Monday, July 23, 2007

Da Vinci: Random bits

This is the post for all those bits about which I have not enough commentary for a full post:

"Aringarosa had never been comfortable with the Vatican's need to dabble in science. What was the rationale for fusing science and faith? Unbiased science could not possibly be performed by a man who possessed faith in God."

Alternatively, unbiased science cannot be performed by anyone. At least with a man of God, one can understand his bias. With a secular scientist, it is impossible to know which items he selected from the buffet of philosophy to create his beliefs. The reason for dabbling with science is that if science is surrendered, it will be turned on the church.


Teabing.

Come on, his antagonist is Leigh Teabing? Teabing? Every time I read it, I read, Leigh Teabag.


Every faith in the world is based on fabrication. That is the definition of faith--acceptance of that which we imagine to be true, that which we cannot prove.

This is a non sequitur. That which we cannot prove, that which we imagine to be true, are not for that reason fabrications. What we imagine to be true may very well be true. What we cannot prove to be true may also be true. Besides, "every faith in the world" is over broad. Orthopraxic religions require no faith. It is only the orthodox religions in which faith matters.


Those who truly understand their faiths understand the stories are metaphorical.

And those who understand their faiths understand that there is a depth to Scripture which your protagonist has not begun to plumb. There are metaphors, yes, but there is also reality. There is allegory, philosophy, advice, and wisdom. Because it can be read as a metaphor does not mean that is its sole, best, or even proper meaning.

On a side note, Christianity without its "miracles" or "stories" is dead. Remove the miracles from the Koran, and nothing changes. Remove Buddha's miracles, and Buddhism survives. Remove the miracles of Christianity, and you have cut the heart out of it.


The doctrine has become a buffet line. Abstinence, confession, communion, baptism, mass--take your pick--chose whatever combination pleases you and ignore the rest. What kind of spiritual guidance is the church offering?

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Return to main post

2 Comments:

Blogger Karl said...

Alternatively, unbiased science cannot be performed by anyone. At least with a man of God, one can understand his bias. With a secular scientist, it is impossible to know which items he selected from the buffet of philosophy to create his beliefs.

When I look at how different the attitudes of a Christian ca. 1995 and 1495 are, I sometimes think that the philosophy is more important than the faith.

8:09 AM  
Blogger Octavo Dia said...

ca. 1995 and 1495 are

Of course you select a date prior to Luther!

It would seem, however, that Christianity goes in cycles of liberalism followed by a return to Scripture. That is why Augustine is still read by Christians for inspiration. Try finding a bit of science from 1500 years ago that is still agreed upon.

8:32 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home