bennychico11 Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 So I started reading the book Angels and Demons by Dan Brown because my clinical site is pretty slow and I don't want to sit around for 8 hours. Anyways, in the book, it says that a Roman Catholic priest named Georges Lemaitre is the originator of the big bang theory, but Hubble gets credit for the idea (even though he published is stuff two years after Lemaitre's original idea) because scientists did not want to give credit to the church for this breakthrough. So I looked it up to see if this was a true statement presented in the book and sure enough it is. Just found it a little interesting that a priest is the first person to claim universe expansion that we teach today. Has the Catholic church ever held a stance against the Big Bang? I know they fully support it now as the prevailing theory. I have to admit I'm not sure on how some aspects of science are with the Catholics. I know there are many denominations of Protistants that claim the earth and univerise are only 5000 years old. And strictly adhere to the 7 day theory, regardless of scientific evidence to the contrary. I don't think the Catholic church is one of them though...I'm pretty sure they agree with the expansion of the universe and evolution in the broadest sense. Of course, once you dig deeper into that, they say god did it all on purpose. Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Has the Catholic church ever held a stance against the Big Bang? I know they fully support it now as the prevailing theory. I have to admit I'm not sure on how some aspects of science are with the Catholics. I know there are many denominations of Protistants that claim the earth and univerise are only 5000 years old. And strictly adhere to the 7 day theory, regardless of scientific evidence to the contrary. I don't think the Catholic church is one of them though...I'm pretty sure they agree with the expansion of the universe and evolution in the broadest sense. Of course, once you dig deeper into that, they say god did it all on purpose. I'm not sure this link represents what the Catholic church believes but you may find it useful in bringing scientific evidence into line with creationism. Your last sentence (and prior posts) leads me to believe you doubt some higher being caused this all to happen. This site http://www.doesgodexist.org/ is right up your alley if you would rather consider these things from a scientific and philosophical viewpoint rather than listen to what some religion or church have to say about it. The 3rd article link, What was the cause of the beginning?, deals with this but I would suggest you peruse the first 2 links as well. Link to comment
The Dude Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 If we do exist, there are only two possible explanations as to how our existence came to be. Either we had a beginning or we did not have a beginning. The Bible says, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1 :1). Most atheists maintain that there was no beginning. The idea is that matter has always existed in the form of either matter or energy; and all that has happened is that matter has been changed from form to form, but it has always been. The Humanist Manifesto says, "Matter is self-existing and not created," and that is a concise statement of the atheist's belief. http://www.doesgodexist.org/ Goddamnit. Link to comment
Sub-Husker Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 The topic of this month's sermons at my church is Sin. What does SIN mean to you? Link to comment
Enhance Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 The topic of this month's sermons at my church is Sin. What does SIN mean to you? Anything a 'God' wouldn't want you to do. Link to comment
walksalone Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 The topic of this month's sermons at my church is Sin. What does SIN mean to you? Anything a 'God' wouldn't want you to do. Everybody has a moral compass, and knows what is right and what is wrong. (granted whether some choose to listen to it or adhere to it, is a discussion for another day) If you need a book, a group of people, or a spiritual figurehead to keep you from doing "bad things", then I don't know what to tell you. It's pretty simple, treat people how you'd like to be treated, and thats it. I don't need a system of belief, a book, or some guy in robes to tell me that. Link to comment
bennychico11 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Everybody has a moral compass, and knows what is right and what is wrong. (granted whether some choose to listen to it or adhere to it, is a discussion for another day) If you need a book, a group of people, or a spiritual figurehead to keep you from doing "bad things", then I don't know what to tell you. It's pretty simple, treat people how you'd like to be treated, and thats it. I don't need a system of belief, a book, or some guy in robes to tell me that. "I get my limits from a rational consideration of the consequences of my actions. That's how I determine what's moral. I get it from a foundation that says, 'My actions have an affect on the people around me, and theirs have an affect on me.' And if we're going to live cooperatively and share space, we have to recognize that impact. And my freedom to swing my arm, ends at their nose. And I have no right to impose my will over somebody else's will in that type of scenario. That's where I get them from. I get them from an understanding of reality, not an assertion of authority." I'd like to add that 'sin' is also considered unchanging. What was a 'sin' 2000 years ago is supposed to be still a 'sin' today. Even though societal and moral rules changes...'sin' apparently doesn't. Obviously I disagree with the concept of 'sin.' Link to comment
Enhance Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 The topic of this month's sermons at my church is Sin. What does SIN mean to you? Anything a 'God' wouldn't want you to do. Everybody has a moral compass, and knows what is right and what is wrong. (granted whether some choose to listen to it or adhere to it, is a discussion for another day) If you need a book, a group of people, or a spiritual figurehead to keep you from doing "bad things", then I don't know what to tell you. It's pretty simple, treat people how you'd like to be treated, and thats it. I don't need a system of belief, a book, or some guy in robes to tell me that. I completely agree. I believe I know what's right and what's wrong. Link to comment
It'sNotAFakeID Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Sin is anything that goes against your moral compass. Link to comment
Enhance Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I correlate sin with religion. Is this fair to do, or has the term 'sin' been historically used outside of a religious context? If it hasn't, then one would think people who don't believe in organized religions can't sin - they can only violate their moral code. Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I agree that "sin" can only be used in a religious context. If a person doesn't believe in God or in any higher authority on moral matters than their own "moral compass" or conscience, then sin is not a concept that they wil have a very good grasp on. They may behave in much the same way a religious person does and feel they they know the difference between right and wrong but, in the religious context, there are absolutes for what constitutes sin and what does not. I do not believe all persons have the same moral compass and that is one reason I don't feel matters of "sin" can simply be left up to the individuals moral compass. As an example, there are people in this world that would kill you without batting an eye and without feeling remorse for something as simple as disrespecting them. Most of us realize killing is wrong and also that it is a sin but the fact is there are people who do not. Hitler? Eichman? Some hardcore gangbangers? Can/should we really leave these matters up to the individuals moral compass? Here's an interesting link dealing with mortal and venial sin. http://www.saintaquinas.com/mortal_sin.html Link to comment
HuskerShark Posted March 6, 2012 Author Share Posted March 6, 2012 People have a moral compass because of the way they are raised by parents and other significant role models, as well as their relationships with their peers. You are not born with a moral compass, it is taught. Link to comment
bennychico11 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 Can/should we really leave these matters up to the individuals moral compass? No. And they aren't. We leave these matters to our social justice system. Where we as people...at least in this country...make the decisions that we all agree to live by. See my above quote. And these morals and societal laws change over time. When in one time where slavery was accepted (and even backed by Bible verses)...another time decides that it is immoral for a person to own another. Link to comment
strigori Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 'Sin' is a term used by religion to manipulate people. Furthering the guilt and shame a virtues garbage. There are always 'sins' that are just part of being human. And they need to find some method of convincing people that they are ALL sinners. There is even the concept of 'original sin' stating that being a decendent of Adam, you are guilty of the 'sin' of the fall of man from the moment of conception. Guilty for being born. How sweet. The Pope will add 'new sins' every few years. And what a 'sin' is is hardly absolute. It changes as time moves on. I do not belive in 'sin.' I know what is right or wrong, and I can not be guilty of anything for just having a thought. Link to comment
knapplc Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 It's OK, everyone. I know how to fix sin. You just use Holy Water. And how do you make Holy Water? Easy. You just boil the Hell out of it. 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts