Religion and Science!

[inocente]

Right back at you.:flowers: You young, sweet, intellectual Bible quoter.

And apologies for the really late reply.

First of all, I have not read all 50 chapters of Genesis so I have no clue why Genesis has assumed such importance to others or how it assumed such importance to others.

Is that common for Catholics - like film critics who write a review after only watching the first three minutes of a movie?

*Second, I learned Catholic doctrine before I opened a Bible so I do not do well in Scripture duels. However, when a particular Scripture verse (CAF mine quoting) interests me, I may go back to the Bible, read the entire context, footnotes, and occasionally the cross references. I should do this more often because often when I do, I find the basis or foundation for Catholic doctrines I learned in grade school. Talk about an eureka moment!

My point is that I need to know the Catholic doctrine in question before I can attempt to answer your questions and your reference to evidence.

Finally, being a nitty-gritty personality, I have, on my own, started exploring why Catholics are losing interest in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. When symbolism creeps into the basic Catholic understanding (transubstantiation) of the Real Presence of Jesus Christ, participating in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass loses significance. (Note: please do not confuse add-on “symbolic” interpretation with Catholic definitions of reality.)*

I’d have thought there are lots of intentional symbols in the Eucharist, one of which is to signify the unity of the body (hint to posters ).

From my Catholic doctrine position, what you are implying about something in Genesis pushing young people away from “church” may also relate to a water-down version of the Catholic Eucharist.

It wasn’t me but US polls which show young people in all denominations are fed up. I don’t remember the Eucharist being mentioned, but also don’t know the quality of the research. Here it is again if interested: barna.org/topics/teens-nextgen

For example – What I am seeing is that there are Catholics who openly declare that they do not believe in the doctrines of Adam and Eve, which include the origin of human nature, human’s relationship to our Creator, spiritual soul, Original Sin, and the essential relationship of the first human being with Jesus Christ.

Speaking as a young, sweet, intellectual , if the Church requires me to read Genesis as a history then that alone would mean I can never be a Catholic, so I think it can work both ways.

We don’t need to be intellectuals to recognize chapters 2 and 3 as wild fantasy. A fully grown talking male instantly made from dust, a fully grown talking female instantly made from field surgery on the male (without his permission), a talking snake (not Satan, who doesn’t appear until a later work), a tree of life, a tree of knowledge, and a god figure pottering around in the cool of the day. All the characters are cartoon-like – the male and female never wonder how they suddenly popped into existence, the god is capricious, placing temptation smack bang in the middle of the garden while the couple are still learning to brush their teeth, and then cursing all humans for eternity for the heinous crime of eating a bit of fruit (incidentally, should we really be using modern childbirth and food production techniques to bypass our everlasting punishment? )

The story weaves a narrative on the human condition, of being helpless against forces we can’t control. Everything in it is highly symbolic, and personally I can’t for the life of me see why any of the dogmas you mentioned rely on it having to be read as authentic history or rely on (dis)agreement with scientific knowledge, or even why symbolism is bad. But then I’m not a Catholic of course, so mainly it sails straight over my head.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

inocente
**
The story weaves a narrative on the human condition, of being helpless against forces we can’t control.**

Only if you don’t believe in free will!

God invited Adam and Eve to choose to obey or disobey. He also urged Cain to do the right thing by Abel, which Cain chooses not to do.

Christianity is also a choice we have to make. Whether to believe it or not.

Atheists and materialists are decidedly more inclined to believe everything is ordained to happen (determinism), and that we are really in a condition “of being helpless against forces we can’t control,” except for those moments when we can “choose” to reject the grace Christ offers us to be truly free.

inocente, you seem to be wrapped up in the symbolism of Genesis, so that you cannot see the truths for which those symbols stand.

For example, you call yourself a Baptist. Is that word only a symbol or does it stand for a reality expressed in Genesis, that we are fallen, have been soiled by our sins, and need to be washed of original sin? If Baptism is a symbol only, and does not stand for some primeval sin committed at the dawn of human kind that has infected all humanity ever since, why bother to call yourself a Baptist?

Why not just chuck religion altogether and wallow in the despair of atheistic determinism?

 

[tonyrey]

We have seen the Anglican conversation with the modern world. Where did it get them?

Confusion and dissension reign supreme in the Protestant world with its thousands of conflicting interpretations of texts, sentences and even single words in the Bible, the contents of which were selected by the Church and accepted for well over a thousand years until certain “inspired” individuals took it into their heads to produce their own brand of religion - including one king who specialised in having his wives decapitated…

 

[grannymh]

And apologies for the really late reply.

Better late than never, except for dinner.

Glad to see you. Thought you might be part of the on-line, off-line group who were either going to immediately tar and feather me or who had to first get over the shock at a few things I posted.

From granny’s post 17 – First of all, I have not read all 50 chapters of Genesis so I have no clue why Genesis
has assumed such importance to others or how it assumed such importance to others.

Inocente’s post 119

Is that common for Catholics - like film critics who write a review after only watching the first three minutes of a movie?

I do not know about Catholics as in plural Catholics. I was speaking from my personal life.

granny --Finally, being a nitty-gritty personality, I have, on my own, started exploring why Catholics are losing interest in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. When symbolism creeps into the basic Catholic understanding (transubstantiation) of the Real Presence of Jesus Christ, participating in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass loses significance. (Note: please do not confuse add-on “symbolic” interpretation with Catholic definitions of reality.)

emphasis mine for this current post

Inocente --I’d have thought there are lots of intentional symbols in the Eucharist, one of which is to signify the unity of the body (hint to posters ).

What is important is my cautionary note – please do not confuse add-on “symbolic” interpretation with Catholic definitions of reality**. **Threads about the Eucharist come and go. I no longer participate in them on a regular basis. Nonetheless --“to signify the unity of the body” can be either an “add-on” symbolic reference or a direct reference to the reality of the Eucharist. And that is as far as I will go in this thread. I will leave that kind of discussion to those, on other threads, who are far more qualified than I am.

granny – From my Catholic doctrine position, what you are implying about something in Genesis pushing young people away from “church” may also relate to a water-down version of the Catholic Eucharist.

Inocente –
It wasn’t me but US polls which show young people in all denominations are fed up. I don’t remember the Eucharist being mentioned, but also don’t know the quality of the research. Here it is again if interested: barna.org/topics/teens-nextgen

As an individual, I can speak from my own position and use the words “may also relate”

Inocente --Speaking as a young, sweet, intellectual , if the Church requires me to read Genesis as a history then that alone would mean I can never be a Catholic, so I think it can work both ways.

Pardon me. After briefly checking the nitty-gritty methods and materials mentioned in that survey linked above, my comment is that the Catholic church does not require members to read Genesis (50 chapters) as a history. Personally, since the Catholic Church did not require me to read all 50 chapters as a history, you would not be required to read all of Genesis as a history.

Please recall that I learned Catholic doctrine before I opened a Bible. I am still required to accept the Divine Revelation found in the first three chapters of Genesis and also in other sections of Scripture. Like me, you would be required to accept Divine Revelation in Scripture which has been expressed in Catholic doctrines.

Because Catholicism recognizes the existence of the spiritual soul (contrary to certain scientific theories based on the physical anatomy which decomposes in due course), one also uses faith to accept doctrines which are difficult for science to accept because of the limitations inherent in science.

Wow, that sentence leaves me exhausted when I think about its many real meanings.

As for the rest of your post, in my humble opinion, it is based on your wide worldview. For me, CAF has been a great learning place. Being a nitty-gritty personality, I was able to trace one of the pieces contained in some common worldviews back to an early teaching of John Calvin, 1509-64. I have traced other pieces to more contemporary groupings of writers.

In closing, to be honest, I never knew I had a worldview until a CAF atheist respectfully pointed it out to me. Thus, if I have misused the term worldview above, please accept my apology in advance.

 

[inocente]

Only if you don’t believe in free will!

God invited Adam and Eve to choose to obey or disobey. He also urged Cain to do the right thing by Abel, which Cain chooses not to do.

Adam and Eve are doomed to fail. There’s no suggestion in the text that any of us could do any better, surely the whole point is that they stand for everyman, that they are us, that none of us is any better?

Christianity is also a choice we have to make. Whether to believe it or not.

That’s a strange way to say it - whether to believe Christianity or not. Never once heard anyone proclaim they believe Christianity. Assume you mean whether to follow Christ.

Atheists and materialists are decidedly more inclined to believe everything is ordained to happen (determinism), and that we are really in a condition “of being helpless against forces we can’t control,” except for those moments when we can “choose” to reject the grace Christ offers us to be truly free.

Perhaps there are those who believe everything is preordained by the Fates or whatever, but I assume this is an overture to being told only you know how to read the bible …

*inocente, you seem to be wrapped up in the symbolism of Genesis, so that you cannot see the truths for which those symbols stand. *

… how did I guess . Ignoring the fact that you’ve extended what I said on chapters two and three to the entire fifty (are you like granny, only reading the first three?), you appear to be saying that there definitely is symbolism but recognizing that there is will blind us to its meaning, which seems a bit cockeyed. Either Gen 2 and 3 is historical fact or it isn’t. It so isn’t.

For example, you call yourself a Baptist. Is that word only a symbol or does it stand for a reality expressed in Genesis, that we are fallen, have been soiled by our sins, and need to be washed of original sin? If Baptism is a symbol only, and does not stand for some primeval sin committed at the dawn of human kind that has infected all humanity ever since, why bother to call yourself a Baptist?

Coercion? Lay Catholics may try to tell each other what is and isn’t heresy but even a Baptist can’t tell another how to relate to God or read to bible.

Why not just chuck religion altogether and wallow in the despair of atheistic determinism?

Why not just chuck trying to have an adult conversation and wallow in a tantrum?

 

[grannymh]

Confusion and dissension reign supreme in the Protestant world with its thousands of conflicting interpretations of texts, sentences and even single words in the Bible, the contents of which were selected by the Church and accepted for well over a thousand years until certain “inspired” individuals took it into their heads to produce their own brand of religion - including one king who specialised in having his wives decapitated…

This is an unfair exaggeration.

 

[grannymh]

Why not just chuck religion altogether and wallow in the despair of atheistic determinism?

Why not just chuck trying to have an adult conversation and wallow in a tantrum?

The only poster who is allowed to be cranky (feminine of snarky) is granny because she is older than dirt.

As for having an adult conversation, both sides need to have a Pepsi break or a dark chocolate break.

You all will have to wait until I finish my Pepsi and dark chocolate because of its health factor.

 

[inocente]

Confusion and dissension reign supreme in the Protestant world with its thousands of conflicting interpretations of texts, sentences and even single words in the Bible, the contents of which were selected by the Church and accepted for well over a thousand years until certain “inspired” individuals took it into their heads to produce their own brand of religion - including one king who specialised in having his wives decapitated…

And in contrast CAF demonstrates daily the firm agreement between Catholics?

Baiting isn’t very nice tony, and when you disrespect other religions you disrespect your own.

Anything to say that’s on-topic?

 

[StAnastasia]

Apologies for late reply .

’
No problem, Inocente. I am in the middle of the American Academy of Religion conference, and have been in meetings, sessions, dinners and receptions with many old friends and colleagues.

I wasn’t criticizing Ratzinger (I like his writing), just using him as an example of how it’s hard to talk about the spiritual for long without using physical metaphors, since the spiritual is otherwise hard to put into words: We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. - Rom 8:26

I know you were not criticizing him, and you are right about the matter of using physical metaphors. There are some great sessions at the AAR. I have a wonderful colleague in a Roman Catholic seminary who integrates the study of nature into her sacramental theology classes, exploring with the seminarians the symbolic use of water, oil, fire, and other physical elements in the Catholic liturgy.

Back to the conference!

StAnastasia

 

[inocente]

The only poster who is allowed to be cranky (feminine of snarky) is granny because she is older than dirt.

As for having an adult conversation, both sides need to have a Pepsi break or a dark chocolate break.

You all will have to wait until I finish my Pepsi and dark chocolate because of its health factor.

We’ve finished pruning the almonds, and this year tractor-man has a new toy which leaves a trail of mashed offcuts everywhere the tractor went. It looks like a yellow-brick road weaving all over the hills. Well, orange-brick road at the moment as it rained. Couldn’t be cranky today if my life depended on it.

 

[inocente]

Glad to see you. Thought you might be part of the on-line, off-line group who were either going to immediately tar and feather me or who had to first get over the shock at a few things I posted.

Shirley not.

Pardon me. After briefly checking the nitty-gritty methods and materials mentioned in that survey linked above, my comment is that the Catholic church does not require members to read Genesis (50 chapters) as a history. Personally, since the Catholic Church did not require me to read all 50 chapters as a history, you would not be required to read all of Genesis as a history.

That can be read two ways - the Church doesn’t require you to read all fifty chapters, and/or doesn’t require you to read it as historical fact.

*As for the rest of your post, in my humble opinion, it is based on your wide worldview. For me, CAF has been a great learning place. Being a nitty-gritty personality, I was able to trace one of the pieces contained in some common worldviews back to an early teaching of John Calvin, 1509-64. I have traced other pieces to more contemporary groupings of writers.

In closing, to be honest, I never knew I had a worldview until a CAF atheist respectfully pointed it out to me. Thus, if I have misused the term worldview above, please accept my apology in advance.*

Something none of us can avoid, we’re all the product of our experiences, no man is an island, etc.

 

[rossum]

The only poster who is allowed to be cranky (feminine of snarky) is granny because she is older than dirt.

Well, that solves one Biblical mystery.

SCENE: The Garden of Eden. There are animals here, but no Adam yet.

ENTER GRANNYMH: “Just look at this place! Why God can’t keep it tidy I’ll never know. Looks like I’m going to have to clean it up.”

[GRANNYMH sweeps round the garden.]

GRANNYMH: [Contemplates the pile of sweepings and looks skywards] “So, what am I going to do with this dirt then?”

GOD: [Voice off] “Hmmm. That gives me an idea…”



rossum

 

[tonyrey]

Confusion and dissension reign supreme in the Protestant world with its thousands of conflicting interpretations of texts, sentences and even single words in the Bible, the contents of which were selected by the Church and accepted for well over a thousand years until certain “inspired” individuals took it into their heads to produce their own brand of religion - including one king who specialised in having his wives decapitated…

On fundamental issues, yes.

Baiting isn’t very nice tony, and when you disrespect other religions you disrespect your own.

It’s not baiting but a set of facts not one of which you have disputed.

You are probably unaware of a book by a former Anglican bishop “Honest to God” - in which Christianity is hardly recognisable: the Resurrection, of course, did not really occur…

At least my statements and questions are not factitious, e.g.:

“And in contrast CAF demonstrates daily the firm agreement between Catholics?”

Anything to say that’s on-topic?

Far more than you appear to have…

 

[michelleds]

There are some great sessions at the AAR. StAnastasia

really? which of the ones listed earlier are you attending? perhaps the queering of St. Paul or one of the Wiccan sessions?

Look, I hate to pick on you, StA, but since I bested you in another thread and you refused to concede victory and do as you said you would, well, it’s sort of personal. Plus you continue to throw our your “credentials” in what I can only assume is an attempt to create an atmosphere of expertise around yourself. This would certainly lead many lurkers and visitors to CAF astray. I, and others, just cannot sit idly by and allow that. You force us to continually point out the errors as well as the platform from which you preach.

 

[grannymh]

Well, that solves one Biblical mystery.
SCENE: The Garden of Eden. There are animals here, but no Adam yet.

ENTER GRANNYMH: “Just look at this place! Why God can’t keep it tidy I’ll never know. Looks like I’m going to have to clean it up.”

[GRANNYMH sweeps round the garden.]

GRANNYMH: [Contemplates the pile of sweepings and looks skywards] “So, what am I going to do with this dirt then?”

GOD: [Voice off] “Hmmm. That gives me an idea…”


rossum

GRANNYMH: Never mind. I am perfectly capable of taking care of it myself. And
don’t bother sending some man whose name begins the alphabet. Men can
never follow instructions.

[GRANNY MH turns on the sprinklers located in the sky blue ceiling and floods
away the dirt.]

[GRANNYMH turns off faucets. And continues the conversation.]

While you were busy tinkering with that creation of yours, I was studying science in
all the top universities, attending all the top scientific conferences, and reading all
the scientific top journals. My dissertations were sought by the top names in all
the world. I now have a B.S., M.A., ABC, and a Ph.D. plus the really, really, useful
degree. The very top degree, B*** S***

Considering my high ranking in the world, I feel we can talk as equals. There is
some tiny organization on earth with the decree of C.C. which has the nerve of
telling people how to stay in your friendship.

I thought you gave me that job.

[curtain closes]

 

[Charlemagne_II]

inocente
**
Coercion? Lay Catholics may try to tell each other what is and isn’t heresy but even a Baptist can’t tell another how to relate to God or read to bible.**How many Baptist denominations are there? - Answers

“Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word, that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou has sent me.” - John 17:20-21

“Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one flock, one shepherd.” (John 10:16).

“I therefore, the prisoner in the Lord, beseech you to walk worthily of the calling wherewith you were called, with all lowliness and meekness, with long suffering, forbearing one another in love; giving diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one Faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all” Saint Paul (Ephesians 4:2-6).

inocente,
Where is your one flock and your one shepherd?

 

[inocente]

On fundamental issues, yes.

I could point out some posts just a few pages back, but let’s not go there as it seemed tempers were raised.

It’s not baiting but a set of facts not one of which you have disputed.

What does it have to do with the title of this thread? And if by “king who specialised in having his wives decapitated…” (post #121) you’re talking about the English dude Henry VIII, it did occur to me to point out the religion in which he was born and raised , but then I remembered I don’t care.

You are probably unaware of a book by a former Anglican bishop “Honest to God” - in which Christianity is hardly recognisable: the Resurrection, of course, did not really occur…

I looked it up. Published in 1963 . I’m not Anglican but if I was and wanted to trade weird bishop stories, Catholic Holocaust denier Bishop Richard Williamson was in the news again only a few weeks back. - jta.org/news/article/2011/10/19/3089896/controversial-catholic-bishop-makes-new-anti-semitic-remarks

OK, so there are some weird people around, but what does it have to do with this thread?

 

[inocente]

inocente,
Where is your one flock and your one shepherd?

You may have a misunderstanding of the Baptist faith. A Baptist joins a church, meaning a group of people rather than an organization, and most groups tend towards what some call the four fragile freedoms:

• Freedom to access and interpret scripture for yourself.
• Freedom to approach God without any impositions, such as creeds, leaders, or religious or civil authorities.
• Freedom to form churches, which have freedom of worship and governance.
• Freedom of religion, freedom for religion, and freedom from religious authorities, which obviously includes separation of religion and state.

A church follows Jesus and is part of the one body of Christ. As far as I know every Baptist in the world has accepted Christ as her personal Savior at her water baptism, and so Christ is her shepherd.

 

[grannymh]

Speaking of Religion & Science.

How scientists work is relevant to people who are seeking truth about God and themselves. The work of the scientist is indeed important when it comes to ourselves and our anatomy. For example, the work of scientists extends into fields such as nutrition and the fight against diseases.

In addition, it is true that scientists do not use a creationist model. This is an important fact to remember when one has to make decisions about the Creator God’s power.

Reading CAF posts, one finds comments that a simple concept of human nature has to fit in with modern scientific speculations, estimates, and basic assumptions – all of which are limited to what can be detected in our natural environment. It is easy to see how some, not all, Catholics can get so caught up in the power of science, that they begin to overlook the reality of God’s power.

When seeking information about God’s relationship to us, how science works is relevant. Knowing that, we can understand why it is important to learn about God in a way which is different from science, a way that goes beyond the natural world and straight to the supernatural world of God.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/misc_khaki/progress.gif​

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/misc_khaki/progress.gif[/RIGHT]

 

[inocente]

Speaking of Religion & Science.

Goody, O On-topical One.

How scientists work is relevant to people who are seeking truth about God and themselves. The work of the scientist is indeed important when it comes to ourselves and our anatomy. For example, the work of scientists extends into fields such as nutrition and the fight against diseases.

And how our minds work, and social interaction, and anthropology, and … we can acknowledge the extent of the sciences.

In addition, it is true that scientists do not use a creationist model. This is an important fact to remember when one has to make decisions about the Creator God’s power.

It’s an important fact to remember that scientists don’t use unsound models, whatever they may be called.

Reading CAF posts, one finds comments that a simple concept of human nature has to fit in with modern scientific speculations, estimates, and basic assumptions – all of which are limited to what can be detected in our natural environment. It is easy to see how some, not all, Catholics can get so caught up in the power of science, that they begin to overlook the reality of God’s power.

I’d say that differently. All aspects of human nature can in principle be explained by rational inquiry, but the big issue is whether those explanations have any meaning in real life outside the specialist field. For instance science can probably tell us why we love and what’s happening in our heads when we feel love, but it can’t tell us who we should love or what it feels like to be in love. Or, science may be able to explain how we process moral issues, but it can’t tell us what is morally good and morally bad.

When seeking information about God’s relationship to us, how science works is relevant. Knowing that, we can understand why it is important to learn about God in a way which is different from science, a way that goes beyond the natural world and straight to the supernatural world of God.

Pedantic as ever, and in no way trying to put words in your mouth the phrase “which is different from science” implies a division, perhaps “which complements science”, or “which goes beyond science” instead?

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/misc_khaki/progress.gif

Finally we get to my real reason for writing this post I can see you got that neat image from a folder in forums.catholic-questions.org/images/ but can’t find a web page to get into it - is there one?