Science knowldege religion bible

[Big_Dummy]

I remember reading years ago that Science came about because of Religious people who studied God’s world. I may not be wording this very well. How do we show from History, Bible, religious philosphy or whatever that knowledge of natural revelation is worth knowing and is profitable?

 

[Abu]

Big Dummy
I remember reading years ago that Science came about because of Religious people who studied God’s world. I may not be wording this very well. How do we show from History, Bible, religious philosphy or whatever that knowledge of natural revelation is worth knowing and is profitable?

Try this: The Power of the Third Commandment
Now the social sciences have discovered that the more frequently Americans worship, practice religion, the better they do on every observable outcome measured to date – this includes adultery, homosexual conduct, cohabitation and many more areas benefiting the individual and society:
catholiceducation.org/articles/printarticle.html?id=6543

The natural moral law in our nature from God the Creator, and the Catholic Church built by Jesus of Nazareth, who proved He is God by His Resurrection, show us the Way the Truth and the Life. His Church gave us the Bible and shows the Way to eternal life.

Science consists of an organized effort to explain natural phenomena. Why did this effort take root in Europe and nowhere else? Because Christianity depicted God as a rational, responsive, dependable, and omnipotent being, and the universe as his personal creation. The natural world was thus understood to have a rational, lawful, stable structure, awaiting (indeed, inviting) human comprehension.

Christians developed science because they believed it could—and should—be done. Alfred North Whitehead, the great philosopher and mathematician, co-author with Bertrand Russell of the landmark Principia Mathematica, credited “medieval theology” for the rise of science. He pointed to the “insistence on the rationality of God,” which produced the belief that “the search into nature could only result in the vindication of the faith.”

“The rise of science was not an extension of classical learning. It was the natural outgrowth of Christian doctrine: nature exists because it was created by God. In order to love and honor God, it is necessary to fully appreciate his handiwork. Because God is perfect, his handiwork functions in accord with immutable principles. By the full use of our God-given powers of reason and observation, it ought to be possible to discover these principles.

“These were the crucial ideas that explain why science arose in Christian Europe and nowhere else.” The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 22-23].

Two good books for you would be *How The Catholic Church Built Western Civilization *by Dr Thomas E Woods, Regnery 2005, and *The Victory of Reason *by Dr Rodney Stark, Random House 2005.

 

[JohnDamian]

I remember reading years ago that Science came about because of Religious people who studied God’s world. I may not be wording this very well. How do we show from History, Bible, religious philosphy or whatever that knowledge of natural revelation is worth knowing and is profitable?

Scientific Method was outlined by the Fransiscan Philosopher Roger Bacon OFM who in his work descriped a cycle of observation, hypothesis, experimentation and independant verification. This built upon the earlier work of Robert Grosseteste, a Catholic Theologian. Both of these drew heavily upon the teachings of Aristotle; and also the works of the Islamic Theolgians Al-Biruni, Alhazen and Avicenna.

Religious people have often had an interest in studying the world. In the same way as we enjoy to listen to a musical masterpiece, or a great piece of art many religions and philosophers were drawn to understanding God’s masterpiece - the world.

 

[rossum]

I remember reading years ago that Science came about because of Religious people who studied God’s world. I may not be wording this very well. How do we show from History, Bible, religious philosphy or whatever that knowledge of natural revelation is worth knowing and is profitable?

Since God made the material world the study of that world is the study of God’s work:

Psalm 19:1, “The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament showeth His handiwork.”

Psalm 85:11 - “Truth springs from the earth; and righteousness looks down from heaven”

Job 12:7-8 - “Ask the animals, they will teach you, or the birds of the air, and they will tell you; or speak to the earth, and it will teach you, or let the fish of the sea inform you.”

Romans 1:20 - Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.

rossum

 

[4Horsemen]

On the reciprocal action of faith and reason:

“To believe is nothing other than to think with assent . . . Believers are also thinkers. In believing they think and in thinking they believe . . . If faith does not think, it is nothing.”
(St. Augustine)

Also:

“Religion is man reaching out to God. Christianity is God reaching out to man through His Divine Son – Christ . . . joining Himself to human nature.” (Unknown source)

The Ultimate Truth is that God exists. He formulated His purpose for us in the Ten Commandments (absolutes). We are here to “know Him, love Him, and serve Him in this world and be happy with Him in the next.” (Baltimore Catechism)

 

[Bobby_Jim]

Well, the scientific method does rely on the basic assumption that nature behaves in a well-ordered, repeatable way. That reflects back on the Christian understanding of God and creation.

One wouldn’t use the scientific method if, for example, one believed the universe to just be completely chaotic, or if we believed in a god who liked to mess with us and change the rules willy-nilly, or that everything depends on a power struggle between competing gods or competing forces, so you never quite know what’s coming next. It also wouldn’t work if a culture despises or runs away from nature, or simply doesn’t care much about nature (which might not bode well for the scientific method in the 21st century).

 

[4Horsemen]

The scientific method is based on logical propositions and could not exist without a perfect Being who has a perfect nature. Since logic is rooted in the orderliness of nature, it derives from the Supreme Being, who is the antithesis of disorder. Therefore, we can use our reason (logic) to come to a knowledge of scientific validity and spiritual truth.

 

[greylorn]

I remember reading years ago that Science came about because of Religious people who studied God’s world. I may not be wording this very well. How do we show from History, Bible, religious philosphy or whatever that knowledge of natural revelation is worth knowing and is profitable?

Forget about finding your answer from history, philosophy, the Bible, or other stuff that humans made up. Consider simple common sense.

Let us suppose that there is a God, Who we shall loosely define as an entity who created the physical universe. We do not actually know anything else about this entity. Enquiring minds want to know.

So in the absence of knowledge, they make things up.

What we know for certain about the Bible, for example, is that it was written by men. What some believe is that their words were inspired by God. But who said so? Sometimes the writers themselves, but always other men.

This leaves human beings as the sole source and imprimateurs of their own knowledge, foxes designing and building the chicken coop.

However there is a source of knowledge about God which is absolutely certain to have come from God Himself, and which can have no other possible origin. That is the physical universe.

Religions have left the interpretation of God’s real bible to scientists, who, for lack of any logical reason to accept religious dogmas, have become atheists. This leaves the interpretation of God’s true but neglected Bible in the hands of atheists. You will have to study physics and microbiology if you genuinely want to understand it.

 

[4Horsemen]

Forget about finding your answer from history, philosophy, the Bible, or other stuff that humans made up. Consider simple common sense.

Common sense tells us that there is more to life than our own limitations could ever dream of, but dream we must. For something within ourselves draws us like a magnet to that which is greater, higher, purer, truer . . . more authentic than what is visible to the naked eye.

Let us suppose that there is a God, Who we shall loosely define as an entity who created the physical universe. We do not actually know anything else about this entity. Enquiring minds want to know.

Enquiring minds seek Truth, Beauty and Goodness–the sum of all the moral virtues. Throughout the ages, humans have sought “this entity” we know as God. He is transcendent, yet immanent possessing His great attributes. You might say that God contains us even more than we have God within us, just as the soul is said to contain the body more so than to exist in the body. Enquiring minds look to theological teachings like those of St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Anselm, St. Albert the Great, as well as the early pagan philosohers, such as Plato and Aristotle who simply used their reason and will to seek and find the Supreme of all beings.

So in the absence of knowledge, they make things up.

Such as? Besides using reason, we have Revelation, which is not made up. Jesus’ coming and dying had been prophesized about in the Old Testament.

What we know for certain about the Bible, for example, is that it was written by men. What some believe is that their words were inspired by God. But who said so? Sometimes the writers themselves, but always other men.

Try reading the Bible prayerfully. (And don’t be so negative!)

However there is a source of knowledge about God which is absolutely certain to have come from God Himself, and which can have no other possible origin. That is the physical universe.

That we can agree on.

Religions have left the interpretation of God’s real bible to scientists, who, for lack of any logical reason to accept religious dogmas, have become atheists. This leaves the interpretation of God’s true but neglected Bible in the hands of atheists. You will have to study physics and microbiology if you genuinely want to understand it.

The universe is the work of God’s hand, but sacred Scripture is the work of God’s saving power.

 

[Abu]

greylorn
So in the absence of knowledge, they make things up. Religions have left the interpretation of God’s real bible to scientists, who, for lack of any logical reason to accept religious dogmas, have become atheists. This leaves the interpretation of God’s true but neglected Bible in the hands of atheists. You will have to study physics and microbiology if you genuinely want to understand it.

Really? What a mummified version of knowledge.

Since science arose from the understanding of God as a rational, responsive, dependable, and omnipotent being, and the universe as his personal creation – the natural world was thus understood to have a rational, lawful, stable structure, awaiting (indeed, inviting) human comprehension.

Alfred North Whitehead, F.R.S., knew that Catholic theology was essential for the rise of science in the West, while stifled elsewhere. He explained: “The greatest contribution of medievalism to the scientific movement [was] the inexpugnable belief that …there is a secret, a secret which can be unveiled. How has this conviction been so vividly implanted in the European mind?..It must come from the medieval insistence on the rationality of God, conceived with the personal energy of Jehovah and with the rationality of a Greek philosopher. Every detail was supervised and ordered: the search into nature could only result in the vindication of the faith in rationality.” [E.L. Jones, 1987; in *The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 15].

Facing Reality
Scientists Don’t Hate God After All, Nov 25th 2009
http://fusionfilter.com/?p=5036" _http://fusionfilter.com/?p=5036
According to a survey of members of the American Assn. for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center in May and June this year [2009], a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41% say they do not.

rtforum.org/lt/lt99.html:
Here we see that science is certified knowledge of reality as such. Empirical science is certified knowledge of observable reality as such. Philosophical science is certified knowledge of natural reality beyond the merely material. Historical science is certified knowledge of past reality as such. And theological science is certified knowledge of revealed reality as such.

 

[greylorn]

Common sense tells us that there is more to life than our own limitations could ever dream of, but dream we must. For something within ourselves draws us like a magnet to that which is greater, higher, purer, truer . . . more authentic than what is visible to the naked eye.

Enquiring minds seek Truth, Beauty and Goodness–the sum of all the moral virtues. Throughout the ages, humans have sought “this entity” we know as God. He is transcendent, yet immanent possessing His great attributes. You might say that God contains us even more than we have God within us, just as the soul is said to contain the body more so than to exist in the body. Enquiring minds look to theological teachings like those of St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Anselm, St. Albert the Great, as well as the early pagan philosohers, such as Plato and Aristotle who simply used their reason and will to seek and find the Supreme of all beings.

Such as? Besides using reason, we have Revelation, which is not made up. Jesus’ coming and dying had been prophesized about in the Old Testament.

Try reading the Bible prayerfully. (And don’t be so negative!)

That we can agree on.

The universe is the work of God’s hand, but sacred Scripture is the work of God’s saving power.

I at first found your post promising, for it reminds me of my own search for understanding. But, I fear that like most believers, you prefer the comfort of illogical dogma to the hard truth of reality.

Of the most difficult things I’m required to accept in my fellow man, none is more absurd than the insistence that the writings of man are the words of God, because other men said so and a lot of followers with bows and arrows, swords, guns, cannons all agreed.

---

When a child in Catholic school I once asked the question, “Since we must be baptized and believe in God and Jesus to get to heaven, why would God create Africans and others who could not learn these truths, and therefore would never get to heaven?”

The answer was that, so long as they have never been taught the truth, they will be allowed to go to limbo. It’s a nice place, not heaven, with iron instead of gold plated faucets, but the water is still good. No, they don’t get to meet God.

Well, you’ve just been exposed to the truth, and have had the integrity to acknowledge as much. For you, limbo is no longer an option.

 

[greylorn]

Really? What a mummified version of knowledge.

Since science arose from the understanding of God as a rational, responsive, dependable, and omnipotent being, and the universe as his personal creation – the natural world was thus understood to have a rational, lawful, stable structure, awaiting (indeed, inviting) human comprehension.

Alfred North Whitehead, F.R.S., knew that Catholic theology was essential for the rise of science in the West, while stifled elsewhere. He explained: “The greatest contribution of medievalism to the scientific movement [was] the inexpugnable belief that …there is a secret, a secret which can be unveiled. How has this conviction been so vividly implanted in the European mind?..It must come from the medieval insistence on the rationality of God, conceived with the personal energy of Jehovah and with the rationality of a Greek philosopher. Every detail was supervised and ordered: the search into nature could only result in the vindication of the faith in rationality.” [E.L. Jones, 1987; in *The Victory of Reason

, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 15].

Facing Reality
Scientists Don’t Hate God After All, Nov 25th 2009
http://fusionfilter.com/?p=5036" _http://fusionfilter.com/?p=5036
According to a survey of members of the American Assn. for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center in May and June this year [2009], a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41% say they do not.

rtforum.org/lt/lt99.html:
Here we see that science is certified knowledge of reality as such. Empirical science is certified knowledge of observable reality as such. Philosophical science is certified knowledge of natural reality beyond the merely material. Historical science is certified knowledge of past reality as such. And theological science is certified knowledge of revealed reality as such.

Gee, whiz. But you didn’t mention science science. Or the science of science science.

 

[Abu]

greylorn
why would God create Africans and others who could not learn these truths, and therefore would never get to heaven?"
The answer was that, so long as they have never been taught the truth, they will be allowed to go to limbo.

False. You had a poor teacher or you got it wrong. Your view on what is “science” suggests the second possibility.

What Christ teaches through His Church is what Pope St Clement knew: that non-Catholics could be saved from the beginning, for he wrote in about 95 A.D. to the Church in Corinth: “Those who repented for their sins, appeased God in praying and received salvation, even though they were aliens to God.” Catholic Apologetics Today, 1986, Fr William G Most, p 145].

This was reaffirmed once again at Vatican II. “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do God’s will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience – those too may achieve eternal salvation.” The Dogmatic Constitution of the Church (Lumen Gentium) # 16, Vatican II.

We would like you to get it right.

 

[4Horsemen]

I at first found your post promising, for it reminds me of my own search for understanding. But, I fear that like most believers, you prefer the comfort of illogical dogma to the hard truth of reality.

Of the most difficult things I’m required to accept in my fellow man, none is more absurd than the insistence that the writings of man are the words of God, because other men said so and a lot of followers with bows and arrows, swords, guns, cannons all agreed.

---

When a child in Catholic school I once asked the question, “Since we must be baptized and believe in God and Jesus to get to heaven, why would God create Africans and others who could not learn these truths, and therefore would never get to heaven?”

The answer was that, so long as they have never been taught the truth, they will be allowed to go to limbo. It’s a nice place, not heaven, with iron instead of gold plated faucets, but the water is still good. No, they don’t get to meet God.

Well, you’ve just been exposed to the truth, and have had the integrity to acknowledge as much. For you, limbo is no longer an option.

It seems incongruous that you have a problem accepting the authority of those who have studied biblical texts and other works to come to theological conclusions, yet you readily accept the authority of men of science. It is true that scientific knowledge can be verifiable empirically, but philosophical knowledge can be understood on a deeper level through reason. Logic, philosophy and theology are valid disciplines. We use our powers of reason all the time to make decisions in our lives, and we trust the decisions of those who have control over areas of our lives like doctors, stock brokers , government officials . . . The point is, you can enlarge your view of reality by opening your mind (and heart) to the spiritual aspects of life.

St. Paul: “If anyone of you thinks of himself as wise, in the ordinary sense of the word, then he must learn to be a fool before he really can be wise. Why? Because the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God.” (1 Cor. 3:18-19)

We can accept the words of others when those words correspond to what we know as truth. The word of God empowers. It brings joy to the heart. Why keep seaching all your life, when the answer is right inside of you and all around you? How incredible that God would reveal Himself to us in so many ways, one of which is the beauty of creation!

I don’t think the idea of Limbo was a doctrine, so nobody had to accept it to be a Catholic.

 

[greylorn]

False. You had a poor teacher or you got it wrong. Your view on what is “science” suggests the second possibility.

What Christ teaches through His Church is what Pope St Clement knew: that non-Catholics could be saved from the beginning, for he wrote in about 95 A.D. to the Church in Corinth: “Those who repented for their sins, appeased God in praying and received salvation, even though they were aliens to God.” Catholic Apologetics Today, 1986, Fr William G Most, p 145].

This was reaffirmed once again at Vatican II. “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do God’s will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience – those too may achieve eternal salvation.” The Dogmatic Constitution of the Church (Lumen Gentium) # 16, Vatican II.

We would like you to get it right.

Good. Keep reading the writings of men who learned what little they knew from the writings of other men, but never poked a stick into the ground and wondered what dirt was.

Keep learning from people who thought that the earth was flat.

Keep learning from old guys who thought that the flat earth was the center of the universe.

Play lots of video games. Learn. Grow wise from memorizing and mastering programs devised by people trying to make a buck 200 centuries ago. Never take a physics course. Don’t learn mathematics. Telescopes are pure fiction. Microscopes are cheap technological tricks.

Oh. And how exactly is it that you imagine yourself qualified to post on a philosophy forum? Trying to impress a chick?

 

[Abu]

greylorn
Keep learning from people who thought that the earth was flat. Keep learning from old guys who thought that the flat earth was the center of the universe

Where ignorance is bliss ‘tis folly to be wise. Forget the folk lore from “academics”.

Popular lore, movies, and children’s stories hold that in 1492 Christopher Columbus proved the world is round and in the process defeated years of dogged opposition from the Roman Catholic Church, which insisted that the earth is flat. These tales are rooted in books like A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, an influential reference by Andrew Dickson White, founder and first president of Cornell University. White claimed that even after Columbus’ return “the Church by its highest authority solemnly stumbled and persisted in going astray.”

The trouble is, almost every word of White’s account of the Columbus story is a lie. All educated persons of Columbus’ day, very much including the Roman Catholic prelates, knew the earth was round. The Venerable Bede (c. 673-735) taught that the world was round, as did Bishop Virgilius of Salzburg (c. 720-784), Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179), and Thomas Aquinas (c. 1224-74). All four ended up saints. Sphere was the title of the most popular medieval textbook on astronomy, written by the English scholastic John of Sacrobosco (c. 1200-1256). It informed that not only the earth but all heavenly bodies are spherical.
*Catholicism and Science *by Rodney Stark, (from Catalyst 9/2004).
catholicleague.org/research/catholicism_and_science.htm

 

[greylorn]

It seems incongruous that you have a problem accepting the authority of those who have studied biblical texts and other works to come to theological conclusions, yet you readily accept the authority of men of science. It is true that scientific knowledge can be verifiable empirically, but philosophical knowledge can be understood on a deeper level through reason. Logic, philosophy and theology are valid disciplines. We use our powers of reason all the time to make decisions in our lives, and we trust the decisions of those who have control over areas of our lives like doctors, stock brokers , government officials . . . The point is, you can enlarge your view of reality by opening your mind (and heart) to the spiritual aspects of life.

St. Paul: “If anyone of you thinks of himself as wise, in the ordinary sense of the word, then he must learn to be a fool before he really can be wise. Why? Because the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God.” (1 Cor. 3:18-19)

We can accept the words of others when those words correspond to what we know as truth. The word of God empowers. It brings joy to the heart. Why keep seaching all your life, when the answer is right inside of you and all around you? How incredible that God would reveal Himself to us in so many ways, one of which is the beauty of creation!

I don’t think the idea of Limbo was a doctrine, so nobody had to accept it to be a Catholic.

4H:

Traditional religious beliefs are based upon the words of men. Other men came along and said that these words of men were actually the words of the Creator of the Universe, and a lot of men believed them. Clearly, you are one link in this long chain of agreement.

But even you might recognize that there is one, and only one Bible which can be attributed to the Creator of the Universe and to none other.

This Bible is the physical universe itself, replete with its laws of physics and evidence of biological evolution. Men cannot have created this awesome Bible.

Yes, men have the job of interpreting. They do this for even the bibles they wrote, and invent a variety of opinions according to their preferences. Humans freely drop from their bibles those sections which might prove troublesome. Various languages allow freedoms of translation which are well exercised, producing major variants of the written Bible’s absolute God-inspired truth.

Men are also required to interpret the real Bible, God’s Bible, the physical universe itself. He gave only a few of us the quality of mind capable of doing this— a left-handed gift, since until recent times, most of the gifted were murdered by those who thought like you, in terms of dogmatic truth revealed by men.

Thanks to people like you, insistent that the writings of men, approved and re-approved by other men, represent Absolute Truth…

God’s genuine Bible, the physical universe, has been left to the interpretation of atheists.

 

[greylorn]

Where ignorance is bliss ‘tis folly to be wise. Forget the folk lore from “academics”.

Popular lore, movies, and children’s stories hold that in 1492 Christopher Columbus proved the world is round and in the process defeated years of dogged opposition from the Roman Catholic Church, which insisted that the earth is flat. These tales are rooted in books like A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, an influential reference by Andrew Dickson White, founder and first president of Cornell University. White claimed that even after Columbus’ return “the Church by its highest authority solemnly stumbled and persisted in going astray.”

The trouble is, almost every word of White’s account of the Columbus story is a lie. All educated persons of Columbus’ day, very much including the Roman Catholic prelates, knew the earth was round. The Venerable Bede (c. 673-735) taught that the world was round, as did Bishop Virgilius of Salzburg (c. 720-784), Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179), and Thomas Aquinas (c. 1224-74). All four ended up saints. Sphere was the title of the most popular medieval textbook on astronomy, written by the English scholastic John of Sacrobosco (c. 1200-1256). It informed that not only the earth but all heavenly bodies are spherical.
*Catholicism and Science *by Rodney Stark, (from Catalyst 9/2004).
catholicleague.org/research/catholicism_and_science.htm

I’m glad that you read stupid books. Better than comic books. I don’t. None of my ideas are derived from your half-wit readings. Try upgrading your material from quasi-religious nonsense to Michael Behe. He is a Catholic with a genuine degree is microbiology, and he is on your side, not mine. His books are superbly written. They are not like the stuff you are accustomed to, and may need to be reread a few times, like any serious book.

Unlike the ancient tomes you quote, Behe’s material, like mine, has the audacity to reference valid contemporary data unavailable to our predecessors.

When people actually know what they are talking about, they do a lot better than those who had to make it up.

 

[awatkins69]

Your arrogant attitude is proof that the science books you’ve read haven’t offered any ethical teaching or true meaning. Try reading “De Ente et Essentia” by Saint Thomas Aquinas. Or maybe go for a spin with the philosophical writings of Blessed Duns Scotus. *Not *stupid. Behe’s book is child’s play. You have nothing to brag about. Science is, in comparison to theology and philosophy, extremely stupid. Science just gives us statements about phenomena. In fact, most of the time it only provides us with fickle theories. It can’t reveal anything about the nature of those phenomena, or being, or morals, or aesthetics, or even itself. That is left to metaphysics and the divine science. When you die your knowledge of science will be like straw. Whereas those who are pure of heart will see God.

 

[awatkins69]

PS In case you didn’t realize it, empirical data are interpreted by men and re-affirmed by men (called scientists). Not only that, these interpretations change every decade. If you’re going to throw the whole man-made artificial religion thing at us, realize that your lovely and infallible science changes every decade. At least ours hasn’t changed for 2,000 years.

Note: I’m not deprecating science. I enjoy reading it myself. But it shouldn’t be uplifted into some sort of false idol.