much of the Bible is allegorical… even Jesus’ way of teaching is through analogy and parables…
science and astronomy is not learned by reading the bible
 
Ok, I like Jesus, as a man, what I find difficult is to beleive without doubts in his divinity and the meaning of the title “Son of God”.
God himself is a concept I have problems with, I mean, if evolution by natural selection is true, of course it doesn’t contradict with the existence of a God as a First Cause, but the problem is that for an atheist (not my case) believing in a God is unnecesary. If evolution explains many crucial questions without God, what reason should have that atheist to believe in God at all?
 
Evolution cannot explain how matter such as atoms developed into the human conscience… when did monkeys gain a human conscience that could reason, abstract, feel guilty… this high level thinking must have come from somewhere…??
Like you stated, evolution may be a part of the development of life, but it’s not the whole story
 
Do you believe in a soul? How does evolution account for a soul??
 
SebastianTorres said:
from that point His intervention is superfluous since natural selection enters in scene
Click to expand...
Non sequitur. Why would that mean His intervention is superfluous? Furthermore, God not only created all things, he also keeps them in existence at every moment, which encompasses all natural phenomena.
SebastianTorres said:
the writtings of the Bible against the mostly proven explanations of natural sciences regarding the origin of this world
Click to expand...
There is no “against” or contradiction between the Catholic faith (including the bible) and science. If you think there is, please give an example.
 
God could give souls to first two monkeys that evolved into actual human beings. It means God could design evolution and by the moment monkeys started to look like him (humans according to the Bible are like mirror images of God himself), He gave them souls.

It’s a good theory as any. And the actual process is not really important for our Faith.
 
Let me ask you some questions…
Do animals or any other life form pray? Or do they have courts with judges? Do any animals communicate with speech and are able to learn other languages and do math, science or play instruments? Do animals search or think about the existence of God or the meaning of life??

A basic question… do animals ask questions like why, when, how??
 
SebastianTorres said:
for an atheist (not my case) believing in a God is unnecesary
Click to expand...
I’ve seen those claims, from Stephen Hawking, for example. And it’s silly. He proposes that something can come from nothing, then basically proceeds to define nothing as certain energy fields… which is something! Much of pop atheism reads like this.

By the way. I consider myself a former atheist, FWIW.
SebastianTorres said:
If evolution explains many crucial questions without God
Click to expand...
I disagree. Questions of value: about goodness, justness, morality, love are far more interesting IMO. Science has no significant answers for these. Yet even evolution, inasmuch as it’s true, reflects the majesty of God.
 
Last edited:
I never said that God couldn’t put a human conscience into a monkey… God can do all things… but also just remember that God created man in His image and that Jesus is the “2nd Adam”… there are many complexities to this theory…
 
Dear Sebastian,
God calls us through His Holy Spirit to find Him through the church.
  1. After burning a few scientists at the stake and science evolving, they taught me in parochial school, THAT God created. Science teaches HOW God created.Dont stop looking at new discoveries in Science. Intelligent Design is getting foothold.
  2. The Bible has many parts and functions. To really study the Bible one must read Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, Latin. Investigating the oral traditions and finding historical writings concerning the Church at that time in that community. I.e. the church in Rome, Corinth, etc. Researches noticed a change in handwritings. It is believed Moses may not have written the Pentateuch but a Scribe. Secretaries or Scribes, or disciples may have done writings. Some writings will be Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and Paul. They defined one writer to be Q. Most of us, pick a translation sanctioned by the Church and by faith move forward. Some Newer Protestant and Catholic Bibles were compiled by groups of scholars that went and translated from original texts and now using Dead Sea scrolls. These groups of Jewish Rabbis, Catholic priests, Protestant ministers included the Latin translation w aforementioned languages.
    The Bible is an allegory. It’s telling a story of God and creation. He chose the Jews as His chosen ppl. It relates stories of the Jews being good and being bad. Their journey w ups and downs. It prophesies about a Messiah that will deliver them out of Roman occupation. It tells history but the timeline might not be accurate. It’s our map on how to get to heaven. It’s living water. Words flow and touch our hearts at times of our greatest needs.
    The New Testament are the prophesies Of OT connected to Jesus. Blood line from David. Stories written about Jesus’s life, suffering and death. His promise of eternal life, if we follow him.
    You will have to keep questioning and applying what you learn. Enjoy your relationship w God, His Son, Jesus, our Brother, and our sweet Holy spirit.
    In Christ’s love
    Tweedlealice
 
If put in philosophical definitions of the material universe. The substance of the universe isn’t accessible to science. Science can only study the accidents.

John Paul ll said this about evolution…I think he was talking about the substance not the accidents. He said…I paraphrase… " for a lower state of life to become higher, a higher state of life must lift it up.
 
As far as I understand, We don’t evolve from monkeys but monkeys and us evolved from a common ancestor in a extremely slow and gradual process. According some theories, conscience evolved too gradually as our brains became biger and more complex, during tousands of generations of natural selection. So conscience, love, sense of righteouness and justice, etc… may be all just natural consecuences of our biger and more complex brains. Does this contradicts the dogmas of the Church somehow?
Put it different: Can I be a catholic if due the latest discoveries in science I have serious doubts regarding the reliability of the books of the Bible in general, included the ones of the NT, and therefore doubting the divine nature of Jesus Christ?
I know, as someone writes before, that science and religion are compatible, but why it looks like is only me that find these discoveries so shaking to the fundations of christianity? I’ve heard that before Darwin almost everybody used to took the Bible almost litterally, even catholics.
And someone says that science cannot explane the first atom or the chemical evolution, but that sounds like God of the gaps. Is what deism used to believe, a God that create matter and then don’t interfiere, making all revealed religions doubtful. So, again, why should I then believe in the christian God?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top