Vatican astronomer likens creationism to superstition

[drpmjhess]

Because Adam and Eve were not originally of a fallen nature and had an unfettered free will and still sinned against an infinitely good God. This was the original sin against an infinite being far beyond time and space and one can infer that in giving man dominion over creation when man fell, creation fell–all of it–and still all of creation, which fell for all space and all time, past present and future, can not make up for a sin against the eternal Creator, who is infinitely good. Only Jesus could suffice.

The Genesis cosmogonic myth is a beautiful story, and as I said before, I love hearing it in the context of the Easter liturgy. It is not, of course, an historical account of an actual event – any more than is the myth of Noah’s Flood – and it was composed several centuries later than the Exodus narrative in Exodus 1-15. But the author(s) frames in the poetic style of the Hebrew scriptures what will become an enduring hebraic theology of sin and salvation history.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

The Genesis cosmogonic myth is a beautiful story, and as I said before, I love hearing it in the context of the Easter liturgy. It is not, of course, an historical account of an actual event – any more than is the myth of Noah’s Flood – and it was composed several centuries later than the Exodus narrative in Exodus 1-15. But the author(s) frames in the poetic style of the Hebrew scriptures what will become an enduring hebraic theology of sin and salvation history.

According to the CCC, it is not simply a story. The Holy Spirit Who guides the authors may teach in many styles and reveal certain truths at certain times. It’s always been this way in salvation history; it is not inconsistent that it was written at a later date, for the same infinite Holy Spirit guides the Church also and chooses how and when to reveal wisdom and truth.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3177639&postcount=2

From the CCC:
390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.

This is not hebraic theology. Man (The whole of creation?) falls from that first sin and that one sinner and mankind (the whole of creation?) being redeemed by the One Redeemer Who by necessity was God Himself to reconcile the sin against God.

• Romans 5

19 For as by the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners; so also by the obedience of one, many shall be made just.*

 

[Stephen_LB]

(1) How does eating a forbidden fruit by two members of one species “affect …the universe with itself”? Our galaxy alone is one hundred thousand light years across. By Fundie calculations Adam and Eve lived 6,000 years ago. How did their fruit lunch affect what goes on on the other side of our galaxy, much less in galactic superculsters clusters ten billion light years away, whose inhabitants have never heard of Adam and Eve?

(2) Can you explain “specified complexity” and “irreducible complexity” in a way that makes scientific sense? Will they have sessions on these theories at the AAAS that I might attend next year?

[1] Well, I don’t think distant galaxies were affected. Don’t take the word “universe” too literally. However, it seems reasonable to me that the fall affected man’s relationship with nature. At that time, the visible creation may have become hostile to God’s creatures, or, as it reads in Genesis, “Cursed is the ground because of you.” The natural world, perhaps the earth was no longer a friendly garden. There is nothing remarkable about that point of view. I know theologians who believe it.

[2] If the concepts were not comprehensible in scientific terms, ID critics would not be able to use the vocabulary to argue against it. Dembski’s probability bound, for example, sets virtual certainty at a complexity level of 500 bits of information. That is the equivalent of l chance in 10^150 that the complexity resulted by chance. That number is something like the probability that all the characters in my first paragraph occurred as lucky combination of events. To analyze the probability of an event by using data and expressing it in terms of mathematical certainty is a good example of science in action. As a scientific inference to the best explanation, you can conclude that the paragraph I alluded to was “designed.”

Behe’s conceptions are scientifically formlated as well. Ken Miller, for example, has attempted in vain to refute Behe’s thesis. I have also read papers from evolutionary biologists who made heroic attempts to find an evolutionary pathway to complexity, which is the scientific alternative to Behe’s scientific proposition.

 

[Stephen_LB]

Correction: the probability bound of 1 out of 10^150 would exceed everything that I wrote in my last response and then some. That goes way beyond any paragraph that I wrote.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Don’t you just find sophistic erudition amusing.

Deacon Ed B

 

[drpmjhess]

390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.

This is not hebraic theology. Man (The whole of creation?) falls from that first sin and that one sinner and mankind (the whole of creation?) being redeemed by the One Redeemer Who by necessity was God Himself to reconcile the sin against God…

MichaelTDoyle, the story of the Fall is beautifully integrated into Christian “salvation history,” with all of its typologies of first and second Adam, first and second Eve, the Garden of Paradise and the Garden of Gethsemane, etc. Theologically the story is important.

But you’re claiming much more than that – you’re claiming that the fundamental dislocation of all creation occurred at the beginning of human history. But we know through science that life existed on earth for three and a half billion years before humans even evolved, and that there was death and predation aplenty during all those eons, which were clearly not resultant upon some mythical “Fall” from a state of Adamic perfection.

Nor could a terrestrial “Fall” account for predation and suffering on planets where life had evolved billions of light years from Earth, and where it might have been extinguished by asteroid impact, gamma ray burst, or supernovae billions of years before the mythological Adam and Eve, who lived 6,000 BCE,

That’s why it is important both to celebrate the Adam and Eve story theologically, and to keep it in proper historical perspective.

Petrus

 

[drpmjhess]

Don’t you just find sophistic erudition amusing. Deacon Ed B

Deacon Ed B, I suppose it’s amusing, but I’ll reserve judgment on that until I after I hear sessions by Dembski and Behe at major scientific meetings like the AAAS, the NABT, the NIH, and the American Physical Society. Of course, IDers complain that they are being blackballed by the scientific establishment rather than admitting that they are legitimately excluded because they have nothing scientific to contribute to the discussion.

Their complaints are no mare valid than would be a complaint that the Manson family is unfairly excluded from meetings of the Family Values Coalition. The FVC has legitimate reason to exclude a fringe group that calls itself a “family”; the AAAS has legitimate reason to exclude fringe “scientists” who cannot demonstrate that they have a scientifically testable research program. When the movie “Expelled” comes out in April (which audiences will be paid to watch), I will be interested in charting the reaction to claims by the “martyrs” that they have been excluded from the halls of academe.

Petrus

 

[drpmjhess]

[1] Well, I don’t think distant galaxies were affected. Don’t take the word “universe” too literally. However, it seems reasonable to me that the fall affected man’s relationship with nature. At that time, the visible creation may have become hostile to God’s creatures, or, as it reads in Genesis, “Cursed is the ground because of you.” The natural world, perhaps the earth was no longer a friendly garden. There is nothing remarkable about that point of view. I know theologians who believe it. .

How would the creation become hostile to God’s creatures? How would the eating of a “Forbidden fruit” affect real meteorology to create hurricanes, or real plate tectonics to create earthquakes and volcanoes, or real oxidation rates to create forest fires, or real bacterial and viral evolution to create diseases when none had existed before? What is the causal chain connecting a human moral act of disobedience with widely disparate physical states of affairs?

Petrus

 

[Stephen_LB]

How would the creation become hostile to God’s creatures? How would the eating of a “Forbidden fruit” affect real meteorology to create hurricanes, or real plate tectonics to create earthquakes and volcanoes, or real oxidation rates to create forest fires, or real bacterial and viral evolution to create diseases when none had existed before? What is the causal chain connecting a human moral act of disobedience with widely disparate physical states of affairs?

Petrus

The fall of man is more than a story and it may have affected a great many things. Then, again, maybe it didn’t. Theologians are divided on the issue. While the event is described in theological terms, its historical significance should not be discounted.

In fact, we don’t know exactly what life was like before the fall. Further, the problem of suffering on other planets presupposes that there is life on those planets and that such life is problematical. In any case, you have ignored my earlier point about “optimum” design as opposed to “perfect” design, which, if understood properly is sufficient to address the bad design argument without even resorting to the fall of man.

More serious, though, is the fact that, as a theologian, you seem to be hedging a bit on the historical reality of the fall. Maybe it is time to ask you a more direct question: Do you believe that our first parents sinned against God by a direct act of disobedience in time/space/history?

 

[Stephen_LB]

Deacon Ed B, I suppose it’s amusing, but I’ll reserve judgment on that until I after I hear sessions by Dembski and Behe at major scientific meetings like the AAAS, the NABT, the NIH, and the American Physical Society. Of course, IDers complain that they are being blackballed by the scientific establishment rather than admitting that they are legitimately excluded because they have nothing scientific to contribute to the discussion.

Their complaints are no mare valid than would be a complaint that the Manson family is unfairly excluded from meetings of the Family Values Coalition. The FVC has legitimate reason to exclude a fringe group that calls itself a “family”; the AAAS has legitimate reason to exclude fringe “scientists” who cannot demonstrate that they have a scientifically testable research program. When the movie “Expelled” comes out in April (which audiences will be paid to watch), I will be interested in charting the reaction to claims by the “martyrs” that they have been excluded from the halls of academe.

Petrus

You have not yet addressed my abbreviated points about the sciencie of “specified complexity” and “irreducible complexity.” as outlined on 201. What is your argument against inference to the best explanation as an example of scienfic methodology.

Also, on what grounds do you dismiss the testimony of these “martyrs?” What is your answer to the abuse that Behe has taken? So far, your only comment has been that since, in your judgment, he is not a genius, persecution is acceptable. It that your final judgment on the matter?

 

[drpmjhess]

More serious, though, is the fact that, as a theologian, you seem to be hedging a bit on the historical reality of the fall. Maybe it is time to ask you a more direct question: Do you believe that our first parents sinned against God by a direct act of disobedience in time/space/history?

StephenLB, a mythological rather than an historical reading of Genesis is mainstream Roman Catholic biblical theology.

“Our first parents” were a hominid group that biologists estimate to have been about 10,000 in number (See earlier posts by biologist Hecd). This seems to be the minimum number to avoid the genetic bottleneck that would led irreversibly to the extinction of Homo sapiens en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck.

In that they were a group, it is genetically impossible to single out an individual pair called “Adam” and “Eve” who were uniquely infused with “immortal souls,” or who uniquely sinned and affected the whole biosphere. For excellent discussion see the following:

John F. Haught, God after Darwin: A Theology of Evolution. Westview Press, 2000.
John F. Haught, Deeper than Darwin: The Prospect for Religion in the Age of Evolution. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 2003.
Hewlett, Martinez, and Ted Peters. Can you believe in God and evolution? A Guide for the Perplexed. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2006.
Russell, Robert John, William Stoeger, S.J., and Francisco Ayala, eds. Evolution and Molecular Biology: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action. Vatican City State and Berkeley: Vatican Observatory and CTNS, 1998.

 

[jfallaw]

If you are here to promote science, fine. But remember, for the Christian, REALITY is combined with the Spiritual. The two are inseparable. Got it?

No, I’m not suggesting scientists start writing papers on God, what I am saying is that Christians believe in a living GOD that exists at this moment. I don’t care that science has nothing to say about God. However, when scientific information is taken out of the lab it is used to further various agendas.

God brought about creation from nothing. It does not matter that science cannot comment on this. It does matter that this is what God can, in fact do. You know, like raise the dead, turn water into wine, give sight to the blind, cleanse the leper…

I believe God formed an earth that was ready to live on in a short period of time. No problem for Him.

God bless,
Ed

Then of course we have to get into the question of; what is time to God? ‘A short period of time’ may be billions of years to God.

 

[drpmjhess]

You have not yet addressed my abbreviated points about the sciencie of “specified complexity” and “irreducible complexity.” as outlined on 201. What is your argument against inference to the best explanation as an example of scienfic methodology.

Also, on what grounds do you dismiss the testimony of these “martyrs?” What is your answer to the abuse that Behe has taken? So far, your only comment has been that since, in your judgment, he is not a genius, persecution is acceptable. It that your final judgment on the matter?

I don’t know what abuse you are talking about. Was Behe denied tenure? As to the martyrs, there are tens of thousands of people denied tenure in thousands of university departments, and each one has a martyrdom story. I look forward to being paid to see “Expelled” and listening in on the discussion afterward to learn the merits of each case.

Specified complexity is not science: “Complex specified information (CSI) is a concept of Dembski’s own invention which is quite different from any form of information used by information theorists. Indeed, Dembski himself has berated his critics in the past for confusing CSI with other forms of information. This critique shows that CSI is equivocally defined and fails to characterize complex structures in the way that Dembski claims it does. On the basis of this flawed concept, he boldly proposes a new Law of Conservation of Information, which is shown here to be utterly baseless. Dembski claims to have made major contributions to the fields of statistics, information theory and thermodynamics. Yet his work has not been accepted by any experts in those fields, and has not been published in any relevant scholarly journals.” http://www.talkorigins.org/design/faqs/nfl/

Petrus

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

In response to post 205. I readily appreciate what you had to say, But, should this not be a different thread.
Deacon Ed B

 

[drpmjhess]

In response to post 205. I readily appreciate what you had to say, But, should this not be a different thread.
Deacon Ed B

I don’t know. What I do know is that if Intelligent Design were a real science there would be departments of it, or at least endowed chairs. Similarly, if astrology or alchemy were real sciences, there would be departments or endowed chairs for those “sciences.”

Where Intelligent Design belongs – and properly so – is in philosophy departments. There are many of us who believe there is an intelligence behind universe, and who apply that assumption daily in our lives, our prayers, our actions. We just can’t find it through science.

Petrus

 

[Stephen_LB]

StephenLB, a mythological rather than an historical reading of Genesis is mainstream Roman Catholic biblical theology.

“Our first parents” were a hominid group that biologists estimate to have been about 10,000 in number (See earlier posts by biologist Hecd). This seems to be the minimum number to avoid the genetic bottleneck that would led irreversibly to the extinction of Homo sapiens en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck.

In that they were a group, it is genetically impossible to single out an individual pair called “Adam” and “Eve” who were uniquely infused with “immortal souls,” or who uniquely sinned and affected the whole biosphere. For excellent discussion see the following:

John F. Haught, God after Darwin: A Theology of Evolution. Westview Press, 2000.
John F. Haught, Deeper than Darwin: The Prospect for Religion in the Age of Evolution. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 2003.
Hewlett, Martinez, and Ted Peters. Can you believe in God and evolution? A Guide for the Perplexed. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2006.
Russell, Robert John, William Stoeger, S.J., and Francisco Ayala, eds. Evolution and Molecular Biology: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action. Vatican City State and Berkeley: Vatican Observatory and CTNS, 1998.

From Pope Pius XII: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).

It would seem that your perception of mainstream theology is at variance with the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Am I to understand that you are a CATHOLIC theologian?

 

[Stephen_LB]

I don’t know what abuse you are talking about. Was Behe denied tenure? As to the martyrs, there are tens of thousands of people denied tenure in thousands of university departments, and each one has a martyrdom story. I look forward to being paid to see “Expelled” and listening in on the discussion afterward to learn the merits of each case.

Specified complexity is not science: “Complex specified information (CSI) is a concept of Dembski’s own invention which is quite different from any form of information used by information theorists. Indeed, Dembski himself has berated his critics in the past for confusing CSI with other forms of information. This critique shows that CSI is equivocally defined and fails to characterize complex structures in the way that Dembski claims it does. On the basis of this flawed concept, he boldly proposes a new Law of Conservation of Information, which is shown here to be utterly baseless. Dembski claims to have made major contributions to the fields of statistics, information theory and thermodynamics. Yet his work has not been accepted by any experts in those fields, and has not been published in any relevant scholarly journals.” http://www.talkorigins.org/design/faqs/nfl/

Petrus

I appreciate your attempt to answer the question, but you have not yet addressed the issue. I contend that a systematic observation followed by a mathematically supported inference to the best explanation is science. You say it is not. Why not?

 

[drpmjhess]

The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).

It would seem that your perception of mainstream theology is at variance with the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Am I to understand that you are a CATHOLIC theologian?

(1) Yes.

(2) What was the event, and when was the history of humankind?

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

In response to post 213. I agree that it cannot all be found in science, this is where one’s faith comes in. This is why there is the saying that for those without faith, no proof is enough, and with those with faith, no proof is necessary. Discussions like this do not help with faith, they help us with understanding the HOW. Sadly, discussions such as this, can also affect a persons faith. There must be a fine balance. I just wish I know where it was
Deacon Ed B

 

[drpmjhess]

The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).

It would seem that your perception of mainstream theology is at variance with the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Am I to understand that you are a CATHOLIC theologian?

(1) Yes.

(2) What was this event, and when was the beginning of the history of humankind?