Religion and Science!

  • Thread starter Thread starter tonyrey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
granny

If I were posting to St.Anastasia, which I am not, I would begin with 4 questions:

“Do you believe in original sin?”

“Is it impossible that there were two human beings who committed the first sin?”

“Who committed the original sin?”

“What was the original sin?”

If the person you are interrogating cannot answer these questions simply and directly, why not just give up? Let that person stay up nights figuring out if she is really a Catholic.
 
“Indeed, a 2004 report of the International Theological Commission, the body of theologians that officially gives theological advice to the pope, highlighted ways in which continuing research and growing consensus within the scientific community on the question of polygenism encourages Catholic theologians to consider ways of accommodating** polygenism **into their theological reflections.[54] The commission observes, for example, the following:
“In its original unity – of which Adam is the symbol – the human race is made in the image of the divine Trinity.”
“While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage.”
“Catholic theology affirms that that the emergence of the first members of the human species (whether as individuals or in populations) represents an event that is not susceptible of a purely natural explanation and which can appropriately be attributed to divine intervention. Acting indirectly through causal chains operating from the beginning of cosmic history, God prepared the way for what Pope John Paul II has called ‘an ontological leap…the moment of transition to the spiritual.’”
The references to Adam as symbol, to “a humanoid population of common genetic lineage,” and to Blessed John Paul II’s identification of “an ontological leap,” all demonstrate ways that official Catholic teaching is moving in the direction of appropriating not simply certain kinds of evolution theory, but also such once-dubious hypotheses, now theories such as polygenism.” ! - wikipedia
 
Charlemagne_II said:
granny

If I were posting to St.Anastasia, which I am not, I would begin with 4 questions:

“Do you believe in original sin?”

“Is it impossible that there were two human beings who committed the first sin?”

“Who committed the original sin?”

“What was the original sin?”

If the person you are interrogating cannot answer these questions simply and directly, why not just give up? Let that person stay up nights figuring out if she is really a Catholic.
Click to expand...
Interrogating anyone about their personal beliefs has nothing to do with the fact that Catholic doctrines exist independently from anyone’s belief or non-belief.

I am interested in the doctrine itself, i.e., if it is being presented correctly. If the doctrines concerning Adam and Eve are not presented correctly, I will do my best to explain the doctrine.

When it comes to presenting Catholic doctrines regarding human origin, human nature, the spiritual soul, original sin, and the power of God as Creator, I do not give up. Nor am I intimidated by the four-letter word slander.
 
tonyrey said:
“Indeed, a 2004 report of the International Theological Commission, the body of theologians that officially gives theological advice to the pope, highlighted ways in which continuing research and growing consensus within the scientific community on the question of polygenism encourages Catholic theologians to consider ways of accommodating** polygenism **into their theological reflections.[54] The commission observes, for example, the following:
“In its original unity – of which Adam is the symbol – the human race is made in the image of the divine Trinity.”
“While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage.”
“Catholic theology affirms that that the emergence of the first members of the human species (whether as individuals or in populations) represents an event that is not susceptible of a purely natural explanation and which can appropriately be attributed to divine intervention. Acting indirectly through causal chains operating from the beginning of cosmic history, God prepared the way for what Pope John Paul II has called ‘an ontological leap…the moment of transition to the spiritual.’”
The references to Adam as symbol, to “a humanoid population of common genetic lineage,” and to Blessed John Paul II’s identification of “an ontological leap,” all demonstrate ways that official Catholic teaching is moving in the direction of appropriating not simply certain kinds of evolution theory, but also such once-dubious hypotheses, now theories such as polygenism.” ! - wikipedia
Click to expand...
No matter who gives what advice according to Wikipedia…

Monogenism is the Catholic doctrine. Period.

If you will kindly check the* Catechism of the Catholic Church*, you will find that monogenism remains the Catholic doctrine.
You could also check St. Paul’s letter to the Romans, chapter 5;
St. Thomas Aquinas, De Malo 4,1;
Council of Orange II;
and the Council of Trent.
 
Charlemagne_II said:
granny

If I were posting to St.Anastasia, which I am not, I would begin with 4 questions:

“Do you believe in original sin?”

“Is it impossible that there were two human beings who committed the first sin?”

“Who committed the original sin?”

“What was the original sin?”

If the person you are interrogating cannot answer these questions simply and directly, why not just give up? Let that person stay up nights figuring out if she is really a Catholic.
Click to expand...
StA will duck the question by saying she will not be subject to the inquisition. 😦
 
StAnastasia said:
Typical nasty comment by buffalo.
Click to expand...
It seems your strategy has changed lately StA. Since you are out of arguments you have resorted to attacking grannymh and generally dismissing any point as - false, nasty, etc…

Several posters have asked point blank yes or no type questions which you mostly refuse to answer. Pretty much all the posters know why. I ask you in all sincerity to discern your positions, since you are a teacher and can ruin many souls. In addition, if your posts are not addressed many lurkers will be hurt. That is one of the reasons I spend the time on your posts, otherwise I would just put you on ignore.
 
buffalo said:
It seems your strategy has changed lately StA. Since you are out of arguments you have resorted to attacking grannymh and generally dismissing any point as - false, nasty, etc…
Click to expand...
Buffalo, I am not out of argument. I just don’t do well with the nastiness you typically demonstrate. You seem incapable of rational argument when you step out of your creationist box, so you resort to ad hominem attacks against me. With your approach you would not last ten seconds in a theology seminar at my institution, either graduate or undergraduate. We do not allow nastiness in our seminar discussions, even if you get away with it on CAF.
 
StAnastasia said:
Buffalo, I am not out of argument. I just don’t do well with the nastiness you typically demonstrate. You seem incapable of rational argument when you step out of your creationist box, so you resort to ad hominem attacks against me. With your approach you would not last ten seconds in a theology seminar at my institution, either graduate or undergraduate. We do not allow nastiness in our seminar discussions, even if you get away with it on CAF.
Click to expand...
Rational argument? :rotfl:C’mon StA - my arguments are rational and always supported by references. I am not attacking, I pose questions you don’t really want to answer.

Simply replying - false (when asked for reasoning you do not give any) would not last anywhere including theology seminars. If I gave a presentation at one of these would the audience be polite and listen with open mind or would they mock? Would they dismiss out of hand the argument because of a priori belief? Howabout you?
 
**Buffalo, I am not out of argument. I just don’t do well with the nastiness you typically demonstrate. You seem incapable of rational argument when you step out of your creationist box, so you resort to ad hominem attacks against me. With your approach you would not last ten seconds in a theology seminar at my institution, either graduate or undergraduate. We do not allow nastiness in our seminar discussions, even if you get away with it on CAF. **

I’d call this a trifle nasty. 😃
 
When approaching the thread’s topic “Religion and Science!” –

We need to recognize the many benefits of science, which in itself, is God’s gift.

By all means, the realm of science is that of the material and physical world. But that does not automatically eliminate the immaterial or spiritual realm from inquiry as if it were non-existent.
Ah, one says. The immaterial cannot be put under a natural science microscope. True. But that does not exclude the reality of spiritual existence which can be known by the tools of reason, self-reflection, logical evaluation, and analytical thought.

We must remember that the choice of a material explanation for the human species does not mean that non-material possibilities must be excluded from analysis especially since there are reasonable grounds for the spiritual aspects of human nature. A prime example is man’s natural, inherent rational ability which enables a person to choose freely and to implement his informed choice by engaging his physical being.

Thus, the human person is the perfect composite of the spiritual soul and material anatomy.

As a consequence of returning the human species to its proper place at the pinnacle of creation, the spiritual soul per se becomes the sufficient reason to re-examine the source of humanity which the biological sciences have proclaimed as polygenism (not all humans have descended from the same couple). When one starts with the false assumption of polygenism, one immediately discovers that it is based on only part of the real nature of human beings.

Theological monogensim, as defined by the Catholic Church, is the only logical explanation not only for the uniqueness of humanity, but also it is the only logical explanation for the birth of Jesus. (Jesus is the reason for the season!)

In my humble opinion, when we address the thread’s topic of “Religion and Science!” we need to consider Catholicism apart from religion in general. While other Christian religions do share our beliefs in some form or another, when it comes to the two, real, sole human parents of all humanity combined with original sin, human nature, the unlimited power of God over His creation, and the Salvific accomplishment of Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, we may eventually end up standing alone – I hope not.

Divine Revelation trumps!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top