Religion and Science!

[grannymh]

Goody, O on-topical one.

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?

That funny image appears occasionally when I transfer normal stuff, with no images, to Word. I have no idea where it comes from. My guess is that when I copy material from one of my CAF posts, which is what I did this time, that image came along. Usually, I delete various lines and unnecessary stuff when I copy and paste. Since I only had one eye open this AM, I probably missed it. I copy and paste to Word a lot because I haven’t figured out how to use spell check on CAF.

This on-topical one needs to be on top of a hill of bills. Talk to you later.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

inocente

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

They use unsound models a lot of the time.

That is because scientists are not infallible and from time to time have to revise their models when they see they have failed to produce the truthful results they thought they had produced.

For example, Einstein fudged the math in his his theory of relativity because he thought the universe was infinite and eternal. LeMaitre corrected Einstein’s math and thus got credit for being the father of the Big Bang theory, which indicates a finite and created universe.

 

[StAnastasia]

At least you have an Academy of Religion in the US. It would probably be viewed with great suspicion in the UK and regarded as a pernicious threat by such influential academics as Richard Dawkins whose antireligious propaganda has helped to foster a hostile environment in which the Catholic Adoption Society has been forced to close under the false pretext that it is intolerant at a time when the Social Services are so hopelessly inefficient that there are many children who have been waiting for years for a home where they can be cared for with love and personal attention…

Tonyrey, I didn’t realise you had no such academy. The AAR is hugely international, and last night I met a large number of your countrymen and countrywoman at the Oxford University alumni reception. Many of them were giving papers as well; I don’t know the membership breakdown of the AAR, but there were papers by people from all over the world. Richard Dawkins would of course never deign to put in an appearance at the AAR! I like Richard’s lucid explanations of evolutionary biology, but I wish he would stop pretending to do theology, and realize his own covert metaphysical assumptions.

Incidentally, there was a brilliant lecture last night by Martin Rees, your astronomer Royal, past president of the Royal Society, Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, and Templeton Laureate. He spoke on the future of humanity in an increasingly crowded world.

StAnastasia

 

[grannymh]

To StAnastasia,

“It appears there are several styles of Catholicism out there, and I prefer the style that is in conversation with the modern world. I guess that makes me a card-carrying modernist!”
(StAnastasia)

This comment of yours from another thread continues to intrigue me. Would it be possible to address the substance of the comment above? In relation to the intersection of religion and science?

I am still thinking about the topic, religion and science, especially where they intersect. This intersection does contribute to several styles of Catholicism in the modern world. This does not imply that all styles are valid. What it does imply is that there is some kind of movement to update certain doctrines of the Catholic Church.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

inocente

**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. **

It is useless to pretend that Christ is your shepherd if you don’t follow him as one flock following one shepherd…

He requires one flock and one shepherd. You and all other Protestants with your thousands of denominations repudiate this teaching … and thereby you repudiate Christ.

“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).

 

[tonyrey]

Tonyrey, I didn’t realise you had no such academy. The AAR is hugely international, and last night I met a large number of your countrymen and countrywoman at the Oxford University alumni reception. Many of them were giving papers as well; I don’t know the membership breakdown of the AAR, but there were papers by people from all over the world. Richard Dawkins would of course never deign to put in an appearance at the AAR! I like Richard’s lucid explanations of evolutionary biology, but I wish he would stop pretending to do theology, and realize his own covert metaphysical assumptions.

Incidentally, there was a brilliant lecture last night by Martin Rees, your astronomer Royal, past president of the Royal Society, Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, and Templeton Laureate. He spoke on the future of humanity in an increasingly crowded world.

StAnastasia

To verify my claim I googled Academy of Religion UK and it came up with American Academy of Religion!

 

[tonyrey]

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

I can ask the same question about many of your recent posts…

At least mine is related to your claim about the Catholic Church

 

[grannymh]

It is useless to pretend that Christ is your shepherd if you don’t follow him as one flock following one shepherd…

He requires one flock and one shepherd. You and all other Protestants with your thousands of denominations repudiate this teaching … and thereby you repudiate Christ.

My apology, but I find this an awful accusation of thousands of people who are sincerely seeking God. This has to be a mistake. Surely, you did not intend this in the present tense.

“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).

May I respectfully point out that the verse you quoted is future tense. It is the end goal. A lot happens before that goal can be reached. It would be beneficial to read all of John, Chapter 10. Also, please read Ezekiel 34: 11-16. Part of this was the first Scripture reading in yesterday’s Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. “…the strayed I will bring back…”

 

[Charlemagne_II]

granny

**My apology, but I find this an awful accusation of thousands of people who are sincerely seeking God. This has to be a mistake. Surely, you did not intend this in the present tense.**I don’t doubt for a moment there are thousands of Protestants sincerely searching for God.

I also don’t doubt that there are thousands of Protestants sincerely willing to disagree with Christ when he taught the doctrine of “ne shepherd and one flock.”

Don’t you find that sincere disagreement with Jesus to be a little puzzling when so many Protestants hold forth that they are Bible Christians and Catholics are not?

 

[inocente]

For example, Einstein fudged the math in his his theory of relativity because he thought the universe was infinite and eternal. LeMaitre corrected Einstein’s math and thus got credit for being the father of the Big Bang theory, which indicates a finite and created universe.

What I meant by unsound models is, for instance, the idea that big bang endorses Genesis chapter one is pure folklore, they’re as different as chalk and cheese. The only common point is a non-eternal universe, but even that isn’t certain - Lemaître himself, who originated big bang theory, pointed out that the bang might represent a resetting of the physical clock in a preexisting cosmos.

I don’t believe Lemaître corrected Einstein’s math, he applied general relativity to cosmology to produce what’s known as Hubble’s Law (Hubble only confirmed it, it should be called Lemaître’s Law). Surely Einstein would have been laughed out of town long before if his math needed correcting. He later regretted including a constant, but observation of accelerating expansion in the 1990’s indicates he may have been right after all.

 

[inocente]

Incidentally, there was a brilliant lecture last night by Martin Rees, your astronomer Royal, past president of the Royal Society, Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, and Templeton Laureate. He spoke on the future of humanity in an increasingly crowded world.

With a name like AAR, I think you should all have to wear a parrot on your shoulder and talk pirate: “AAR, me shipmates”.

 

[inocente]

He requires one flock and one shepherd. You and all other Protestants with your thousands of denominations repudiate this teaching … and thereby you repudiate Christ.

That’s just darn tooting silly, Jesus is our shepherd, you even quoted the passage yourself:

*I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.

I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me— just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. – John 10:11-16*

You can’t just skip whole chunks of scripture to make it say what you want to hear , Jesus is our shepherd and you have no say, the hired hand is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep, that’s the start and end of it, alpha and omega, done and dusted.

If you actually read my post #136, which I’m beginning to doubt , you’ll see that according to Baptist principles we all have freedom of religion. If you want to play sectarian games, I suggest first reading about Northern Ireland during the Troubles, which may put you off the idea.

Enough!!! - I Stand Amazed - April Sturgell/Stevens Creek Church - youtube.com/watch?v=HjCoX4tRoT8

 

[inocente]

I can ask the same question about many of your recent posts…

At least mine is related to your claim about the Catholic Church

I remember saying something about lay Catholics on CAF but not about the Church, unless you mean my questioning whether the Church requires us to read Gen 2 and 3 as an authentic history rather than pure allegory, which btw I don’t believe it does.

 

[tonyrey]

I remember saying something about lay Catholics on CAF but not about the Church, unless you mean my questioning whether the Church requires us to read Gen 2 and 3 as an authentic history rather than pure allegory, which btw I don’t believe it does.

Please cite my words because I’m not sure wht you mean.

 

[inocente]

Please cite my words because I’m not sure wht you mean.

In post #145 you said I made a claim, and I replied in post #151 to say I’m not sure what claim you mean, so if you’re not sure what you said when you said I made a claim then my replying that I’m not sure what claim you mean when you say you’re not sure what you said when you said I made a claim, then …

 

[tonyrey]

In post #145 you said I made a claim, and I replied in post #151 to say I’m not sure what claim you mean, so if you’re not sure what you said when you said I made a claim then my replying that I’m not sure what claim you mean when you say you’re not sure what you said when you said I made a claim, then …

You posted your claim in the form of a rhetorical question:

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

 

[inocente]

You posted your claim in the form of a rhetorical question:

In post #145 you said I made a claim about the Church, and that wasn’t about the Church, and in any event I already responded in post #135.

 

[StAnastasia]

With a name like AAR, I think you should all have to wear a parrot on your shoulder and talk pirate: “AAR, me shipmates”.

Inocente, that would be true if it were the AARGH. As at any conference, there was some parroting and piracy.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

inocente

**according to Baptist principles we all have freedom of religion. **

We are not discussing freedom of religion.

We are discussing your freedom to repudiate Christ by believing that he founded many different denominations when he founded only one.

“Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church **[not churches] **and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.” Words of Jesus Christ, not to be confused with

1517- Lutherans: Martin Luther, 75 million.
1534- Church of England: Henry VIII, 70 million
1536- Calvinism: John Calvin
1560- Presbyterians: John Knox (Calvin ) 35 million
1570- Puritans: Thomas Cartwright.
1582- Congregationalism: Robert Brown.
1605- Baptists: John Smith (Zwingli) 45 million
1620- Episcopalians: Samuel Seabury, 3 million
1654- Quakers: George Fox, 0.2 million.
1741- Shakers: Ann Lee, 0.03 million.
1744- Methodists: John and Charles Wesley, 29 million.
1774- Unitarians: Theophilus Lindsay.
1800- Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) Thomas and Alexander Campbell, 2 million
1830- Mormons: Joseph Smith, 7 million.
1846- Adventists: William Miller, 5 million.
1852- Jehovah’s Witnesses: Charles T. Russel, 3 million.
1865- Salvation Army: William and Catherine Booth, 1 million.
1879- Christian Science: Mary Baker Eddy, 1 million.
1900- Pentecostals: Charles F. Parham, 58 million.
1933- Worldwide Church of God: Herbert Armstrong, .05 million
1954- Moonies: Sun M. Moon, 2 million.
1957- United Church of Christ Three Denominations Merged, 2 million.
1969- Children of God: David “Mo” Berg, .008 million.

ON THE OTHER HAND:

Pentecost- Catholic Church: Jesus Christ – more than one billion souls

“one flock, one shepherd”

 

[tonyrey]

In post #145 you said I made a claim about the Church, and that wasn’t about the Church, and in any event I already responded in post #135.

I fail to see how you responded to the specific point I was making.