There is no natural law... so kindly DROP it

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
AntalKalnoky said:
LittleSoldier, Biology Is Science of Living Cells, and is Dependant on Evidence, Facts Reasonably interpreted by The Scientific Method. It Verifies God’s Incredible Creations of Incredible Intelligence in Everything.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry but I don’t quite understand what you are trying to say here. What I am saying is that biology does not and cannot *prove *anything. That is in response to the OP’s statement.
 
AngryAtheist8 said:
No, but I do appreciate your attempt at humor;)

I am not angry at God, I have never met such a being and have no compelling (or convincing) reason to believe in the existence of such an entity. However I have had bad experiences with religious people, especially the Church Universal and Triumphant (relevant link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Universal_and_Triumphant).
Click to expand...
*Wiki? Wiki as a relevant link? *I’ve made changes in several Wiki articles and if I can make changes it’s probably best to take anything Wiki states or claims with a grain of salt. It’s not a bad starting point and sometimes it is the only available resource but it’s really pretty awful, although I will admit that the linked article is quite interesting. I didn’t read much of it but I’m surprised that the cult mentioned doesn’t have a Church Militant, too. The Catholic Church does; hence, my user name.
 
If science is trying to prove and search and teach about where life comes from, isn’t that considered a religion?

And if it is a type of religion, than how come it is still supported by government?

If it is merely helping research medicines to help improve health, than it isn’t a science, it’s a research to help doctors.

Science is such a vague term. Science of space exprolaration. Science of medicine. Science of philosophy.

Science can’t be seperate from mere research.

A basic seek and find.

Matthew 7:7 KJV

A seek and find of what is, already.

If it is a research of things that already exist, than it isn’t seperate from religion, and there isn’t any need to call it science. Only research.

Saying that science discovered this, or science discovered that is confusing the simplicity of it. When it should be called by research we discovered. Researching has been around a lot longer than the modern term science. Each of us are researching and cannot be excluded from it’s ways by some term called “science”. We are given all that we have and cannot glory in what we were given.

1 Corinthians 4:7 KJV
For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive ? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory , as if thou hadst not received it?

So saying that science is seperate from God, is promoting a contradictory view and exalting confusion. Science is simply research and research was around long before that guy/gal instituted the term “science”.
 
LittleSoldier said:
*Wiki? Wiki as a relevant link? *I’ve made changes in several Wiki articles and if I can make changes it’s probably best to take anything Wiki states or claims with a grain of salt. It’s not a bad starting point and sometimes it is the only available resource but it’s really pretty awful, although I will admit that the linked article is quite interesting. I didn’t read much of it but I’m surprised that the cult mentioned doesn’t have a Church Militant, too. The Catholic Church does; hence, my user name.
Click to expand...
:rotfl:
 
someguy14 said:
If science is trying to prove and search and teach about where life comes from, isn’t that considered a religion?

And if it is a type of religion, than how come it is still supported by government?

If it is merely helping research medicines to help improve health, than it isn’t a science, it’s a research to help doctors.

Science is such a vague term. Science of space exprolaration. Science of medicine. Science of philosophy.

Science can’t be seperate from mere research.

A basic seek and find.

Matthew 7:7 KJV

A seek and find of what is, already.

If it is a research of things that already exist, than it isn’t seperate from religion, and there isn’t any need to call it science. Only research.

Saying that science discovered this, or science discovered that is confusing the simplicity of it. When it should be called by research we discovered. Researching has been around a lot longer than the modern term science. Each of us are researching and cannot be excluded from it’s ways by some term called “science”. We are given all that we have and cannot glory in what we were given.

1 Corinthians 4:7 KJV
For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive ? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory , as if thou hadst not received it?

So saying that science is seperate from God, is promoting a contradictory view and exalting confusion. Science is simply research and research was around long before that guy/gal instituted the term “science”.
Click to expand...
Science is not religion. But any truths discovered by science (which cannot prove anything, as I believe I have already stated in this thread) cannot contradict any truths uncovered in any other way, including religion. Truth cannot ever contradict truth. And as science can provide evidence supporting truth, it is embraced by the Church.
 
davidv said:
In the post you were replying to I found no reference to monachy. It would appear that your response to his is a red herring.
Click to expand...
It was in reference to the claim that the Catholic Church reversed EVERYTHING it inherited from the Roman Empire.
 
LittleSoldier said:
*Wiki? Wiki as a relevant link? *I’ve made changes in several Wiki articles and if I can make changes it’s probably best to take anything Wiki states or claims with a grain of salt. It’s not a bad starting point and sometimes it is the only available resource but it’s really pretty awful, although I will admit that the linked article is quite interesting. I didn’t read much of it but I’m surprised that the cult mentioned doesn’t have a Church Militant, too. The Catholic Church does; hence, my user name.
Click to expand...
The Church Universal and Triumphant is an apocalypse cult that I was a member of (because my parents joined it) in the 1980s. If you want to look up the official site do it yourself, I’m not giving those frauds any free exposure.
 
someguy14 said:
If science is trying to prove and search and teach about where life comes from, isn’t that considered a religion?

And if it is a type of religion, than how come it is still supported by government?

If it is merely helping research medicines to help improve health, than it isn’t a science, it’s a research to help doctors.

Science is such a vague term. Science of space exprolaration. Science of medicine. Science of philosophy.

Science can’t be seperate from mere research.

A basic seek and find.

Matthew 7:7 KJV

A seek and find of what is, already.

If it is a research of things that already exist, than it isn’t seperate from religion, and there isn’t any need to call it science. Only research.

Saying that science discovered this, or science discovered that is confusing the simplicity of it. When it should be called by research we discovered. Researching has been around a lot longer than the modern term science. Each of us are researching and cannot be excluded from it’s ways by some term called “science”. We are given all that we have and cannot glory in what we were given.

1 Corinthians 4:7 KJV
For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive ? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory , as if thou hadst not received it?

So saying that science is seperate from God, is promoting a contradictory view and exalting confusion. Science is simply research and research was around long before that guy/gal instituted the term “science”.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make, but here’s the definition of science from Dictionary.com (link: dictionary.reference.com/browse/science):🙂
  1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.
  2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
  3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.
  4. systematized knowledge in general.
  5. knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study.
 
LittleSoldier said:
Science is not religion. But any truths discovered by science (which cannot prove anything, as I believe I have already stated in this thread) cannot contradict any truths uncovered in any other way, including religion. Truth cannot ever contradict truth. And as science can provide evidence supporting truth, it is embraced by the Church.
Click to expand...
So you believe knewledge uncovered by science is irrelevant and inferior to divine revelation and similar forms of* knewledge* then?
 
AngryAtheist8 said:
The Church Universal and Triumphant is an apocalypse cult that I was a member of (because my parents joined it) in the 1980s. If you want to look up the official site do it yourself, I’m not giving those frauds any free exposure.
Click to expand...
In retrospect I reacted too angrily :o here’s the official site if you really want it: tsl.org/about-2/about-us/
 
AngryAtheist8 said:
So you believe knewledge uncovered by science is irrelevant and inferior to divine revelation and similar forms of* knewledge* then?
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s quite the point LittleSoldier was making - Catholicism is certainly not of the same school as evangelical Christianity, many of whose adherents believe just as you say above, taking the Bible as divine revelation and refusing to accept any evidence that runs counter to their literal interpretation of scripture.

What you find more in Catholicism is a harmonising tendency - scripture can be interpreted metaphorically in ways that can be taken to embrace more concrete scientific findings, and the definition of God can be made broad enough to accommodate established facts that would appear to contradict more specific definitions. Then, of course, there is the cosy notion of non-overlapping magisteria, in which scientific truths and religious truths can be considered as separate species of truth, neither of which can contradict the other because, so the idea runs, they are treating with different aspects of reality. Thus it is ‘safe’ for the Church to embrace science.
 
It’s an old joke: Try not going to the bathroom for a couple of days. You’ll wind up in the docs office, and, one how or another, you’ll discover there’s a natural law.
 
Not forgetting, also, that Catholicism, early in its history, embraced the thinking of classical pagan philosophers, of which the concept of natural law itself is a product. Sola scriptura has generally not been a feature of Catholic Church teaching.
 
Sair said:
Then, of course, there is the cosy notion of non-overlapping magisteria, in which scientific truths and religious truths can be considered as separate species of truth, neither of which can contradict the other because, so the idea runs, they are treating with different aspects of reality. Thus it is ‘safe’ for the Church to embrace science.
Click to expand...
Can you cite a source for this assertion?
 
tonyrey said:
Can you cite a source for this assertion?
Click to expand...
I believe Stephen J. Gould was the first to so express it - in an attempt to pacify the religious objections to scientific progress. Google ‘Stephen J. Gould’ and ‘non-overlapping magisteria’ and you will find all the sources you require.
 
AngryAtheist8 said:
So you believe knewledge uncovered by science is irrelevant and inferior to divine revelation and similar forms of* knewledge* then?
Click to expand...
No. I believe that truth cannot contradict truth. A truth uncovered by science is just as valid as a truth uncovered by any other means.

I’m a scientist. I have great respect for science. I believe it is a tool God gave us to aid us in understanding the universe He created.
 
Sair said:
Not forgetting, also, that Catholicism, early in its history, embraced the thinking of classical pagan philosophers, of which the concept of natural law itself is a product. Sola scriptura has generally not been a feature of Catholic Church teaching.
Click to expand...
Even classical pagan philosophers got some things right. Should the Church deny everything they taught, even though she agrees with some of them?
 
LittleSoldier said:
Even classical pagan philosophers got some things right. Should the Church deny everything they taught, even though she agrees with some of them?
Click to expand...
Not at all - I was merely expanding upon my earlier point that Catholicism differs from evangelical Christianity in embracing other sources of knowledge than scripture alone. Of course, this is one of the grounds on which the latter adherents claim that Catholicism is not ‘real’ Christianity - or not any sort of Christianity at all - but I certainly think it is far more respectable to critically evaluate the claims of science and philosophy than to reject them out of hand because they don’t fit in with a literal interpretation of the Bible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top