Science & Religion

[Charlemagne_II]

inocente

**Excuse me thinking knowledge might be preferable to ignorance, and that the “guns don’t kill people, only scientists kill people” slogan might just indicate double standards. **

Excuse me for thinking religion is more important than science.

Excuse me for thinking that it is less important to have the knowledge that creates nuclear arsenals than to have the wisdom and virtue never to start those arsenals in the first place.

 

[francessmith]

Read Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s Phenomena of Man and his essays, Christianity and Evolution, (Reflections on Science and Religion), just to mention a few of his books. The Divined Milieu is another book I found profound.

Because of his theory’s and writings he was silenced by the catholic church in the past. Today the church has come a long way in allowing a catholic to accept evolution and science as the means in which God has and continues to create his universe. You can find Chardin’s books today in Catholic libraries.

Christ had foretold: “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John16:12-13).

 

[francessmith]

Read Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s Phenomena of Man and his essays, Christianity and Evolution, (Reflections on Science and Religion), just to mention a few of his books. The Divined Milieu is another book I found profound.

Because of his theory’s and writings he was silenced by the catholic church in the past. Today the church has come a long way in allowing a catholic to accept evolution and science as the means in which God has and continues to create his universe. You can find Chardin’s books today in Catholic libraries.

Christ had foretold: “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John16:12-13).

 

[buffalo]

Yes, I can see how flat screen TVs, the Internet and artificial hearts were just “stumbled on”.

Yes, indeed, many inventions that today we take for granted were just stumbled upon.

Do you consider the Wright Bros scientists? What you are so eagerly crediting science with is practical engineering perfected.

I give credit to inventors and engineers.

The internet? Do you even know the story of the Internet? Artificial hearts? It was a doctor.

How about electricity? The steam engine? Agricultural implements?

 

[buffalo]

As long as you get to chair the censorship committee.

Great point - who chairs the censorship committee now?

 

[twinc]

Read Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s Phenomena of Man and his essays, Christianity and Evolution, (Reflections on Science and Religion), just to mention a few of his books. The Divined Milieu is another book I found profound.

Because of his theory’s and writings he was silenced by the catholic church in the past. Today the church has come a long way in allowing a catholic to accept evolution and science as the means in which God has and continues to create his universe. You can find Chardin’s books today in Catholic libraries.

Christ had foretold: “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John16:12-13).

alas and sadly this we know- there is now no longer an index but de Chardin’s books are still on Monitum - they are,however found also in many Presbyteries.Evolution which has been and is forbidden and anathema to and for Catholics is also widely embraced and accepted and taught openly and blatantly - it seems not many Catholics know or have been informed exactly what has been and is and must be the Church’s stance - via Google search box type in [response to L Conte Jr] and click - also try [Dr.Ben Wiker…catholic answers] and [www.cfnews.org/sung-pio.htm]](www.cfnews.org/sung-pio.htm]) - btw the Bible and pseudo/phoney science are absolutely incompatible - twinc

 

[twinc]

alas and sadly this we know- there is now no longer an index but de Chardin’s books are still on Monitum - they are,however found also in many Presbyteries.Evolution which has been and is forbidden and anathema to and for Catholics is also widely embraced and accepted and taught openly and blatantly - it seems not many Catholics know or have been informed exactly what has been and is and must be the Church’s stance - via Google search box type in [response to L Conte Jr] and click - also try [Dr.Ben Wiker…catholic answers] and [www.cfnews.org/sung-pio.htm]](www.cfnews.org/sung-pio.htm]) - btw the Bible and pseudo/phoney science are absolutely incompatible - twinc

try www.cfnews.org/sung-pio.htm - twinc

 

[SGWessells]

As a former young earth creationist (YEC), I recognize many of the tactics Sungenis uses in the article twinc referenced. Two features are common to almost all YEC apologetics. First is an understandable, though deplorable, ignorance of the actual theory of evolution and the well-established proofs that the earth is billions of years old; second, a willingness to distort and misquote sources to make them say what one wants them to say.
For example, evolution has nothing at all to do with Hegelian dialectic, and operates on a totally different philosophical basis, but linking the two allows Sungenis unfairly to tar Darwin with the Marxist brush.
Another example is footnote one. Popular misunderstanding might use Einstein’s relativity theory as an excuse for moral relativism, but relativity is an absolutist theory. Its main postulate is that the speed of light, unlike other movements, is the same regardless of the position or velocity of an observer. Needless to say, it has no relevance to morality whatsoever.
Evolution has nothing to do with Neoplatonic theories of emanation either. The quote about “kinds” that Sungenis relies so heavily on does not say that God created all the “kinds” as they are today all at once; Pope St. Pius X included that concept as part of a view he condemned, which is as far from an endorsement as one can get. Although Darwin included references to a “creator” in later editions of Origin, he did so reluctantly, as a result of the sort of social pressure that people like Sungenis exerted at the time. Darwin himself became more and more agnostic during his lifetime, though he started out as a YEC and enthusiast for Paley’s defense of natural theology.
Despite its flaws, though, the article points out a crucial distinction in the science/religion controversy. That is the distinction between those who adopt the findings of the scientific method regardless of non-scientific ideas to the contrary, and those who expect science to serve, and distort itself to conform to, non-scientific, and especially religious, doctrines. Both sides use science, but only the former respects it. The Church is too wise to paint itself into a corner by taking Genesis, or other parts of the Bible, more literally than science allows, but Sungenis shows the folly of ignoring this wisdom. By insisting on the literal reading of scripture, even to the point of trying to restore geocentrism (the idea that the earth is at the center of the universe, and that the sun , stars, and other planets all revolve around it), he merely makes the Christian faith (or at least, Robert Sungenis) seem foolish in the eyes of nearly everyone. As I recall, St. Augustine warned against Christians arguing from ignorance, for that very reason. Sungenis should heed his advice.

 

[rinnie]

Read Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s Phenomena of Man and his essays, Christianity and Evolution, (Reflections on Science and Religion), just to mention a few of his books. The Divined Milieu is another book I found profound.

Because of his theory’s and writings he was silenced by the catholic church in the past. Today the church has come a long way in allowing a catholic to accept evolution and science as the means in which God has and continues to create his universe. You can find Chardin’s books today in Catholic libraries.

Christ had foretold: “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John16:12-13).

What does that scripture have to do with science. This scripture is not about the future, its about what has already occurred or been said:shrug:

 

[twinc]

As a former young earth creationist (YEC), I recognize many of the tactics Sungenis uses in the article twinc referenced. Two features are common to almost all YEC apologetics. First is an understandable, though deplorable, ignorance of the actual theory of evolution and the well-established proofs that the earth is billions of years old; second, a willingness to distort and misquote sources to make them say what one wants them to say.
For example, evolution has nothing at all to do with Hegelian dialectic, and operates on a totally different philosophical basis, but linking the two allows Sungenis unfairly to tar Darwin with the Marxist brush.
Another example is footnote one. Popular misunderstanding might use Einstein’s relativity theory as an excuse for moral relativism, but relativity is an absolutist theory. Its main postulate is that the speed of light, unlike other movements, is the same regardless of the position or velocity of an observer. Needless to say, it has no relevance to morality whatsoever.
Evolution has nothing to do with Neoplatonic theories of emanation either. The quote about “kinds” that Sungenis relies so heavily on does not say that God created all the “kinds” as they are today all at once; Pope St. Pius X included that concept as part of a view he condemned, which is as far from an endorsement as one can get. Although Darwin included references to a “creator” in later editions of Origin, he did so reluctantly, as a result of the sort of social pressure that people like Sungenis exerted at the time. Darwin himself became more and more agnostic during his lifetime, though he started out as a YEC and enthusiast for Paley’s defense of natural theology.
Despite its flaws, though, the article points out a crucial distinction in the science/religion controversy. That is the distinction between those who adopt the findings of the scientific method regardless of non-scientific ideas to the contrary, and those who expect science to serve, and distort itself to conform to, non-scientific, and especially religious, doctrines. Both sides use science, but only the former respects it. The Church is too wise to paint itself into a corner by taking Genesis, or other parts of the Bible, more literally than science allows, but Sungenis shows the folly of ignoring this wisdom. By insisting on the literal reading of scripture, even to the point of trying to restore geocentrism (the idea that the earth is at the center of the universe, and that the sun , stars, and other planets all revolve around it), he merely makes the Christian faith (or at least, Robert Sungenis) seem foolish in the eyes of nearly everyone. As I recall, St. Augustine warned against Christians arguing from ignorance, for that very reason. Sungenis should heed his advice.

LOL = Sungenis arguing from ignorance[lol]- imho he is a genius and attempts to belittle him backfire - he should be known as Sungenius - twinc

 

[francessmith]

While the words science and technology are often used interchangeably, they actually have different meanings.

Christ when he said “ ]I have yet many things to say to you……When the Spirit of truth comes”…. ]Jesus referring to the Holy Spirit which came upon the apostles in the upper room after Jesus death) is what Christ was referring to and that same spirit lives in the world today, each and everyone who accepts and understands Christ in the world…. our Hope of Glory. The Holy Spirit was not just meant for that one particular time in history. What the apostles did not understand became clear to them and continues as we develop. In other words the Holy Spirit is active today in us and brings us ever closer to knowing God and much of that can be learned through science.

I always ask the question, why do many Christians reject science and evolution? Yes atheists believe that science disproves a creator, but science glorifies our awesome God. The incarnation of the Word (which is in process of continual and universal consummation ( is simply the final term of a creation which is still continuing everywhere and does so through our imperfections (omnis creatura adhuc ingemiscit et parturit) The whole creation has been groaning in travail together until now.

Since a small child I loved Jesus, the Christ but I could not understand or accept God the father till much later in my life when I began to seek understanding. The catechism and the dogmas were confounding and conflicting. The universe is not stagnant, nothing is stagnant. God is constantly reveling and renewing. In the human body, analysis shows us how corpuscles continue to multiply in countless thousands—so, too, above us, in our outer body, nebulae jostle one another in millions:
God’s creation is a complexity beyond our imagination. Scientist continues to explore the endless wonders of God’s creation. The first cause is not involved in effects; it acts upon individual natures and on the movement of the whole. Properly speaking, God does not make: He makes things make themselves.
We can no longer derive the whole of evil from one single hominine. I must emphasize again that long before man, death existed on earth. And in the depths of the heavens, far from any moral influence of the earth, death also exists.

. The question is often asked by believers and non believers if there is a God how could he allow the suffering to be in the world. Babies born deformed, mental illness, that prevents the soul from becoming what God had in his plan for this individual. The questions go on and on. The answer is always original sin. I submit to you there was no original sin.
Original sin is an effort to explain suffering in the world. But I submit for your consideration Original Sin simply symbolizes the inevitable chance of evil (It must be that scandals come.) which accompanies the existence of all participated being. Wherever being in the process of becoming is produced, suffering and wrong immediately appear as its shadow: not only as a result of the tendency towards inaction and selfishness found in creatures, but also (which is more disturbing) as an inevitable concomitant of their effort to progress. Original sin is the essential reaction of the finite to the creative act. Inevitable it insinuates itself into existence through the medium of all creation. It is the reverse side of all creation. By the very fact that He creates, God commits himself to a fight against evil and in consequence to, in one way or another, affecting redemption. The specifically human Fall is no more than the (broadly speaking, collective and eternal) actualizing of this ‘kindling, touchwood’—stimulus to sin, which was infused, long before us, into the whole of the universe, from the lowest zones of matter to the angelic spheres. Strictly speaking, there is not a first Adam.

The name disguises a universal and unbreakable law of reversion or perversion—the price that has to be paid for progress.

Simply: Creation is a constant ongoing occurrence. a) God’s mind forever upbuilding His universe. b) creative Principle—God as the cause and moving force in and through all creation. c) creative force in man—Holy Spirit-mind is the creative force constantly working in man and all other creation. Those who fail to recognize Spirit-mind shining within them dwell in a continuous state of darkness and ignorance. To them the almighty Christ is nonexistent. And the light shines in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not.”
Much of what I have stated here is from Pierre Teilhard de Chardin essays about his theological writings, both his theology as a whole and about particular points in his teaching.

Simply – I believe puts Teilhard’s very profound essays in simpler language.

Prayer: Oh my God you are here; Oh my God we are here; Oh my God together we are here and always, always, you love us.

 

[twinc]

While the words science and technology are often used interchangeably, they actually have different meanings.

Christ when he said “ ]I have yet many things to say to you……When the Spirit of truth comes”…. ]Jesus referring to the Holy Spirit which came upon the apostles in the upper room after Jesus death) is what Christ was referring to and that same spirit lives in the world today, each and everyone who accepts and understands Christ in the world…. our Hope of Glory. The Holy Spirit was not just meant for that one particular time in history. What the apostles did not understand became clear to them and continues as we develop. In other words the Holy Spirit is active today in us and brings us ever closer to knowing God and much of that can be learned through science.

I always ask the question, why do many Christians reject science and evolution? Yes atheists believe that science disproves a creator, but science glorifies our awesome God. The incarnation of the Word (which is in process of continual and universal consummation ( is simply the final term of a creation which is still continuing everywhere and does so through our imperfections (omnis creatura adhuc ingemiscit et parturit) The whole creation has been groaning in travail together until now.

Since a small child I loved Jesus, the Christ but I could not understand or accept God the father till much later in my life when I began to seek understanding. The catechism and the dogmas were confounding and conflicting. The universe is not stagnant, nothing is stagnant. God is constantly reveling and renewing. In the human body, analysis shows us how corpuscles continue to multiply in countless thousands—so, too, above us, in our outer body, nebulae jostle one another in millions:
God’s creation is a complexity beyond our imagination. Scientist continues to explore the endless wonders of God’s creation. The first cause is not involved in effects; it acts upon individual natures and on the movement of the whole. Properly speaking, God does not make: He makes things make themselves.
We can no longer derive the whole of evil from one single hominine. I must emphasize again that long before man, death existed on earth. And in the depths of the heavens, far from any moral influence of the earth, death also exists.

. The question is often asked by believers and non believers if there is a God how could he allow the suffering to be in the world. Babies born deformed, mental illness, that prevents the soul from becoming what God had in his plan for this individual. The questions go on and on. The answer is always original sin. I submit to you there was no original sin.
Original sin is an effort to explain suffering in the world. But I submit for your consideration Original Sin simply symbolizes the inevitable chance of evil (It must be that scandals come.) which accompanies the existence of all participated being. Wherever being in the process of becoming is produced, suffering and wrong immediately appear as its shadow: not only as a result of the tendency towards inaction and selfishness found in creatures, but also (which is more disturbing) as an inevitable concomitant of their effort to progress. Original sin is the essential reaction of the finite to the creative act. Inevitable it insinuates itself into existence through the medium of all creation. It is the reverse side of all creation. By the very fact that He creates, God commits himself to a fight against evil and in consequence to, in one way or another, affecting redemption. The specifically human Fall is no more than the (broadly speaking, collective and eternal) actualizing of this ‘kindling, touchwood’—stimulus to sin, which was infused, long before us, into the whole of the universe, from the lowest zones of matter to the angelic spheres. Strictly speaking, there is not a first Adam.

The name disguises a universal and unbreakable law of reversion or perversion—the price that has to be paid for progress.

Simply: Creation is a constant ongoing occurrence. a) God’s mind forever upbuilding His universe. b) creative Principle—God as the cause and moving force in and through all creation. c) creative force in man—Holy Spirit-mind is the creative force constantly working in man and all other creation. Those who fail to recognize Spirit-mind shining within them dwell in a continuous state of darkness and ignorance. To them the almighty Christ is nonexistent. And the light shines in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not.”
Much of what I have stated here is from Pierre Teilhard de Chardin essays about his theological writings, both his theology as a whole and about particular points in his teaching.

Simply – I believe puts Teilhard’s very profound essays in simpler language.

Prayer: Oh my God you are here; Oh my God we are here; Oh my God together we are here and always, always, you love us.

it has been said that “what Teilhard has put together let no one put asunder” - here we have it again and again the preference for the way out,weird and wacky alternatives instead of what the Church accepts and teaches - btw acceptance of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s rantings and fakes and frauds and cons and fantasies are forbidden and anathema to and for Catholics - twinc

 

[twinc]

it has been said that “what Teilhard has put together let no one put asunder” - here we have it again and again the preference for the way out,weird and wacky alternatives instead of what the Church accepts and teaches - btw acceptance of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s rantings and fakes and frauds and cons and fantasies are forbidden and anathema to and for Catholics - twinc

btw God and death are incompatible and the world He created was very good so we cannot accept the way out,weird and wacky to include millions of dead things,torn apart with nature red in tooth and claw as very good - Catholics should know this since it can only be found in Catholic bibles at Wisdom 1:12-14 and furthermore acceptance of Adam and Original sin is binding on all Catholics - twinc

 

[SanAgustin]

Yes, indeed, many inventions that today we take for granted were just stumbled upon.

Do you consider the Wright Bros scientists? What you are so eagerly crediting science with is practical engineering perfected.

I give credit to inventors and engineers.

The internet? Do you even know the story of the Internet? Artificial hearts? It was a doctor.

How about electricity? The steam engine? Agricultural implements?

We didn’t “stumble upon” the internet, and more than a few Computer Scientists were involved in its creation.

And if you think the development of electricity, its distribution and management has nothing to do with “science”, you don’t know what electricity is then.

 

[rossum]

btw God and death are incompatible and the world He created was very good

Not all the time it wasn’t:Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” [Genesis 2:18] (emphasis added)
The pre-Fall world was certainly not perfect, and not even “very good” all the time. Sometimes it was “not good”.

rossum

 

[buffalo]

We didn’t “stumble upon” the internet, and more than a few Computer Scientists were involved in its creation.

And if you think the development of electricity, its distribution and management has nothing to do with “science”, you don’t know what electricity is then.

I also examined the outstanding biodiscoveries of the past century… I even queried biologists working in areas where one would expect the Darwinian paradigm to have most benefited research, such as the emergence of resistance to antibiotics and pesticides. Darwin’s theory had provided no discernible guidance, but was brought in, after the breakthroughs, as an interesting narrative gloss. – Dr. Philip Skell, National Academy of Sciences member, in The Scientist, 08/29/2005.

 

[StAnastasia]

btw God and death are incompatible and the world He created was very good so we cannot accept the way out,weird and wacky to include millions of dead things,torn apart with nature red in tooth and claw as very good - Catholics should know this since it can only be found in Catholic bibles at Wisdom 1:12-14 and furthermore acceptance of Adam and Original sin is binding on all Catholics - twinc

Twinc, predation and death has been going on for the last 3.5 billion years. Do you think God is not aware of this?

 

[inocente]

Yes, indeed, many inventions that today we take for granted were just stumbled upon.

Do you consider the Wright Bros scientists? What you are so eagerly crediting science with is practical engineering perfected.

I give credit to inventors and engineers.

The internet? Do you even know the story of the Internet? Artificial hearts? It was a doctor.

How about electricity? The steam engine? Agricultural implements?

I see. So unless someone has SCIENTIST stamped on her forehead by you, she’s not doing science.

Great point - who chairs the censorship committee now?

As you’re the one laying down who and who isn’t doing science, the answer would be … hang on, it’s on the tip of my tongue …

 

[StAnastasia]

I see. So unless someone has SCIENTIST stamped on her forehead by you, she’s not doing science. As you’re the one laying down who and who isn’t doing science, the answer would be … hang on, it’s on the tip of my tongue …

The committee are buffalo and the Discovery Institute, with scientific (name removed by moderator)ut from Answers in Genesis and the Institute for Creation Research. This body alone determines who is a real scientist.

 

[buffalo]

The committee are buffalo and the Discovery Institute, with scientific (name removed by moderator)ut from Answers in Genesis and the Institute for Creation Research. This body alone determines who is a real scientist.

Thank you for the promotion!