Conference on Evolution

[grannymh]

I have recognized God in the wilderness of Alaska and I see His beauty in metaphysical poetry.

But, I do not comprehend making a choice (consistent or otherwise) between a transcendent being and the universe itself which is described as an emotional life-like thing who is blind and uncaring. Even if I were a non-theist, it would be like comparing apples and carrots.

Grannymh, that is to say, I did not understand your post.

With the morning sun even with my second story window, I’ll answer your question about my post 335. Your posts 327 & 334 reported on a Conference on the subject of God and Evolution. The bulk of the conference was spent on the problem of evolutionary suffering and theodicy. Alec responded between your two posts.

Pain’s biological function, predation, and the caprice of nature are observable in our time. On the other hand trying to account for animal suffering, including human, with either theodicies or the universe seems to me too simplistic if one is trying to deal with both the eons it took for life to evolve and the world since Adam and Eve. These two epochs are essentially different.

In addition there is the difference between a transcendental being who is able to be recognized within the natural universe and the universe itself. Giving the universe life-like qualities and giving God human qualities are used all the time to demonstrate our feelings and our understanding. It is my personal opinion that Conference participants Francisco Ayala, Tom Hosinski, and Robert Russell would not be talking in terms of the genre of the Hebrew Psalms or modern poetry. Thus, I cannot comprehend that there are only two choices, theistic or non- theistic for explaining suffering as suggested in post 334.

Important Medical Note: As a former Hospice volunteer, I know from experience that it is no longer necessary to suffer “horrific pain from terminal cancer” post 334. The medical profession has done a turnaround regarding certain medicine protocols. In fact, there are now medical schools which have a sub-specialty of palliative care.

Easter blessings,
granny

 

[ricmat]

One approach is that of Tom Hosinski, a Holy Cross Father who is also a process theologian. He argues that God limits Godself in creating a universe of freedom; that God cannot in the order “He” has established intervene. A God who could intervene to relieve the pain of a child suffering from cancer but who declined to do so would not be worthy of the title “Father,” at least as we apply that title to human males.

Or if you don’t like the “God cannot intervene in a universe of freedom” and "God is not worthy of the title “Father” approach of this “shepherd”, here’s a short article about the issues of freedom and suffering that is an easy read.

An excerpt:

Naturally, a creature cannot be both a creature and a Creator at the same time. But freedom does not necessarily choose what is realistic. The presence of pride makes it possible for freedom to lean toward the irrational and the unrealistic. Suffering is the inescapable consequence of a person refusing to be what he is…Suffering is not God’s idea of how man should live. It is the inevitable result of man stubbornly rejecting his own nature.

 

[hecd2]

Or if you don’t like the “God cannot intervene in a universe of freedom” and "God is not worthy of the title “Father” approach of this “shepherd”, here’s a short article about the issues of freedom and suffering that is an easy read.

An excerpt:

Naturally, a creature cannot be both a creature and a Creator at the same time. But freedom does not necessarily choose what is realistic. The presence of pride makes it possible for freedom to lean toward the irrational and the unrealistic. Suffering is the inescapable consequence of a person refusing to be what he is…Suffering is not God’s idea of how man should live. It is the inevitable result of man stubbornly rejecting his own nature

This is the sort of theodicy that is absurd, trivial, facile and distasteful.

A person does suffer and die from malaria because of “refusing to be what he is” but because of infestation with Plasmodium falciparum. A person does not die of starvation and agony after 10 days of being trapped under a collapsed building because of “stubbornly rejecting his own nature” but because a stick-slip geological fault has slipped.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[buffalo]

This is the sort of theodicy that is absurd, trivial, facile and distasteful.

A person does suffer and die from malaria because of “refusing to be what he is” but because of infestation with Plasmodium falciparum. A person does not die of starvation and agony after 10 days of being trapped under a collapsed building because of “stubbornly rejecting his own nature” but because a stick-slip geological fault has slipped.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

You display a jaded and narrow understanding of suffering. This is one reason why you cannot be trusted with your scientific reasoning. Since your worldview does not permit a divine foot in the door, you cannot understand suffering. You will not until that changes.

 

[hecd2]

You display a jaded and narrow understanding of suffering. This is one reason why you cannot be trusted with your scientific reasoning. Since your worldview does not permit a divine foot in the door, you cannot understand suffering. You will not until that changes.

It’s my (and everyone else’s) scientific method that does not permit a divine foot in the door, not my worldview.

As to the problem of suffering, it is too difficult and intractable for your sort of glib reply. I notice that although you criticise my understanding of the problem, you don’t explain what yours is.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[grannymh]

It’s a metaphoric way of speaking - I do not mean to imply that the universe is a living being or emotional - just that observation leads to the rejection of design and purpose and the collapse of teleology. That is what I meant by the universe unfolding in an uncaring way.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

Your use of metaphoric way of speaking is more accurate than my using feelings/poetic expressions in post 340 Thank you. Actually, I was thinking metaphorically somewhat close to your observation.

Currently … If we are going to look at the problem of evil, humanity itself must be one of the choices for responsibility. Which leads right back to Adam & Eve and reviewing evolutionary theory for the first life signs, not necessarily the origin of life.

Easter blessings,
granny

 

[StAnastasia]

And your point about predation from to to bottom is true – I thought about this during my parish’s Seder Dinner last night, reflecting on the life of the lamb wasted that we might revel (to paraphrase Alexander Pope).

Here’s the quotation:

Alexander Pope (1688–1744)
An Essay on Man
Epistle I—Of the Nature and State of Man, with Respect to the Universe

III. Heav’n from all creatures hides the book of fate,
All but the page prescrib’d, their present state:
From brutes what men, from men what spirits know:
Or who could suffer being here below? 80
The lamb thy riot dooms to bleed to-day,
Had he thy reason, would he skip and play?
Pleas’d to the last, he crops the flow’ry food,
And licks the hand just rais’d to shed his blood.
Oh blindness to the future! kindly giv’n, 85
That each may full the circle mark’d by heav’n:
Who sees with equal eye, as God of all,
A hero perish, or a sparrow fall,
Atoms or systems into ruin hurl’d,
And now a bubble burst, and now a world. 90
Hope humbly then; with trembling pinions soar;
Wait the great teacher death, and God adore.
What future bliss, he gives not thee to know,
But gives that hope to be thy blessing now.

 

[buffalo]

It’s my (and everyone else’s) scientific method that does not permit a divine foot in the door, not my worldview.

As to the problem of suffering, it is too difficult and intractable for your sort of glib reply. I notice that although you criticise my understanding of the problem, you don’t explain what yours is.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

The fact you adopt such a limited worldview sets your bias. As a scientist who is by nature curious, you willingly shut yourself off from the supernatural. This is so limiting I cannot see how you can be comfortable with it. Don’t you want to know more?

First off, suffering is temporary during our mortal lifetimes. Those of us who make it to heaven will not experience it again.

Second - redemptive suffering purifies the soul so to increase its capacity for the Beatific vision.

Third - since we do not know the full extent of evil our bodily suffering may be very much limited by God. As humans we can neither experience infinite good or infinite evil. As science is limited by our senses so too is our ability to with regard to good and evil.

Jesus comments frequently on suffering. Clearly He shows there is purpose in it.

Matt. 10:38 - Jesus said, “he who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.” Jesus defines discipleship as one’s willingness to suffer with Him. Being a disciple of Jesus not only means having faith in Him, but offering our sufferings to the Father as He did.
Matt. 16:24; Mark 8:34 - Jesus said, “if any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” Jesus wants us to empty ourselves so that God can fill us. When we suffer, we can choose to seek consolation in God and become closer to Jesus.
Luke 9:23 - Jesus says we must take up this cross daily. He requires us to join our daily temporal sacrifices (pain, inconvenience, worry) with His eternal sacrifice.
Luke 14:27 - Jesus said, “whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple.” If we reject God because we suffer, we fail to apply the graces that Jesus won for us by His suffering.
John 7:39 - Jesus was first glorified on the cross, not just the resurrection. This text refers to John 19:34, when Jesus was pierced on the cross by the soldier’s lance.
John 12:24 - unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone and bears no fruit. Jesus is teaching that suffering and death are part of every human life, and it is only through suffering and death that we obtain the glory of resurrection.
Rom. 5:2-3 - Paul says that more than rejoicing in our hope, we rejoice in our sufferings which produces endurance, character and hope. Through faith, suffering brings about hope in God and, through endurance, salvation.
Rom. 8:17 - Paul says that we are heirs with Christ, but only if we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with Him. Paul is teaching that suffering must be embraced in order to obtain the glory that the Father has bestowed upon Jesus.
Rom. 8:18 - the sufferings of the present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. We thus have hope that any sufferings we or others endure, no matter how difficult, will pale in comparison to the life of eternal bliss that awaits us.

 

[buffalo]

cont’d

1 Cor. 1:23- Paul preaches a Christ crucified, not just risen. Catholic spirituality focuses on the sacrifice of Christ which is the only means to the resurrection. This is why Catholic churches have crucifixes with the corpus of Jesus affixed to them. Many Protestant churches no longer display the corpus of Jesus (only an empty cross). Thus, they only preach a Christ risen, not crucified.
1 Cor. 2:2 - Paul preaches Jesus Christ and Him crucified. While the cross was the scandal of scandals, and is viewed by the non-Christian eye as defeat, Catholic spirituality has always exalted the paradox of the cross as the true tree of life and our means to salvation.
2 Cor. 1:5-7- if we share abundantly in Christ’s sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort as well. If we unite our sufferings with His, we will be comforted by Him.
2 Cor. 4:10 – Paul writes that we always carry in the body the death of Jesus so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies. Christ has allowed room in His Body for our sufferings, and our sufferings allow room for Christ to bring us to life.
2 Cor. 4:11 - while we live we are always being given up to death for Jesus’ sake so that His life may be manifested in our flesh. This proves the Catholic position that our sufferings on earth are united with Jesus in order to bring about Jesus’ life in us.
2 Cor. 12:9-10 - Jesus’ grace is sufficient, for His power is made perfect in weakness. If we are weak, we are strong in Christ. Our self-sufficiency decreases, so Christ in us can increase.
Eph. 3:13 - Do not to lose heart over my sufferings for your glory. Our suffering also benefits others in the mystical body of Christ.
Phil. 1:29 - for the sake of Christ we are not only to believe in Him but also to suffer for His sake. Growing in holiness requires more than having faith in God and accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior. We must also willfully embrace the suffering that befalls us as part of God’s plan. Thus, Christ does not want our faith alone, but our faith in action which includes faith in suffering.
Phil. 3:10 - Paul desires to share in Christ’s sufferings in order to obtain the resurrection. Paul recognizes the efficacy of suffering as a means of obtaining holiness which leads to resurrection and eternal life. There is no Easter Sunday without Good Friday. Col. 1:24 - Paul rejoices in his sufferings and completes what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of His body. This proves the Catholic position regarding the efficacy of suffering. Is there something lacking in Christ’s sufferings? Of course not. But because Jesus loves us so much, He allows us to participate in His redemptive suffering by leaving room in His mystical body for our own suffering. Our suffering, united with our Lord’s suffering, furthers the work of His redemption.
2 Thess. 1:5 - we may be made worthy of the kingdom of God for which we are suffering. This is because suffering causes us to turn to God and purifies us from sin.
2 Tim. 1:8 - Paul instructs Timothy to share in suffering for the Gospel. Suffering is not to be asked for, but it is also not to be avoided. For the sake of the Gospel, it is to be embraced.
2 Tim. 2:3 - Paul says to take our share of sufferings as a good soldier in Christ. Sufferings atone for the temporal effects of our sin.
2 Tim. 3:12 - all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. But this persecution unites us more closely to Jesus and repairs our relationship with God.
2 Tim. 4:5 - Paul instructs Timothy to endure suffering to fulfill his ministry. As evangelists, we suffer with Christ for the Gospel.
Heb. 12:5-7 - do not lose courage when you are punished, for the Lord disciplines whom He loves. The Lord loves each one of us more than we love ourselves, and will only permit suffering if it brings about our salvation.
Heb. 12:11 - this discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but it brings the peaceful fruit of righteousness.
James 4:8-10 - we must purify our hearts and grieve, mourn and wail, changing our laughter into morning and joy to gloom.
1 Peter 1:6 - Peter warns us that we may have to suffer various trials. Peter does not want us to be discouraged by this reality, but understand that such suffering purifies us and prepares us for union with God.
1 Peter 2:19-21 - Peter instructs that we have been called to endure pain while suffering for Christ, our example. God actually calls us to suffer as His Son did, and this is not to diminish us, but to glorify us, because it is by our suffering that we truly share in the eternal priesthood of Jesus Christ.
1 Peter 4:1-2 - Peter says whoever has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin to live not by the flesh but by the will of God. Our suffering furthers our growth in holiness which is the aim of Catholic life.
1 Peter 4:13 - Peter says to rejoice in Christ’s sufferings in order to rejoice and be glad when Christ’s glory is revealed. Those who suffer with faith in Christ will rejoice in His glory.
1 Peter 4:16 - if we suffer as Christians, we should not be ashamed but glorify God.
1 Peter 5:10 - after we have suffered, the God of all grace will restore, establish and strengthen us. God promises us that our suffering will ultimately be followed by glory.
Rev. 11:3 - Jesus gives power to His witnesses clothed in sackcloth. By virtue of our priesthood, we suffer to repair our relationship with God for sins that He has already forgiven us. As priests, we atone for the temporal punishments due to our sin.

 

[StAnastasia]

Thus, I cannot comprehend that there are only two choices, theistic or non- theistic for explaining suffering as suggested in post 334.

grannymh, I never said there were only two choices. But out of curiosity, what might be your intermediate choice – deistic, agnostic, or something else?

StAnastasia

 

[edwest2]

Hi Alec -

The “let’s explain the Bible away” hobby is quite evident here. In fact, I’m aware of one religious group that has taken their Bible and simply put the word Man on it. Which is all a purely scientific worldview can do. Men wrote this, but they were ‘primitive’ men, not like modern men. If you look at the Bible, you see all of the same problems people have with each other today, minus the tech. The solution, of course, is to turn the Bible into a book of primitive psychology and instructive stories. But now that man has become ‘moden’ we can just toss the Bible and replace it with science. Science has become God.

Unfortunately, that sort of thinking ignores the reality of God. And that boils down to a brief conversation I had with someone 30 years ago: “Show me God. If you can show me God, I might believe in him.” That’s all it is dressed up in intellectual verbiage.

Recently, two miracles have been attributed to intercessory prayers to Pope John Paul II. A thorough investigation will follow to insure that what happened was indeed miraculous, but I doubt anyone here will be following the details or attempting to get the details. I doubt anyone here will do what Secretary of State Clinton did recently, view the tilma with the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe – and ask, who painted it? The answer is God.

A few here will simply encourage people to worship their minds and worship the new saviors of the human race - scientists, who work in their citadels of science. They will lead us, they will heal us, they are the answer. The terrible flaw buried in each of us will appear with the Atheist-Technocracy – so-called experts will get followers, they will divide into competing camps, and lies and deceptions will be resorted to for some ‘greater’ goal or ‘good.’ Perhaps a line from Terminator will be instructinve: “It is in your nature to destroy yourselves.”

I suggest you pick up this book:

amazon.com/Unspeakable-Facing-Up-Challenge-Evil/dp/0060833009/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239205878&sr=8-8

It shows suffering in an illustrative light. Jesus Christ said God causes it to rain on good and evil alike. Job understood suffering and human frailty but he also knew this life is not all there is. He had a relationship with God.

I should also mention a comment by Christopher Hitchens published in the National Catholic Register. He said that if he saw a miracle he would doubt the evidence of his own eyes. That was a fear statement. That was a “God, please don’t be real” statement. I don’t know why, in his case, he doesn’t want God to be real. But everyone here has an opportunity to actually examine God’s interventions in the world. Interventions which still happen today.

Peace,
Ed

 

[grannymh]

grannymh, I never said there were only two choices. But out of curiosity, what might be your intermediate choice – deistic, agnostic, or something else?

StAnastasia

Two choices are mentioned in the second sentence of Post 334.

I would suggest that when you talk about terminal cancer with friends, you refer to this medical note. Most people are not aware of changes being made.

As a former Hospice volunteer, I know from experience that it is no longer necessary to suffer “horrific pain from terminal cancer” post 334. The medical profession has done a turnaround regarding certain medicine protocols. In fact, there are now medical schools which have a sub-specialty of palliative care.

Easter blessings,
granny

 

[grannymh]

You display a jaded and narrow understanding of suffering. This is one reason why you cannot be trusted with your scientific reasoning. Since your worldview does not permit a divine foot in the door, you cannot understand suffering. You will not until that changes.

Why do I think this is an example of non sequitor statements?

 

[StAnastasia]

As a former Hospice volunteer, I know from experience that it is no longer necessary to suffer “horrific pain from terminal cancer” post 334. The medical profession has done a turnaround regarding certain medicine protocols. In fact, there are now medical schools which have a sub-specialty of palliative care.Easter blessings,granny

Thanks granny – I know a lot about hospice, having lost a parent and a parent-in-law recently, both of whom died at home.

So let’s leave out for now the pain of a child dying of inoperable cancer; let’s assume she experiences no pain at all. Now the only indictment of God as “loving father” would be if God could prevent the death – and all the attendant emotional pain and suffering of the parents and family as they lose their child – but chooses not to prevent it.

So, we have

(1) A generally loving father who chooses not be be loving in certain cases, or

(2) A sort of cosmic tough love ('buck-up dudes – you’ll grow stronger from this experience, and you’ll see your little one in the afterlife"), or

(3) A God who suffers with us, but whose instantiation of an evolving universe precludes periodic intervention.

Or some other possibilities, but I have to get back to writing…

 

[ricmat]

This is the sort of theodicy that is absurd, trivial, facile and distasteful.

A person does suffer and die from malaria because of “refusing to be what he is” but because of infestation with Plasmodium falciparum. A person does not die of starvation and agony after 10 days of being trapped under a collapsed building because of “stubbornly rejecting his own nature” but because a stick-slip geological fault has slipped.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

Did you read the entire article, or just my excerpt?

The point goes back to God’s original plan for us and how original sin screwed that up. There are some things we can’t make better, but many things we can prevent from getting worse.

 

[grannymh]

Thanks granny – I know a lot about hospice, having lost a parent and a parent-in-law recently, both of whom died at home.

So let’s leave out for now the pain of a child dying of inoperable cancer; let’s assume she experiences no pain at all. Now the only indictment of God as “loving father” would be if God could prevent the death – and all the attendant emotional pain and suffering of the parents and family as they lose their child – but chooses not to prevent it.

So, we have

(1) A generally loving father who chooses not be be loving in certain cases, or

(2) A sort of cosmic tough love ('buck-up dudes – you’ll grow stronger from this experience, and you’ll see your little one in the afterlife"), or

(3) A God who suffers with us, but whose instantiation of an evolving universe precludes periodic intervention.

Or some other possibilities, but I have to get back to writing…

I understand about losing parents. My sympathy to you. I bunked in with my Dad at a Hospice facility. I am a witness to the spiritual power which resides in human beings long after the ability to communicate fails.

Regarding other possibilities to the three you gave in the above post 353. Here’s (4) Adam and Eve.

Easter blessings,
granny

 

[StAnastasia]

Regarding other possibilities to the three you gave in the above post 353. Here’s (4) Adam and Eve. Easter blessings,granny

What about Adam and Eve?

 

[grannymh]

What about Adam and Eve?

To answer that question, one should read about original sin in the Glossary of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, then read all the references listed under original sin in the index.

 

[StAnastasia]

To answer that question, one should read about original sin in the Glossary of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, then read all the references listed under original sin in the index.

I’m on deadline and have too much other reading before tomorrow. Can you please summarize your argument?

StAnastasia

 

[grannymh]

I’m on deadline and have too much other reading before tomorrow. Can you please summarize your argument?

StAnastasia

I understand. My argument is not all that important.