Why does science always upstage God?

[Ahriman]

Seems you know the magical thinking is irrational yet still want to indulge just because.

I play pretend because my real life sucks. All my friends went off to college. I have a female dachshund. I believe God sent her to protect me and make me feel safe. I am willing to back off of every irrational belief I hold, besides the dachshund one.

[Silver]

You can easily think the dog being brought into your life is a special circumstance without involving the god concept.

[Mashmont]

You're right about the biases. I just think in terms of magic, miracles, angels, demons, all that stuff. My tendency to think that way, actually became more pronounced after I left Catholicism, almost as if God was saying, "No Jacob, come back, we need you". I used to have friends and a social life, so maybe back then, I didn't feel as much of a need to indulge in magical thinking, because I was more fulfilled?

Miracles are simply science which we do not  yet have the intelligence to understand, and perhaps never will.

Prior to Edison capturing light in the electric lightbulb from the ether, that would have been perceived as a miracle.  But when you understand enough science,  the miracle becomes understandable.

---

Oh, ok.  Thanks.

---

I don’t get it.

Dachshunds are a human-created breed. German dog breeders took multiple generations of artificial selection to come up with the animal you know as a dachshund.

Boru

Ah, I see.  Thank you.

---

The best proof of God are the astoundingly great and accomplished lives of His most devoted believers; the canonized saints of the Catholic Church.

But what about figures like Gandhi? Do they count as proof of Vishnu?

Gandhi, while a man of accomplishment, had blemishes in his personal life, including a love affair with a woman not his wife.  Had he been Catholic, he probably would not have been canonized as a saint.

---

The cannonized saints?  We talking about the ones who flew around churches and made animals talk...or?  I don't wanna be completely dismissive here, and I suspect that those guys probably handed out alot of bread or made alot of bread for the catholic church.  That's amazing, in it's own right - but they lose me when they get to the whole verified miracles thing.

I can't think of any canonized saint who was involved in making money for the Catholic Church.  They were all either very poor or renounced their family wealth.  But they performed outsized accomplishments of good for mankind.

[vulcanlogician]

Gandhi, while a man of accomplishment, had blemishes in his personal life, including a love affair with a woman not his wife.  Had he been Catholic, he probably would not have been canonized as a saint.

1) You missed my point. Brewer said it better. The "great deeds" of saints are evidence of belief... not of God's existence.

2) Canonization is a rather a political process. Think of Aquinas. A remarkable figure, yes. But hardly on par with the stories of some of the saints. He didn't live in poverty and still give all he had... he wrote some works that the Catholic Church quite liked. So be sure not to read too much into the fact that someone is canonized by the Church.

(Let's focus on item 1, though.)

[Mashmont]

Gandhi, while a man of accomplishment, had blemishes in his personal life, including a love affair with a woman not his wife.  Had he been Catholic, he probably would not have been canonized as a saint.

1) You missed my point. Brewer said it better. The "great deeds" of saints are evidence of belief... not of God's existence.

2) Canonization is a rather a political process. Think of Aquinas. A remarkable figure, yes. But hardly on par with the stories of some of the saints. He didn't live in poverty and still give all he had... he wrote some works that the Catholic Church quite liked. So be sure not to read too much into the fact that someone is canonized by the Church.

(Let's focus on item 1, though.)

I say it is circumstantial evidence of God's existence,  that these people are God's most ardent believers have borne such great fruit in their lives for the benefit of mankind.

[vulcanlogician]

1) You missed my point. Brewer said it better. The "great deeds" of saints are evidence of belief... not of God's existence.

2) Canonization is a rather a political process. Think of Aquinas. A remarkable figure, yes. But hardly on par with the stories of some of the saints. He didn't live in poverty and still give all he had... he wrote some works that the Catholic Church quite liked. So be sure not to read too much into the fact that someone is canonized by the Church.

(Let's focus on item 1, though.)

I say it is circumstantial evidence of God's existence,  that these people are God's most ardent believers have borne such great fruit in their lives for the benefit of mankind.

It isn't even circumstantial evidence. Certain people perform great deeds. The reason why they performed these deeds is (assumed to be) belief in God. God's actual existence isn't needed to explain any of it.

Unless maybe you refer exclusively to miracles. And if a saint performed miracles, I'm more apt to think he was a charlatan... not a great person. That's a strike against the person in my book.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I can't think of any canonized saint who was involved in making money for the Catholic Church. 

Saint Teresa of Calcutta fairly leaps to mind.

Boru

[Mashmont]

I can't think of any canonized saint who was involved in making money for the Catholic Church. 

Saint Teresa of Calcutta fairly leaps to mind.

Boru

How so?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Saint Teresa of Calcutta fairly leaps to mind.

Boru

How so?

She raised hundreds of millions of dollars to ostensibly help the poor. Virtually none of the money was spent to help the poor. It sat in the Vatican Bank.

Boru

[Mashmont]

How so?

She raised hundreds of millions of dollars to ostensibly help the poor. Virtually none of the money was spent to help the poor. It sat in the Vatican Bank.

Boru

Why would people send money to a Vatican bank instead of to the Sisters of Charity?   But assuming this is so, and assuming it was mismanaged by a few bad people,  I would say two things.  1)  Fallible humans do bad things sometimes, and they exist in every organization.  2) How do you make the leap that bringing in money to the Vatican is a prerequisite for Sainthood, even through this example?