Fr. Barron’s response to Bill Maher’s upcoming movie “Religulous“gives penetrating insight into Maher’s problematic methodology for the atheists’ favorite movie:
October 4, 2008
bill maher, fr. barron, religulous
October 4, 2008 at 5:08 am
This is actually a problematic area for me. On the one hand, and most importantly, I appreciate very much Fr’s extremely well argued case for the rapport between science and faith.
On the other hand, as a “young earth” Catholic, I almost felt as if Fr tossed us (young earth Catholics) in the dust bin in an effort to prove that Catholics aren’t as dumb as the Bill Marrs of the world think we are. After all, I can believe that faith and science will ultimately coincide without believing that Genesis is nothing but allegory. Science and faith will/do synch. Unfortunately, Fr assumes that science is at a point in its “evolution” that it can synch with faith now. Why assume this? Assuming it now, at this point in science’s evolution, requires that we reduce Holy Scripture to something less than its word in order to make it match up with the current rev of science beta. For my own part I prefer to assume Holy Scripture got it right the first time and that it’s up to science to evolve in an effort to catch up. I firmly believe that scripture and reason are ultimately, not only reconcilable, but also one; but, the onus is upon science to do catch-up.
Taking this all into account, I wonder: after the Church’s apology for the Galileo unpleasantness, is it now politically incorrect, or even embarrassing, to have Catholics who express views that cannot be squared with current scientific thought?
October 4, 2008 at 7:13 am
Douglas,The problem with the “young Earth” hypothesis is a theological and not a scientific one. The “young Earth” hypothesis necessitates also the hypothesis that God has deliberately attempted to deceive us by falsifying carbon dating tests. Apparently, for Protestants a deceptive God is not a problem, as they readily accept the “God-changed-the-carbon-ratio-in-order-to-test-our-faith” conjecture, but it is a non-starter for Catholics.
October 4, 2008 at 2:21 pm
On the age of the earth thing, I recommend PhilVaz, who has done more dialogs on this than any one man probably should: http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/philos.htm#Science
October 5, 2008 at 2:24 am
The “young Earth” hypothesis necessitates also the hypothesis that God has deliberately attempted to deceive us by falsifying carbon dating tests.
God is not the author of carbon-dating tests so there is no deception here. On the other hand, God is the author of Holy Scripture which clearly implies that the earth is young.
October 5, 2008 at 6:40 am
God is the author of creation- therefore “carbon”; and radio carbon dating is only a method (use of God given reason) to peer more deeply into His creation. Hence; get your reasoning straight and read a book on scripture and educate yourself dcs and douglas. Your points are baseless and bring the possibilities of God down to a fourth grade level. Christopher is right on the mark.
October 5, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Hence; get your reasoning straight and read a book on scripture and educate yourself dcs and douglas.
Yes, radiocarbon dating is a method to peer into God’s creation, assuming that the results are being interpreted properly and are not subjected to human bias (cf. the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin).
And yes, God is the author of creation but unlike the truths expressed in Holy Scripture, radiocarbon dating is not necessary for salvation. So logically why would one believe the results of radiocarbon dating over Holy Scripture?
October 7, 2008 at 7:18 pm
The comment by anonymous is pointed and demeaning. I agree that foregoing good reasoning and dumbing things down are bad, but Douglas & dcs are doing neither.
The young earth hypothesis does not 'necessitate' the hypothesis that God has deliberately deceived us unless you assume the inerrancy of carbon dating (or more accurately, that certain interpretations are inerrant).
July 13, 2009 at 10:21 am
August 15, 2009 at 9:39 am
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
© 2021 Creative Minority Report — Powered by WordPress
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑