Religion and Science!

[SGWessells]

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

:clapping:

 

[SGWessells]

All out of breath (puff puff)…trying to (puff puff)…keep up…

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.

As I understand it, the Catholic Church teaches that Protestants are part of the one flock, or “separated brethren.” Maybe wandering on a different hill, but not “repudiating Christ” because of that. Ir’s a bit harsh.

 

[grannymh]

:clapping:

What about the follow-up to Rossum’s post 130? Which ends
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…”

From post 133.
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]

 

[inocente]

I agree that you never said that you personally called Catholicism frivolous nonsense.

Thanks, done and dusted.

When it comes to Catholicism, one needs to be careful that “words” are a fit with its doctrines more so than being modern and appealing to the contemporary reading audience. This is an important distinction.

My observation is that the issue is not so much about words but misdirected passion. There’s a lot of passion about science/religion, creationist/evolution, theist/atheist, on just about anything which has little to do with ordinary lives but where it happens to be easy to theorize or to draw a line between them and us, whoever them and us are supposed to be this week.

I guess we’re all guilty. John Cleese is really scathing about the sin of oversimplification in this youtube : “… it’s closely linked to this gene here, which gives you such a weak sense of self that you hang on to anything which makes you feel more secure emotionally, whether it’s fundamentalist religion or a reductionist view of the universe; which is right over this gene here, which makes you want to punch people in the head when they take the scientific process and subject it to their pathological literal-mindedness”

 

[inocente]

Do I detect the influence of Spanish in that question or is it my imagination?

Hey, that would be cool as it’s not my first language.

If science purports to conclude that the universe is self-explanatory there is only one meaning you can take from it - that God is redundant.

I think we evolved to have a spiritual aspect, and it’s far too powerful to be trained out of us, it’s part of what makes us human. So in that sense, however we express our spirituality, only false gods can ever be redundant, but we knew that all along.

 

[inocente]

*How Protestantism Divides Itself:

Two tiny Protestant communities in a small town in Canada were getting on quite fine. They were of different sects, but they communicated well together and shared certain charitable chores in the town.

Eventually they decided to look into things, see if they could unite and form one church. They went back to the Bible, to see what that said. They studied the fathers, to see what they had to say. They prayed and held services in the hopes of achieving unity. Eventually they acted on their conclusions.

There are now three Protestant communities in that small Canadian town!*

I love happy endings but the narrative was a bit tame compared to Grimms’ Fairy Tales.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

SGW
**
As I understand it, the Catholic Church teaches that Protestants are part of the one flock, or “separated brethren.” Maybe wandering on a different hill, but not “repudiating Christ” because of that. Ir’s a bit harsh. **

The repudiating Christ remark was in reference to a specific teaching of Christ, with which Protestants (including inocente) collectively disagree.

“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).

If they are on another hill, they are another flock.

 

[rossum]

SGW
**
As I understand it, the Catholic Church teaches that Protestants are part of the one flock, or “separated brethren.” Maybe wandering on a different hill, but not “repudiating Christ” because of that. Ir’s a bit harsh. **

The repudiating Christ remark was in reference to a specific teaching of Christ, with which Protestants (including inocente) collectively disagree.

“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).

If they are on another hill, they are another flock.

Lost sheep? You need these guys.

rossum

 

[tonyrey]

I love happy endings but the narrative was a bit tame compared to Grimms’ Fairy Tales.

The truth is often far more exciting than fairy tales and it leads to genuinely happy endings - for those who deserve them!

 

[tonyrey]

Hey, that would be cool as it’s not my first language.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

**Then the physical universe tells us nothing about God? **

At the very least, the history of the universe tells us that at one moment it began to exist. Why and how that moment began is a baffling mystery that science will never be able to fathom. This does not prove, but it strongly suggests, that if God exists, He has tremendous power by our own standard of what constitutes power. And if He created the universe for us to enjoy, He is a generous God to boot, with infinite insight as to how to make that enjoyment possible. And if He created the universe as an instrument for producing a creature that could work its way into His loving arms, He is truly adorable.

 

[inocente]

The truth is often far more exciting than fairy tales and it leads to genuinely happy endings - for those who deserve them!

Yes, and as I said that particular tale was tame, very unlike the truth according to you, so I’m glad we agree.

Then the physical universe tells us nothing about God?

I guess the philosophical issue is that ”spiritual powers like insight, freewill, conscience and capacity for love” haven’t tended to lead to conclusions that are common across all peoples and religions.

 

[inocente]

The repudiating Christ remark was in reference to a specific teaching of Christ, with which Protestants (including inocente) collectively disagree.

“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).

If they are on another hill, they are another flock.

The texts are clear, not sure how anyone could get them wrong. John 10 – Jesus is talking to Jews and referring to gentiles. John 17 – Jesus is praying for His disciples and future followers.

O, hang on, I can see how this might happen: if you just read a few lines out of context + ignore what’s written and substitute what you want to hear.

 

[inocente]

At the very least, the history of the universe tells us that at one moment it began to exist. Why and how that moment began is a baffling mystery that science will never be able to fathom.

That’s not necessarily true. Big bang says there was a point when the physical clock was set to zero. The standard model is that the universe was an infinitely small singularity at that time, but infinities are anathema in math. There are many ideas about how to remove this abomination from the theory, but all of them appear to mean there must have been some physical preexistence which is probably forever obscured by big bang resetting the clock.

 

[grannymh]

The physical universe is intelligible.

 

[inocente]

The physical universe is intelligible.

But surely you would need to show that a godless universe is necessarily unintelligible, and that a universe with many gods is also necessarily unintelligible, and so on, i.e. that only a universe created by the Christian God can be intelligible.

 

[grannymh]

But surely you would need to show that a godless universe is necessarily unintelligible, and that a universe with many gods is also necessarily unintelligible, and so on, i.e. that only a universe created by the Christian God can be intelligible.

Why?

All I said was “The physical universe is intelligible.” (post 212)

I learned this bit of information from an atheist physicist so I really doubt he was thinking about many gods or any god.

 

[inocente]

All I said was “The physical universe is intelligible.” (post 212)

As you didn’t quote anyone I thought you were following on from me on CII’s thoughts about what the physical universe might tell us about God.

 

[buffalo]

But surely you would need to show that a godless universe is necessarily unintelligible, and that a universe with many gods is also necessarily unintelligible, and so on, i.e. that only a universe created by the Christian God can be intelligible.

Design and purpose are very important here. Randomness is hard to empirically study because of its unpredictability.

 

[inocente]

Design and purpose are very important here. Randomness is hard to empirically study because of its unpredictability.

Yes, the universe contains orderly processes or we couldn’t exist, and yes it’s pretty awesome and all, and I guess Christians would at least agree that the physical law is designed by our God. We might want to prove this, we might feel that it’s the kind of thing we should be able to prove, but we can’t. And the atheist can’t prove an absence, and so on. But for me purpose would be about our lives right now and in the future, while how we got to be here is not overly important.