Where the Rubber Hits the Road

Pope Benedict: No scientific theory can discount God | Holy Post | National Post

"I want to examine what I see as the three most profound problems for Christian theism since the advent of Darwinism, so profound as to cause many to see Darwinism as a "defeater" of Christian belief. These problems were certainly not absent before the discovery of evolution - indeed, they are classic inheritances from Christian philosophical theology which have exercised Christian thinkers at least since the third century. But evolutionary theory has certainly sharpened them in particular ways that, I would insist, responsible contemporary Christians cannot now avoid confronting. What then are the three problems that confront us when we try to see a coherent relation between a good, providential deity and the unfolding created process?" Click on the link below to read entire article. God and Evolution: A New Proposal - ABC Religion & Ethics - Opinion

Aaah... they saved the best line for the last! "Why is there something rather than nothing" is the ultimate question that science and theology tries to answer. During my recent fishing trip I was able to take advantage of the absolute peace and quiet to read 4 or 5 books, among the best of which was "The Universe in a Single Atom" by the Dalli Lama. In it he makes a persuasive and cogent argument that science and faith are not competitors or opponents. He posits that each is using its own methodology to answer that simple single question by pointing to points of convergence between Buddhist teachings and the recent discoveries of particle physics (just to name one of the material sciences). It inspired a great deal of thought as I read his book and compared his arguments with the teachings of the R.C. Church. Between the five books I completed I filled up a good sized notebook with thoughts, quotes and arguments on this and other questions. Lots of fodder for future...

Below you'll find part of an exchange I'm engaged in on the Holy Post with somehow going by the handle 'Shibboleth'.  The subject? Can the application of the scientific method to determine the truths of whether or not supernatural forces or beings do exist. I thought you might like comment of the exchange. At the very least, I hope you find it interesting. Fr. Tim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11:59 AM on June 13, 2010 Tim: I have asked some pointed questions and made statements which may have initially made you bristle. The reason I have done so is because of my bias toward scientific methodology. Sufficiency is a term among many others to ensure a persons claim is tested according to scientific rigueur. Specifically, evidence offered in support of any claim must be adaquate to establish the truth of that claim with: 1) the burden of proof for any claim resting on th...

THIS is fascinating - it's rather dazzling to see it presented this way. I CERTAINLY THOUGHT THIS WAS ENLIGHTENING.  BEYOND OUR SUN IT'S A BIG UNIVERSE. ANTARES IS THE 15 TH BRIGHTEST STAR IN THE SKY.  IT IS MORE THAN 1000 LIGHT YEARS AWAY.  NOW, HOW BIG ARE YOU? NOW, TRY TO WRAP YOUR MIND AROUND THIS... THIS IS A HUBBLE TELESCOPE ULTRA DEEP FIELD INFRARED VIEW OF COUNTLESS 'ENTIRE' GALAXIES BILLIONS OF LIGHT-YEARS AWAY. BELOW IS A CLOSE-UP OF ONE OF THE DARKEST REGIONS OF THE PHOTO ABOVE. NOW, HOW BIG ARE YOU?  AND HOW BIG ARE THE THINGS THAT UPSET YOU TODAY? KEEP LIFE IN PERSPECTIVE.. AND DON'T SWEAT THE SMALL STUFF! IT'S ALL UNDER CONTROL! EVEN IN A COSMOS THIS LARGE, GOD STILL LOVED US EACH SO MUCH THAT HE SENT HIS ONLY SON SO THAT I MIGHT KNOW THAT I AM SAVED, LOVED AND IMPORTANT TO HIM! FAITH IN GOD'S REVELATION IN SCRIPTURE AND MADE MANIFEST IN CHRIST...

Every now and then there is a science article that provides an insight into the nature of things that serves to reinforce Christian belief. The Globe and Mail has published such an article entitled "Where does the universe end?". I draw your attention to following quote: The Universe doesn't end, as counter-intuitive as this seems. Once again, language confuses concepts. We speak of a ‘Big Bang' but don't mean a ‘bang' like an explosion, which has a centre and a shock wave that moves spherically out into air from the explosion. Instead, the ‘Big Bang' happened everywhere in the Universe at once, with no centre. Shortly after the ‘Big Bang', density and pressure of the Entire Universe were the same everywhere. So, pressure difference could not possibly create an explosion. The ‘Big Bang' wasn't a bang at all. Humm... so the universe appeared everywhere all at once. Sounds like the Genesis account to me.

Mark Shea , on today's Catholic Exchange Blog , offers an excellent post on how the language of science has evolved into a counter-point of the language of religion. Notwithstanding the contributions of John Ralston Saul (Voltaire's Bastards) and his insights into the use of language as a means by which "experts" have perverted knowledge into a series of technological camps that jealously guard their own areas of expertise, Shea's contribution helps us to see how the advocates of the scientific method have established a false dichotomy of "faith vs science" which tends to blind each side to the wisdom inherent in the other. Its well worth a read.