Eucharist

[FaithT]

I remember people telling me that God only made the earth to 'look' old to fool people. That just didn't work for me. If the earth is young it should 'look' young so that people can figure it out and not be fooled. If, for example, continental drift happens in a young earth the continents should drift a few hundred miles a year every year. It's way way less than that.

I heard that too. God is not deceptive.

 

[FaithT]

You need to follow your conscience. If LCMS young earth creation bothers you, then tell your pastor.

Oh I did. Many times. Only he‘s since left to become a high school chaplain. He was ok with it as long as I believed God could’ve created in that way. Which of course He can, He can do anything. He’s God.

 

[FaithT]

That's very interesting. It must be a conservative area.

Yes it is. But despite being conservative, the LCMS church I go to is very contemporary. It in no way resembles a Catholic Mass but more like a non denominational (ND) church.

 

[RileyG]

You are always welcome back with open arms.

God bless you!

 

[FaithT]

You are always welcome back with open arms.

God bless you!

Thanks!

 

[fide]

You can vent if you want to. I trust the rocks. Not the scientists. They all are, like me, fallible and sinful. But a rock is neither fallible nor sinful. It can only tell a truth. I have spent a long time with fossils. And it’s not fossils vs faith but fossils and faith. I don’t have to deny one to have the other.

Extrapolations into the past or the future from a present measurement depend upon presupositions - concerning initial conditions and intermediate processes. Those presuppositions often directly reflect theological presumptions - typically, "no God". The word "God" is often used only in a joking way; or in a way such as, "There is no place or need for a God - unless you refer to "the Big Bang" (and of course we can explain away even that pseudo-dependence)". And "'God' is a useful assumption in a decreasing number of cases, which tend to zero of course, anyway."

It would not surprise me, btw, if God set the initial conditions in Creation in such a way that men who sought God not to exist, could find "evidence" in their wounded intellects and disordered wills (from inherited concupiscence) to conclude, to them, their desired "result: "We can explain everything without any God-premise. Case closed."

Similar to what He did in the world of religion, in salvation history. God is a holy sanctuary to those who know and trust and love Him, but a trap and a snare and a cause of stumbling to those who will not:

Isa 8:14 And he will become a sanctuary, and a stone of offense, and a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Extrapolations into the past or the future from a present measurement depend upon presupositions - concerning initial conditions and intermediate processes. Those presuppositions often directly reflect theological presumptions - typically, "no God". The word "God" is often used only in a joking way; or in a way such as, "There is no place or need for a God - unless you refer to "the Big Bang" (and of course we can explain away even that pseudo-dependence)". And "'God' is a useful assumption in a decreasing number of cases, which tend to zero of course, anyway."

It would not surprise me, btw, if God set the initial conditions in Creation in such a way that men who sought God not to exist, could find "evidence" in their wounded intellects and disordered wills (from inherited concupiscence) to conclude, to them, their desired "result: "We can explain everything without any God-premise. Case closed."

Similar to what He did in the world of religion, in salvation history. God is a holy sanctuary to those who know and trust and love Him, but a trap and a snare and a cause of stumbling to those who will not:

You can look down on me all you wish. But my view of creation is acceptably Catholic. You can say that I have no place or need for God too, but in that you are merely blowing smoke.

 

[FaithT]

You can look down on me all you wish. But my view of creation is acceptably Catholic. You can say that I have no place or need for God too, but in that you are merely blowing smoke.

Yes, it is definitely a Catholic view.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Yes, it is definitely a Catholic view.

One of the acceptable views, just as seven day creationism is an acceptable Catholic view. Catholics are not to be going to war with each other over differences on this issue or look down on other Catholics who view it differently.

 

[fide]

You can look down on me all you wish. But my view of creation is acceptably Catholic. You can say that I have no place or need for God too, but in that you are merely blowing smoke.

I am very, very sorry - please forgive me, if my words communicated any condescension whatsoever to you. I do not wish to "look down on you" at all, for any reason, in any way. I do not "look down on you" in any way. I was only trying to briefly summarize my own path into and out of science, hoping it might ring true for anyone else still stumbling around in their own searches, and thus maybe save them some time. In retrospect, I should have posted a generic comment to the thread and not "in response" to your post.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I am very, very sorry - please forgive me, if my words communicated any condescension whatsoever to you. I do not wish to "look down on you" at all, for any reason, in any way. I do not "look down on you" in any way. I was only trying to briefly summarize my own path into and out of science, hoping it might ring true for anyone else still stumbling around in their own searches, and thus maybe save them some time. In retrospect, I should have posted a generic comment to the thread and not "in response" to your post.

I am trying to live a life within the bounds of 'fides et ratio' as described by pope John Paul II. Not 'sola ratio', which of course quickly slides into irrationality when it is unmoored from the faith OR 'sola fide' which can also slide into fideistic irrationality. The heavens tell of the glory of God. That is why Romans chapter one declares that nobody has an excuse not to know.

" 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 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. So they are without excuse; 21* for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23* and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. 29 They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them."

Scientists can have muddy minds, not because of nature, but because they have started off bent and they then refused to see what is around them even when graced with plenty to see of the creation of God. Science is about hypothesis and testing observable things. A good scientist carefully tests what they can observe. A sloppy scientist is doctrinaire. Good science corrects past misinterpretations.

A Catholic is allowed to view the world in a way that evolution happened and that the earth is a few billion years old. A Catholic is also allowed to believe in a literal six day creation in 4004 BC. Or most anything in between. Bot the goofiness of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, which is heresy AND junk science (rejectable as both trash science AND false faith). As long as we all believe we are related as humans in one big biological family and as long as we all believe in an actual ancestral fall from original grace, I can't criticize your beliefs in a recent six day creation. And I don't.

 

[fide]

I am trying to live a life within the bounds of 'fides et ratio' as described by pope John Paul II. Not 'sola ratio', which of course quickly slides into irrationality when it is unmoored from the faith OR 'sola fide' which can also slide into fideistic irrationality. The heavens tell of the glory of God. That is why Romans chapter one declares that nobody has an excuse not to know.

" 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 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. So they are without excuse; 21* for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23* and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. 29 They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them."

Scientists can have muddy minds, not because of nature, but because they have started off bent and they then refused to see what is around them even when graced with plenty to see of the creation of God. Science is about hypothesis and testing observable things. A good scientist carefully tests what they can observe. A sloppy scientist is doctrinaire. Good science corrects past misinterpretations.

A Catholic is allowed to view the world in a way that evolution happened and that the earth is a few billion years old. A Catholic is also allowed to believe in a literal six day creation in 4004 BC. Or most anything in between. Bot the goofiness of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, which is heresy AND junk science (rejectable as both trash science AND false faith). As long as we all believe we are related as humans in one big biological family and as long as we all believe in an actual ancestral fall from original grace, I can't criticize your beliefs in a recent six day creation. And I don't.

Just one last thought on this matter - yes, "scientists can have muddy minds..." but more: we all do have muddy minds, and hearts, and wills- the only question is "how muddy?" And what do we do as we discover that fact? And will we ever see, and realize, just how muddy and how deep is that inner corruption? Scientists are not exempt from the deep and deadly disordered self-love that, as Augustine notes, makes a bipolarity in us all: made in the image and likeness of God we have a hunger for God, and possessing a fallen nature we have an excessive and disordered love for ourselves.

Thus the conflict that we have a life to resolve: ultimately and finally we have before us two cities - citizens of the one, love self to the contempt of God; citizens of the other, love God to the contempt of self. We are called to choose. MANY, in my experience, decide on what is really not a choice at all, but a wish, a dream, another form of the fundamental sickness: they want and pretend to have a compromise [that actually does not exist] - saying, "I want to choose myself, and the pleasures of this world, while not offending God too much."

The Church wisely sees and teaches that human and Church history will tend not toward the City of God but the opposite: the City of Man. The final victory of God in humanity will require His direct intervention, not a gradual "progressive ascendency" among mankind (and science) of a faithful Church:

677 The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection.<Cf. Rev 19:1-9> The kingdom will be fulfilled, then, not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God’s victory over the final unleashing of evil, which will cause his Bride to come down from heaven.<Cf Rev 13:8; 20:7-10; 21:2-4> God’s triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of the Last Judgement after the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world.<Cf. Rev 20:12 2 Pt 3:12-13>

Surely there are some good scientists, just are there are some good men and women in any profession. And these days, it seems to me, the corruption in society is growing, not "being corrected" (as you seem to be suggesting in the world of science) by the good. Come Lord Jesus!