I Dont Have Enough Faith to be an Evolutionist - Skepticism of Evolution
By the way, cassini's plagiarism above (since he did not quote his source, but decided to modify the text as if it were his own) was from Chapter 3 of A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom  by Andrew Dickson White.

(I guess it's the dozen or so years of teaching that makes me suspicious when I find text that seems to be from somewhere but not attributed, and given the tools teachers have these days, it's easy to search for key phrases)

White is the co-founder of Cornell University. Raised an Episcopalian, he was a Freemason and when the Episcopalian preferences at Cornell caused the New York State governor who was meant to inaugurate the building of some new science buildings in 1869, White invited his fellow masons to perform the ceremony. In his autobiography he writes :

Quote:To honor to this occasion, it was decided to invite leading men from all parts of the State, and, above all, to request the governor, Mr. Fenton, to lay the corner-stone. But it was soon evident that his excellency's old fear of offending the sectarian schools still controlled him. He made excuse, and we then called on the Freemasons to take charge of the ceremony. They came in full regalia, bringing their own orators; and, on the appointed day, a great body of spectators was grouped about the foundations of the new building on the beautiful knoll in front of the upper quadrangle.

The book from which cassini has borrowed is White's attempt to promote the idea that science and religion must stay in separate spheres to avoid conflict, and science is essentially the superior. Of course, that's not the Catholic understanding of the truth, but neither is nominalist and later Fundamentalist Protestant view (Luther's view that our human reason is not trustworthy and God tricks us in order to humiliate us), or the polar extreme of White's, which says that science is not trustworthy and we just have to "believe".

The Truth, which the Catholic Church asserts is the higher point in the middle of the extremes. Infallibly defined by the First Vatican Council in Dei Filius is this notion that Faith and Reason can never truly conflict :

Quote:But, although faith is above reason, nevertheless, between faith and reason no true dissension can ever exist, since the same God, who reveals mysteries and infuses faith, has bestowed on the human soul the light of reason; moreover, God cannot deny Himself, nor ever contradict truth with truth. But, a vain appearance of such a contradiction arises chiefly from this, that either the dogmas of faith have not been understood and interpreted according to the mind of the Church, or deceitful opinions are considered as the determinations of reason.

If scientific study shows one thing, we cannot assert that Scripture says the contrary.

Geocentrists understand this in principle, and this is why they spend lots of words trying to show how the science is wrong and instead proves Geocentrism, but as David Palm and others have shown time and time again, every try is an utter failure in basic high-school level mathematics and science.

As Palm summarizes it :

Quote:The neo-geocentric explanation to those phenomena consists of after-the-fact, ad hoc special pleading and invocation of media and forces for which they do not have a shred of observational evidence.  Their only other recourse is to General Relativity, a theory they vociferously reject as hopelessly wrong, the product of moral degeneracy and possibly even syphilis-induced insanity (while still appealing to it themselves whenever they’re called to establish their case on its own grounds.)  Therefore neo-geocentrism is neither philosophically nor scientifically robust – it’s correctly labelled junk science.

So the fall-back is just what Adventist "scientist" George McCready Price did with "Flood Geology". He could not make an argument against Darwinian Evolution (of which there are many good scientific arguments), so he decided to short cut this by asserting as dogmatic the literal reading of a 24-hour day in Genesis 1, based on the "revelations" of the Adventist "prophetess" Ellen White (not Scripture). If the Flood produced what looked like a very old world then evolution would never have enough time, so he ipse dixit re-wrote his geology to suggest a young earth, and that we could never know what the world was really like before the Flood, thus evolution could not be true.

(Side note to avoid being accused of being pro-evolution : I think Darwinian evolution (beyond the level of genus) is certainly false, but not because of revelation, rather because good science and philosophy show it's a problem.)

The neo-Geocentrists like cassini, don't want to have to make the scientific arguments, because they don't work. So they oppose science to their dogma, and thus reject it. The consequence is that whenever even Magisterial or Scriptural proofs are asserted against their dogma, they must maintain it, like Fundamentalist Protestants do.
[-] The following 3 users Like MagisterMusicae's post:
  • Alphonse il Segundo, Filiolus, jovan66102

Messages In This Thread
RE: I Dont Have Enough Faith to be an Evolutionist - Skepticism of Evolution - by MagisterMusicae - 07-01-2019, 04:56 PM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)