Why does science always upstage God?

[Ravenshire]

Since when does science upstage God? That's actually laughable. Science didn't give me an enriching Catholic education. Science didn't give me the ability to learn how to play guitar. Science didn't give me the wonderful dachshund sleeping next to me right now. God did all of those things.

Gawd gave you none of that. Your parent's made the choice to run you through the kathy-lick indoctrination mill. Artists gave you the guitar, and scientists allowed you to plug it in and really rock the house. Breeders, following the laws laid out by evolution, even though they weren't yet understood, gave you the dachshund, along with every other variety of domesticated K-9s.

No gawds needed.

---

We recently rescinded our rule against replying to old posts, a process called 'necroposting'.

Boru

Oh, ok.  Thanks.

---

Where does one find a herd of wild dachsunds?

I don’t get it.

Color my 100% unsurprised. 

---

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.

And you just keep pushing your gawd into smaller and smaller gaps.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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?

You keep using this "just a few bad people" excuse every time someone exposes yet another crime against humanity by the RCC. How many will it take before you realize it's the RCC itself that's corrupt and not "just a few" people. Just a few did this, just a few did that, just a few molested kids, just a few took bribes, just a few redirected the donations, just a few... just a few... just a few.

It's really not "just a few."