Wherein the Author Wishes to Give Mr. Robertson a Swift Kick and Opines on Science and Faith

[thomryng]

This man is clearly in need of some professional help.

First, he publically called for the assassination of the President of Venezuela. Granted, he apologized (perhaps realizing that is a felony in the United States), he did but did not recant. Then, he claimed that Hurricane Katrina was somehow caused by legalized abortion.

And now:

I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city... If they have future problems in Dover, I recommend they call on Charles Darwin. Maybe he can help them.

While I'm willing to grant Pascal's assertion that occasionally we catch glimpses of reality which transcend reason (more or less his definition of Christianity), it does not follow that Christians are required to be nonsensical.

I just returned from Mass, and what I heard there was vastly different.

(F)rom the greatness and the beauty of created things
their original author, by analogy, is seen.

In answer to Mr. Robertson's anti-science, I ask: can science contradict the Christian faith?

The answer must be: of course not. As Pope John Paul II said, "truth cannot contradict truth". If Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection accurately describes the evolution of life on Earth - if it's true - then it cannot be incompatible with Christianity. Is Genesis literally true? Of course not; some of the earliest Church Fathers said as much. For one thing, there are two different accounts of creation there. And just in case anybody was unclear on the idea of mythopœic cosmogenesis, the first chapter of John's Gospel should pretty much clear up the concept.

They're myths, people. They are an inspired attempt to speak Truth, not facts. Genesis tells us about God and about the people who worshipped Him, and about how to live, not about exactly how the physics of cosmogenesis works.

Science seeks to understand how the universe works. Faith seeks to understand why and what to do now.

Science may eventually unravel the secrets of time and space, but it cannot describe an Eternal God who transcends time, an omnipotent God who transcends space.

Anyway, I'm going to Shakabrah to write now. Maybe I actually will manage something.

Comments

RE: They're myths

[littledrow.livejournal.com]

That statement, applied towards ANYTHING in the bible would be grounds to label you anti-christian in a growing number of churches, some including catholic churches. There are more and more christian faiths (my mother's Presbyterian church...of all things!) where they believe the bible as fact line for line.

But of course these people also misinterpret a lot of the parables Jesus told. My favorite being the parable of the good Samaritan and why it was so weird that he stopped to help the man. Most just interpret it as helping a stranger when in fact it was helping someone of a different faith than you without judgement just because they needed help.

Anyway...there you are. :)

Re: They're myths

[thomryng.livejournal.com]

I can't speak for other Christian communions, but as for the Catholic Church: the Church emphatically teaches that scripture is not to be taken in a literalist fashion, but is to be read "following the rules of sound interpretation".

All they have to do is read the Catechism (CCC 115-119). It really is quite explicit.

In passing, I should note that I don't mean that myths aren't true, just that they aren't factual. Just as mathematics is in some sense the language of science, so myth is the language of religion.

Re: They're myths

[littledrow.livejournal.com]

I didn't mean to imply that you had meant that myths aren't true. I happen to agree with your statement that mathematics = the language of science and myth the language of religion. One simply cannot define a code of conduct with 3+x=5, x=2. Ok that's simplifying a bit but you get my drift. ;)