When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Where Fellowship and Camaraderie lives: that place where the CPS membership values fun and good fellowship as the cement of the community
Post Reply
User avatar
Thunktank
Terminal Lance. Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Terminal Lance.  Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Posts: 22330
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Home Sweet California at the Beach!

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by Thunktank » Tue May 22, 2018 11:59 am

Well, it looks to me, Tuttle, that perhaps you’re just barking up the wrong tree. A hundred years ago, well maybe more like 150 years ago there was much less evidence for an old earth or evolution. Today, there are layers and layers of evidence and virtually no disagreement in the basic outline. The point is, the type of creationism the young earthers are pushing simply doesn’t add up. Believing that they are filling in the spaces better than science is over the physical evidence we have is really a tough thing to do, IMO. There’s so much evidence for science that it’s really tough to see much room for another drastically different layer of information that could tell a cohesive story.

I feel like maybe creationists are trying too hard to get attention and get adopted into a family (science) who doesn’t want their input in how they’re demanding the families of science change to make room for the creationists own preferred perspective. Meanwhile science is aloofly and confidently saying with a smug smile, “Listen buddy, we’re being as objective as humanly possible, but you’re nuts if you think we’re going to try those metaphysics again.”
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” -Yoda

User avatar
infidel
kthxbai
kthxbai
Posts: 6483
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by infidel » Tue May 22, 2018 12:16 pm

tuttle wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:57 am
If that's the case, I have no problem believing light is seen from some odd million light years away and at the same time believing the universe doesn't have to be millions or billions of years old.
Well I'm glad that's settled. Anyone for some pho?
Inadvertently emboldening the cause of naïve Evolutionism since 2016.

"Who the hell ponders placentas? Dude, you're a freak of nature." - DepartedLight

"One man's saint is another man's infidel." - hugodrax

"Total. Freaking. Win." - Skip

User avatar
tuttle
Brother of the Briar
Brother of the Briar
Posts: 13869
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by tuttle » Tue May 22, 2018 12:23 pm

infidel wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:50 am
tuttle wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:36 am
I did say it. I've been saying it for years over fifty plus pages! :lol: I've just changed gears (same vehicle) from 'narrative' to 'philosophy'. I've never denied creationism is an 'ism', and I've been trying to say (forever) that this is the main reason Creation can't fit with Evolution. It's also why I'll amend your statement to say "Creationism or intelligent design are more like a philosophy that “conflicts” with science as interpreted by the evolutionist narrative. (Evolutionism is an 'ism' too). And yes, I've never advocated or pushed for modern science. It isn't quite something else entirely (since Creation deals with All Things) but it is something that transcends modern science. It goes where modern science cannot go. Insofar as it interprets evidence based on its own narrative that reaches beyond the bounds of modern science, yes, it does 'use' science, maybe not to further its goals (generally speaking) but to aid in understanding things within this worldview.
Your language is very creative. Creationism "transcends", it is "free", it is "beyond the bounds" of modern science. And the fact that you keep qualifying it as "modern" science seems suspicious too, like, "science was great before it figured out these newfangled ideas that contradict Genesis".
To be fair, I'm using 'modern science' because Thunk did. I was just trying to keep us on the same playing field. If it helps I'm thinking of 'modern' science as 'evolution'.

infidel wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:50 am
No, Creationism does not use science to understand anything. Creationism does not use science at all. Individual creationists might attempt to, but at the end of the day Creationists use the ancient scripture as the script and use whatever mental gymnastics they can to force anything it can to fit it. That is not science. I know you think evolutionists do the exact same thing using a different script, but you are just wrong. Creationism conflicts with science, period.
They do both have a narrative that they interpret evidence from and I can see how, via evolution's narrative that I'm "just wrong". I'm okay with that.

Creationism conflicts with evolutionary science, yes.

infidel wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:50 am
Intelligent Design is somewhere in the middle between straight up Creationism and Science. IDers use science right up to the point where something seems impossible or highly unlikely and then just stop the science and declare "Intelligence!"
No complaints from me. I agree. The difference between us though is that I don't see that as a problem.

Personally I think IDers, while I commend their efforts, spend too much time trying to argue the evolutionists by way of evolutionist rules. The sooner everyone inside and out realizes/recognizes that ID/Creationism/Evolution all operate according to their own rules/limitations/etc, the easier it'd be to have some real discussion. I personally don't think the creationists will win any kind of arguments in the evolutionist realm because their best arguments are not allowed on the same playing field. The real battle is over the narratives, the philosophical, the spiritual. In reality evolutionists are having those kinds of discussions all the time, but are usually unaware that their limits are the very things leading them to their conclusions. If an evolutionist says, "Based on the evidence, I don't believe there is a god" he's speaking outside of his realm, making a kind of statement that they wouldn't allow a creationist to make using the same rules. This tells me they don't recognize (willingly or unwillingly) their limitations and in a weird, kind of inverted way, transdelve (?) science, using science as the only tool to completely miss the point.

Things are getting weird. I need to go eat lunch :lol:
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
Thunktank
Terminal Lance. Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Terminal Lance.  Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Posts: 22330
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Home Sweet California at the Beach!

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by Thunktank » Tue May 22, 2018 12:25 pm

infidel wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 12:16 pm
tuttle wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:57 am
If that's the case, I have no problem believing light is seen from some odd million light years away and at the same time believing the universe doesn't have to be millions or billions of years old.
Well I'm glad that's settled. Anyone for some pho?
It’s not settled yet.

So Jesus changed water into wine to show support for marriage and a good buzz, likewise he made starlight visible to earthlings from stars millions of light years away within a time frame of thousands of years to prove that he can make wine from water? I like it. :dance:
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” -Yoda

User avatar
tuttle
Brother of the Briar
Brother of the Briar
Posts: 13869
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by tuttle » Tue May 22, 2018 1:42 pm

Thunktank wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:59 am
Well, it looks to me, Tuttle, that perhaps you’re just barking up the wrong tree. A hundred years ago, well maybe more like 150 years ago there was much less evidence for an old earth or evolution. Today, there are layers and layers of evidence and virtually no disagreement in the basic outline. The point is, the type of creationism the young earthers are pushing simply doesn’t add up. Believing that they are filling in the spaces better than science is over the physical evidence we have is really a tough thing to do, IMO. There’s so much evidence for science that it’s really tough to see much room for another drastically different layer of information that could tell a cohesive story.

I feel like maybe creationists are trying too hard to get attention and get adopted into a family (science) who doesn’t want their input in how they’re demanding the families of science change to make room for the creationists own preferred perspective. Meanwhile science is aloofly and confidently saying with a smug smile, “Listen buddy, we’re being as objective as humanly possible, but you’re nuts if you think we’re going to try those metaphysics again.”
I'm not really barking up any tree. I do react against what I perceive as an agenda and get tired of the onslaught of propaganda. (And I can't help reading things that just jump out at me as extremely weird. Like when you said "There's so much evidence for science..." Evolution has so ingrained itself that people use evolution and science interchangeably :lol: ) Those are the kinds of things that created threads like this. Feathers on dinosaurs being one of the biggest whoppers as of late. And I don't often have a huge dog in the fight as to the age of the earth. My position doesn't really allow me to prove to you from a test tube how old the earth is. But I'm cool with that, and I'm not calling my representatives to put my view into the schools. I'll teach my kids what I want thankyouverymuch, but beyond that, it's more of a fun topic to wrangle over.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 36848
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by UncleBob » Tue May 22, 2018 1:46 pm

tuttle wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 10:38 am
If unbelievers are scandalized and believe Christianity unacceptable on the basis of creationism being 'anti-science', then they'll think the same of the resurrection. I've done nothing but advocate that supernatural creation (and resurrection) transcend evolutionary science.
Um, this is my point. If the universe erupted into existence 6000 years ago (or whenever) this should be testable. So measure it, test it, and demonstrate it. A one-time event like the resurrection cannot be measured, tested, or demonstrated because it cannot be seen now. But YEC are anti-science if for no other reason that they cannot or will not "do" science. They tend to want to philosophize rather than use the scientific method. World-creating in the armchair is much easier and neater than measuring, testing, and describing the world that is.
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
tuttle
Brother of the Briar
Brother of the Briar
Posts: 13869
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by tuttle » Tue May 22, 2018 1:47 pm

Thunktank wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 12:25 pm
infidel wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 12:16 pm
tuttle wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:57 am
If that's the case, I have no problem believing light is seen from some odd million light years away and at the same time believing the universe doesn't have to be millions or billions of years old.
Well I'm glad that's settled. Anyone for some pho?
It’s not settled yet.

So Jesus changed water into wine to show support for marriage and a good buzz, likewise he made starlight visible to earthlings from stars millions of light years away within a time frame of thousands of years to prove that he can make wine from water? I like it. :dance:
He made stars to reveal his glory and to mark times and seasons and for whatever else reason he wanted to. I'm just using wine to water as an example of a formula/pattern I see in the scriptures regarding miracles and I happen to believe that they are good reflections of a supernatural Creation.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
tuttle
Brother of the Briar
Brother of the Briar
Posts: 13869
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by tuttle » Tue May 22, 2018 1:53 pm

UncleBob wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 1:46 pm
tuttle wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 10:38 am
If unbelievers are scandalized and believe Christianity unacceptable on the basis of creationism being 'anti-science', then they'll think the same of the resurrection. I've done nothing but advocate that supernatural creation (and resurrection) transcend evolutionary science.
Um, this is my point. If the universe erupted into existence 6000 years ago (or whenever) this should be testable. So measure it, test it, and demonstrate it. A one-time event like the resurrection cannot be measured, tested, or demonstrated because it cannot be seen now. But YEC are anti-science if for no other reason that they cannot or will not "do" science. They tend to want to philosophize rather than use the scientific method. World-creating in the armchair is much easier and neater than measuring, testing, and describing the world that is.
The only thing I disagree with you on here is the term 'anti-science'. I've listed my reasons why I think that's the case. One can hold a belief that science cannot measure test or demonstrate, and still use the scientific method. That's why I've been using terms like "transcend science".
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 36848
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by UncleBob » Tue May 22, 2018 2:09 pm

tuttle wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 1:53 pm
UncleBob wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 1:46 pm
tuttle wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 10:38 am
If unbelievers are scandalized and believe Christianity unacceptable on the basis of creationism being 'anti-science', then they'll think the same of the resurrection. I've done nothing but advocate that supernatural creation (and resurrection) transcend evolutionary science.
Um, this is my point. If the universe erupted into existence 6000 years ago (or whenever) this should be testable. So measure it, test it, and demonstrate it. A one-time event like the resurrection cannot be measured, tested, or demonstrated because it cannot be seen now. But YEC are anti-science if for no other reason that they cannot or will not "do" science. They tend to want to philosophize rather than use the scientific method. World-creating in the armchair is much easier and neater than measuring, testing, and describing the world that is.
The only thing I disagree with you on here is the term 'anti-science'. I've listed my reasons why I think that's the case. One can hold a belief that science cannot measure test or demonstrate, and still use the scientific method. That's why I've been using terms like "transcend science".
Which is not science. By definition, science is a method that measures, tests, and describes. No matter how much one calls a Muslim a sedan, they just don't have wheels and four doors in their back.

Now, phenomena may exist that cannot be generalizable. That's cool. Science may not be able to measure faith events like the resurrection. That's also cool. That's why they are faith events. Saying something akin to "I don't believe in evolution" isn't anti-science. Saying something akin to "science can't 'prove' (not science definition but general use) evolution" and then reject all the physical evidence for it because Bible, is anti-science. Also, trying to keep people away from learning science because Bible is anti-science [1].

[1]Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_evolution_hearings
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
Thunktank
Terminal Lance. Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Terminal Lance.  Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Posts: 22330
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Home Sweet California at the Beach!

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by Thunktank » Tue May 22, 2018 3:23 pm

tuttle wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 1:42 pm
Thunktank wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 11:59 am
Well, it looks to me, Tuttle, that perhaps you’re just barking up the wrong tree. A hundred years ago, well maybe more like 150 years ago there was much less evidence for an old earth or evolution. Today, there are layers and layers of evidence and virtually no disagreement in the basic outline. The point is, the type of creationism the young earthers are pushing simply doesn’t add up. Believing that they are filling in the spaces better than science is over the physical evidence we have is really a tough thing to do, IMO. There’s so much evidence for science that it’s really tough to see much room for another drastically different layer of information that could tell a cohesive story.

I feel like maybe creationists are trying too hard to get attention and get adopted into a family (science) who doesn’t want their input in how they’re demanding the families of science change to make room for the creationists own preferred perspective. Meanwhile science is aloofly and confidently saying with a smug smile, “Listen buddy, we’re being as objective as humanly possible, but you’re nuts if you think we’re going to try those metaphysics again.”
I'm not really barking up any tree. I do react against what I perceive as an agenda and get tired of the onslaught of propaganda. (And I can't help reading things that just jump out at me as extremely weird. Like when you said "There's so much evidence for science..." Evolution has so ingrained itself that people use evolution and science interchangeably :lol: ) Those are the kinds of things that created threads like this. Feathers on dinosaurs being one of the biggest whoppers as of late. And I don't often have a huge dog in the fight as to the age of the earth. My position doesn't really allow me to prove to you from a test tube how old the earth is. But I'm cool with that, and I'm not calling my representatives to put my view into the schools. I'll teach my kids what I want thankyouverymuch, but beyond that, it's more of a fun topic to wrangle over.
"...So much evidence for science" isn't my best off the cuff remark, I'll grant you that. But evolution is to science what coffee beans are to coffee. Is that a better off the cuff remark? :lol:

As to feathers and dinosaurs, I'll leave that to the experts to sort out.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” -Yoda

User avatar
Cleon
The Mad Hatter
The Mad Hatter
Posts: 15115
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Indiana - South of 40
Contact:

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by Cleon » Wed May 23, 2018 3:09 pm

Thunktank wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 3:59 pm
Cleon wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 3:17 pm
Why does it matter to the evolutionist whether the creationist believes them or not?
Because young earth creationists vote. How’s that for an answer? :lol:

More explanation:

But that’s an interesting question you posit and one that can just as quickly be asked of young earth creationists as to why they care if evolutionists believe in creation. Why have they challenged evolutionists to debates? Of course they have preferred to challenge atheist evolutionists to debates as though they were conflating evolution and atheism, a situation that some atheists themselves were all too eager to support. The entire question revolves around the question of truth. Rather than viewing creation and evolution as two different, but potentially complimentary perspectives of truth, they instead view them as hostile to each other as though neither has a particular grasp on objective testing or philosophical proofs within their own spheres.

From a religious perspective, what does “creation” have to mean? Does it require constant supernatural inputs or can the mere law of nature be seen as the cause and sustaining role of God? Is God required to act supernaturally or may he use the laws of nature that He authored itself to create? Why do some Christians have as a matter of doctrine that God created the universe in six 24 hour days? Things like that are artifacts of faith that really aren’t subject to science and cannot form science as we practice it today.

I believe it’s actually quite harmful to Christianity when many Christians are anti science. And yes, I do believe that young earth creationist leaders and many of their supporters are anti science and anti truth. I will not mince words about that. It shows a witness poorly and marginalizes the Christian faith in several ways. I mayself have been one casualty to it. It’s dishonest and false. There’s guilt by association that spills over to all Christians in the eyes of unbelievers. It also effects other areas of social concerns that we cannot discuss here.

People are at liberty to believe as they wish. But to be clear, I don’t suggest one do away with the traditional Christian narrative of creation in favor of evolution. But the tradional view may need doctrinal tweaking or at least parsing of different types of knowledge as it partains to life in the world today. I do know that some atheists do use evolution as a type of Godless creation narrative of their own. They are are at liberty to do that. But the objective truth of evolution as known through modern science is a type of revelation and truth, a fact on many levels. It is not a religion or even religious replacement. It only speaks of specific things concerning life.
I suppose I don't care all that much about science. I find theology and metaphysical stuff much more interesting and of much more importance. I'm just not able to care about the two things equally. I don't have a love for science and empiricism. Sure, I like neat, natury stuff, but unlike others I do not get all emotional about God when I see a sunset. Psalm 19:1, I believe is true, but I don't feel it. Lot's of people do though. I can sort of see a way where science, in that awe filled way, might encourage someone towards belief. It's just hard for me to personally grasp. I like what science provides through engineering and technology, but other than that I'm rather apathetic about it. I like being an end user of science. :lol:, but I like doing religion and theology much more.

So, it really doesn't matter to be what a person believes about creation as long as they can confirm the Imago Dei, The Creed, and that the scriptures are the supernatural Word of God. My fear is that creationist Christians will be marginalized and kept from leadership roles outside the church in the broader community because of things like this. I'd hate for it to become a litmus test for a local school board seat either way. Leadership skills and the ability to build consensus are much more important, IMO.
"Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven" - Jesus

"More people need to put their big boy britches on." - JMG

"Dang, a pipe slap." - JimVH

User avatar
Thunktank
Terminal Lance. Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Terminal Lance.  Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Posts: 22330
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Home Sweet California at the Beach!

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by Thunktank » Wed May 23, 2018 4:27 pm

I hear you Cleon. I’ve really tried to understand young earth creationists. I was literally raised by them at home and at my school by fundamentalist Evangelicals of a certain persuasion, but despite that influence, by the time I was 12 I secretly believed evolution over young earth creation. As far as I know, I was the only person of my acquaintance who did until high school when one or two others began to question it for themselves too. The dangerous thing however, and this is something Christian parents might want to consider, was that I didn’t have an alternative Christian view of it. Even mainline Christian Protestant bodies like Presbyterians and Methodists were too worldly and not Biblical enough to learn from according to my educators. This didn’t help counter my retreat from Christianity the first time and set a stage I still often struggle with.

I know some are more theologically inclined. The love of science isn’t for everyone. For my part, the fun starts when I try and grapple with two different kinds of creation narratives. This is unusual in the history of man. Most cultures held only one. On one hand I tell the Christian story that talks of creation in one way, while evolution and science covers it very differently. I do believe everyone should have a basic scientific education today that includes a working understanding of evolution. Especially when choices are presented in the practical order of society that involves science. And today, there’s lot of different ways science is applied in society. It is a litmus test for me to be honest. Between that litmus test and others, my options are sometimes awfully limited. :D

When I was nine, I told my parents I wanted to be a scientist. They laughed. They never supported that in any way. Science most certainly wasn’t valued among our peers. I think the main reason for that is because evolution made things difficult for them and the doctrines they held. When an entire church and church culture is built on very specific fundamentals about a certain type of Scriptural inerrancy that was born in response to liberalism in European churches over a century ago, it can be downright worrisome to consider that what you believe may be so wrong that you might have to take another road. This is especially true when all other roads, like other Christian doctrines have been demonized by the church currently attended.

All this to say, that this sort of topic can come very loaded and be very formative.
Last edited by Thunktank on Wed May 23, 2018 5:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” -Yoda

User avatar
infidel
kthxbai
kthxbai
Posts: 6483
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by infidel » Wed May 23, 2018 4:53 pm

Thunktank wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 4:27 pm
inherency
Ok, I let this go the first few times because I initially thought it was a typo but the word you're looking for is "inerrancy"
Inadvertently emboldening the cause of naïve Evolutionism since 2016.

"Who the hell ponders placentas? Dude, you're a freak of nature." - DepartedLight

"One man's saint is another man's infidel." - hugodrax

"Total. Freaking. Win." - Skip

User avatar
Thunktank
Terminal Lance. Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Terminal Lance.  Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Posts: 22330
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Home Sweet California at the Beach!

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by Thunktank » Wed May 23, 2018 5:20 pm

infidel wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 4:53 pm
Thunktank wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 4:27 pm
inherency
Ok, I let this go the first few times because I initially thought it was a typo but the word you're looking for is "inerrancy"
Much better root words there, yes.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” -Yoda

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 20115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by wosbald » Wed May 23, 2018 6:17 pm

+JMJ+
infidel wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 10:40 am
[…]

But Creation and the Resurrection are qualitatively different things. …

[…]
Not sure where yer gettin' this. Not even 100% sure of your meaning. But based on how you seem to be framing the issue, your assertion seems like a distinctively Protestant notion.

In Catholic teaching, Creation & Resurrection (or Nature & Grace, Faith & Reason, General Revelation & Special Revelation or whatnot) can't be hermetically isolated from each other. Yes, there is an incommensurability — an infinite gulf — which obtains between the first and the second. But Creation must, by virtue of Catholic dogmatic commitments, be held to possess the "space" necessary to "open up onto" Resurrection. The Catholic can hold to no unproblematic view of Creation such that, closed in upon itself, it rests serenely in autonomous indifference to Grace.

This conceptual "space" causes a whole nest of problematics for both Philosophy and Theology, but it is these glorious problematics which retard either discipline from becoming totalistic. It this space which gives beauty and life to these disciplines.

And if this "fly in the ointment" causes heartburn for any numinously lingering, promethean dreams of Evolutionists (or Creationists!), then maybe they need to look inward (or Romeward) for a bit.

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

User avatar
infidel
kthxbai
kthxbai
Posts: 6483
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by infidel » Thu May 24, 2018 9:50 am

wosbald wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 6:17 pm
+JMJ+
infidel wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 10:40 am
[…]

But Creation and the Resurrection are qualitatively different things. …

[…]
Not sure where yer gettin' this. Not even 100% sure of your meaning. But based on how you seem to be framing the issue, your assertion seems like a distinctively Protestant notion.

In Catholic teaching, Creation & Resurrection (or Nature & Grace, Faith & Reason, General Revelation & Special Revelation or whatnot) can't be hermetically isolated from each other. Yes, there is an incommensurability — an infinite gulf — which obtains between the first and the second. But Creation must, by virtue of Catholic dogmatic commitments, be held to possess the "space" necessary to "open up onto" Resurrection. The Catholic can hold to no unproblematic view of Creation such that, closed in upon itself, it rests serenely in autonomous indifference to Grace.

This conceptual "space" causes a whole nest of problematics for both Philosophy and Theology, but it is these glorious problematics which retard either discipline from becoming totalistic. It this space which gives beauty and life to these disciplines.

And if this "fly in the ointment" causes heartburn for any numinously lingering, promethean dreams of Evolutionists (or Creationists!), then maybe they need to look inward (or Romeward) for a bit.
I was wondering when you would finally chime in with your ten dollar words :-)
Inadvertently emboldening the cause of naïve Evolutionism since 2016.

"Who the hell ponders placentas? Dude, you're a freak of nature." - DepartedLight

"One man's saint is another man's infidel." - hugodrax

"Total. Freaking. Win." - Skip

User avatar
Thunktank
Terminal Lance. Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Terminal Lance.  Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Posts: 22330
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Home Sweet California at the Beach!

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by Thunktank » Thu May 24, 2018 12:23 pm

infidel wrote:
Thu May 24, 2018 9:50 am
wosbald wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 6:17 pm
+JMJ+
infidel wrote:
Tue May 22, 2018 10:40 am
[…]

But Creation and the Resurrection are qualitatively different things. …

[…]
Not sure where yer gettin' this. Not even 100% sure of your meaning. But based on how you seem to be framing the issue, your assertion seems like a distinctively Protestant notion.

In Catholic teaching, Creation & Resurrection (or Nature & Grace, Faith & Reason, General Revelation & Special Revelation or whatnot) can't be hermetically isolated from each other. Yes, there is an incommensurability — an infinite gulf — which obtains between the first and the second. But Creation must, by virtue of Catholic dogmatic commitments, be held to possess the "space" necessary to "open up onto" Resurrection. The Catholic can hold to no unproblematic view of Creation such that, closed in upon itself, it rests serenely in autonomous indifference to Grace.

This conceptual "space" causes a whole nest of problematics for both Philosophy and Theology, but it is these glorious problematics which retard either discipline from becoming totalistic. It this space which gives beauty and life to these disciplines.

And if this "fly in the ointment" causes heartburn for any numinously lingering, promethean dreams of Evolutionists (or Creationists!), then maybe they need to look inward (or Romeward) for a bit.
I was wondering when you would finally chime in with your ten dollar words :-)
We’re having communication problems around here now aren’t we? :lol:
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” -Yoda

User avatar
durangopipe
Under-secretary to the Minister of Pipe Breaking
Under-secretary to the Minister of Pipe Breaking
Posts: 6895
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:58 pm
Location: Southwest Colorado

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by durangopipe » Thu May 24, 2018 12:49 pm

Hey.
Youngbloods!

This debate was over semhunditfiddy years ago!
Donut need no young earth to believe. Just need faith.
Science is cool. Jesus is cool.

And evolution ain’t Darwin no more, just like physics ain’t Newton.
Science be movin’. Always movin’.

Image
. . . be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you. Ephesians 4:32 (NKJV)

The most improper job of any man, even saints, is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity.. J.R.R. Tolkien

2017 Morley - Outstanding BRATASS of the Year

User avatar
Thunktank
Terminal Lance. Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Terminal Lance.  Perpetual Sea Lawyer. Unicorn Aficionado
Posts: 22330
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Home Sweet California at the Beach!

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by Thunktank » Thu May 24, 2018 6:34 pm

durangopipe wrote:
Thu May 24, 2018 12:49 pm
Hey.
Youngbloods!

This debate was over semhunditfiddy years ago!
Donut need no young earth to believe. Just need faith.
Science is cool. Jesus is cool.

And evolution ain’t Darwin no more, just like physics ain’t Newton.
Science be movin’. Always movin’.

It moves towards something and accomplishes the increase in knowledge. The debate today mirrors the debate of the third century in an almost doomed fashion. Christians often like to challenge secular knowledge. In fact it seems to subsist from it. Though, I must say that the science and philosophy has fundamentally shifted in a couple of key areas since the days of St. Basil, yet the scoffers, the “atheists” look to be trying to avoid the finger of God just as many do now. One of my all time favorite things to read is from one of the doctors of the Church from the third century, St. Basil the Great. Here’s a man the churches east and west have pronounced to be Great.

‘On The Hexaemeron
by St. Basil the Great’

Homilies from a Great one.

Anyone here who hasn’t read these homilies really should. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

It is worth noting that St. Basil came from the Antiochian school of theology and praxis, which was antagonistic to the Alexandrian school in how Christians approached Biblical texts a thread that time. Which is a whole other conversation so I’ll stop it here. :)
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” -Yoda

User avatar
Goose55
Bartleby the Scrivener
Bartleby the Scrivener
Posts: 9013
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 6:44 pm
Location: Southern Arizona, U.S.A.

Re: When did Dinosaurs get feathers?

Post by Goose55 » Thu May 24, 2018 9:20 pm

The T-Rex grew feathers and took flight and is now the house finch that sings to me every morning. Glad I'm here now rather than there, then.
"At present we're on the wrong side of the door. But all the pages of the New Testament are rustling with the rumor that it will not always be so." ~ C.S. Lewis

Post Reply