Creationism and life in general

[StAnastasia]

Only if your faith is so weak that you have to depend on the regrowing of amputees limbs.

Here is an interesting page about the question: whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.htm

I don’t agree with the premisses, but I can see what drives skeptics.

"For this experiment, we need to find a deserving person who has had both of his legs amputated. For example, find a sincere, devout veteran of the Iraqi war, or a person who was involved in a tragic automobile accident.

"Now create a prayer circle like the one created for Jeanna Giese. The job of this prayer circle is simple: pray to God to restore the amputated legs of this deserving person. I do not mean to pray for a team of renowned surgeons to somehow graft the legs of a cadaver onto the soldier, nor for a team of renowned scientists to craft mechanical legs for him. Pray that God spontaneously and miraculously restores the soldier’s legs overnight, in the same way that God spontaneously and miraculously cured Jeanna Giese and Marilyn Hickey’s mother.

“If possible, get millions of people all over the planet to join the prayer circle and pray their most fervent prayers. Get millions of people praying in unison for a single miracle for this one deserving amputee. Then stand back and watch.”

 

[StAnastasia]

I don’t agree with the premisses, but I can see what drives skeptics.

For the record, I am and always will be a Christian theist, but the skeptics do have a point, which Catholics need to answer:

“Here is an explanation that you might have heard or used before: The reason God cures thousands of cancers, infections, etc. each day but never intervenes with amputees is because it is not God’s will to do that. It is not part of God’s plan.”

"This explanation seems a little odd. Amputees really do seem to be getting the short end of God’s plan if this is the case. If God answers prayers as promised in the Bible, and if God is performing all of the medical miracles that we read about in inspirational literature, then God should also be restoring amputated limbs. Why would God help cancer victims (e.g. Marilyn Hickey’s mother) and people bitten by rabid bats (e.g. Jeanna Giese), but discriminate against amputees like this? (See Understanding God’s Plan for an in-depth look at how “God’s Plan” works).

“No matter how many people pray, no matter how often they pray, no matter how sincere they are, no matter how much they believe, no matter how deserving the amputee, what we know is that prayers do not inspire God to regenerate amputated legs. This happens despite what Jesus promises us in Matthew 21:21, John 14:14, Mark 11:24, etc.”

whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.htm

 

[grannymh]

It’s got something to do with eggiweggs.

No, hang on, trust. Jesus is Lord, the rest is a hill of beans.

I can’t read the words without singing the Messiah in my head, so here’s the version I like best (English Concert, Pinnock). Sing along but don’t try any air guitar stuff in case it undoes the miracle on your elbow.

#18 He Shall Feed His Flock - youtube.com/watch?v=YKYNDLYWds0
#19 His Yoke is Easy - youtube.com/watch?v=aiv8LdiSaiE

I looked at the video on the nitty-gritty thread to test my new laptop. But I will not be tempted to try these since apparently I am the only one in known medical history to have re-dislocated my elbow while it was in a brace. Does that count as a miracle–the doctors told me I was impressive.

I better return to the rest bit. I don’t want to dislocate myself from His yoke.

 

[grannymh]

For the record, I am and always will be a Christian theist, but the skeptics do have a point, which Catholics need to answer:

“Here is an explanation that you might have heard or used before: The reason God cures thousands of cancers, infections, etc. each day but never intervenes with amputees is because it is not God’s will to do that. It is not part of God’s plan.”

"This explanation seems a little odd. Amputees really do seem to be getting the short end of God’s plan if this is the case. If God answers prayers as promised in the Bible, and if God is performing all of the medical miracles that we read about in inspirational literature, then God should also be restoring amputated limbs. Why would God help cancer victims (e.g. Marilyn Hickey’s mother) and people bitten by rabid bats (e.g. Jeanna Giese), but discriminate against amputees like this? (See Understanding God’s Plan for an in-depth look at how “God’s Plan” works).

“No matter how many people pray, no matter how often they pray, no matter how sincere they are, no matter how much they believe, no matter how deserving the amputee, what we know is that prayers do not inspire God to regenerate amputated legs. This happens despite what Jesus promises us in Matthew 21:21, John 14:14, Mark 11:24, etc.”

whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.htm

StAnastasia’s post 319 contains a half argument which is tempting.The half argument ignores eternal life.

My Mother often had serious health complications. She was a very good woman, praying and going as much as possible to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Some of her friends were just like the people in post 319. They, too, asked my Mother why didn’t God answer her prayers.

My mother replied gently. “God did answer my prayers. He said no, not now.”

The danger of the half argument in post 319 is that people are led to believe that
a person’s judgment is greater than God’s. The half argument ignores eternal life.
The mantra is-- leave Catholicism because God is not acting according to your will right this very minute.

When one dies, what becomes important?

 

[ricmat]

It would take more than a “few” mutations. If a limb did regrow then I am sure scientists would examine the animal’s DNA to see if such had happened.

Of course they would. But would they actually be able to come to a conclusion for the detailed process of “old DNA” to “new DNA”?

Indeed, but modern fish and modern amphibians have been evolving for precisely the same length of time as modern mammals. We all go back to the same ancestors so we have all had the same time to evolve.

rossum

You seem to be saying that the tree of life immediately branched out into a gazillion different branches. Isn’t that a radical idea (a heresy so to speak) in the evolution community?

 

[ricmat]

StAnastasia’s post 319 contains a half argument which is tempting.The half argument ignores eternal life.

My Mother often had serious health complications. She was a very good woman, praying and going as much as possible to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Some of her friends were just like the people in post 319. They, too, asked my Mother why didn’t God answer her prayers.

My mother replied gently. “God did answer my prayers. He said no, not now.”

The danger of the half argument in post 319 is that people are led to believe that
a person’s judgment is greater than God’s. The half argument ignores eternal life.
The mantra is-- leave Catholicism because God is not acting according to your will right this very minute.

When one dies, what becomes important?

Amen Granny.

Some people propose experiments to test God. “God, do what I wish, or I won’t believe you exist.”

Why a catholic theologian (supposedly) is promoting such a thing, even as a “thought experiment” is beyond me.

Some of us here promote thought experiments to non-believers (in God) that they might question their non-belief, and find eternal life.

Some others of us here promote thought experiments to believers that they might question their belief in God, and instead learn to believe in and trust something other than God, and lose eternal life.

Belief in God, trust in God, is essential for eternal life. You can believe in evolution, or not, and it doesn’t matter.

 

[StAnastasia]

The danger of the half argument in post 319 is that people are led to believe that a person’s judgment is greater than God’s. The half argument ignores eternal life.

I don’t know that it’s saying that. It’s merely asking the question why God heals the easy stuff but doesn’t attempt the difficult stuff. There may be a good reason for aiming only at the low-hanging fruit.

The mantra is-- leave Catholicism because God is not acting according to your will right this very minute.

 

[grannymh]

I don’t think anyone is asking anyone else to leave Catholicism, unless you interpret an intellectual challenge as such a directive. When I ask my graduate students to think about difficult theological issues I am not telling them they have to walk out if they can’t solve them. Just because we can’t solve a mystery does not mean we leave the Church, if that’s what you are implying.

I simply said:
“The mantra is-- leave Catholicism because God is not acting according to your will right this very minute.”

You may choose any situation or frame of reference you wish. The real question which should be asked is-- When one dies, what becomes important?

 

[StAnastasia]

I simply said: The mantra is-- leave Catholicism because God is not acting according to your will right this very minute."

Silly mantra.

You may choose any situation or frame of reference you wish. The real question which should be asked is-- When one dies, what becomes important?

 

[tonyrey]

It’s quite unusual for a Baptist to believe in miracles. 1 Cor 1:18-31 again, we don’t go looking for signs, it’s not part of our reality.

It is not a question of looking for them but accepting them. If they’re not a part of your reality you reject the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection, not to mention the miracles of Jesus and the Saints.

Maybe realist was too strong a word, but atheist doesn’t fit the bill either. Modern medicine has cut the rate of deaths from cancer, and that’s a miracle for many, to do with knowledge, dedication and hard work rather than just sitting back hoping.

You also reject the value of petitionary prayer as if the Lord’s Prayer is either a joke or a fantasy.

When Christ is our personal Savior, Hume’s logic flies out the window with the birdies, it’s just irrelevant to real life.

When Christ is your personal Saviour the Church is redundant and you alone decide which is the true interpretation of the Bible and His teaching. That is why there are thousands of different Christian sects.

 

[tonyrey]

For the record, I am and always will be a Christian theist, but the skeptics do have a point, which Catholics need to answer:

“Here is an explanation that you might have heard or used before: The reason God cures thousands of cancers, infections, etc. each day but never intervenes with amputees is because it is not God’s will to do that. It is not part of God’s plan.”

"This explanation seems a little odd. Amputees really do seem to be getting the short end of God’s plan if this is the case. If God answers prayers as promised in the Bible, and if God is performing all of the medical miracles that we read about in inspirational literature, then God should also be restoring amputated limbs. Why would God help cancer victims (e.g. Marilyn Hickey’s mother) and people bitten by rabid bats (e.g. Jeanna Giese), but discriminate against amputees like this? (See Understanding God’s Plan for an in-depth look at how “God’s Plan” works).

“No matter how many people pray, no matter how often they pray, no matter how sincere they are, no matter how much they believe, no matter how deserving the amputee, what we know is that prayers do not inspire God to regenerate amputated legs. This happens despite what Jesus promises us in Matthew 21:21, John 14:14, Mark 11:24, etc.”

whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.htm

There is a simple answer you have overlooked. God does not perform coercive miracles, i.e. those which compel everyone to believe that He exists…

 

[StAnastasia]

There is a simple answer you have overlooked. God does not perform coercive miracles, i.e. those which compel everyone to believe that He exists…

Of course. I’m merely noting that there are categories of potential miracles that seem to be ruled out. God does not perform miracles that would be seem in principle to be inexplicable.

 

[rossum]

Of course they would. But would they actually be able to come to a conclusion for the detailed process of “old DNA” to “new DNA”?

That depends on the exact details of the two DNAs.

You seem to be saying that the tree of life immediately branched out into a gazillion different branches.

No I am not. What I am saying is absolutely standard. Every living organism on Earth evolved from a first ancestor, or group of ancestors, about 3.5 billion years ago. Every organism has an evolutionary ancestry stretching back to those original simple organisms. This is basic biology. The branchings in the tree, between fish and amphibians or between reptiles and mammals, came a lot later.

rossum

 

[ricmat]

"No matter how many people pray, no matter how often they pray, no matter how sincere they are, no matter how much they believe, no matter how deserving the amputee, what we know is that prayers do not inspire God to regenerate amputated legs. This happens despite what Jesus promises us in Matthew 21:21, John 14:14, Mark 11:24, etc."

No doubt you know more about this than I do, but the daily Gospel readings lately have been from John, so this has been on my mind.

John 14:12 Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes in me will do the works that I do, and will do greater ones than these, because I am going to the Father. 13 And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it. 15 "If you love me, you will keep my commandments.

Also – Jn14 19 In a little while the world will no longer see me, but you will see me, because I live and you will live. 20 On that day you will realize that* I am in my Father and you are in me and I in you.* 21 Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me.

What does it mean to “ask anything of me* in my name*”? What does it mean for us to be “in Jesus who is in the Father”? God’s name represents everything God is, including God’s will, his holiness, his perfect love. Are you “in God’s name”? Is your will totally aligned with God’s will? Is your love equal to God’s love. Are you “in God’s name” when you are asking for something? Have you kept the commandments?

I know for sure that I’m not “in God’s name” and most likely won’t even be close until done in purgatory (assuming I get that far). I don’t know anybody personally that is all the way “in God’s name”, but isn’t that one characteristic of a true saint? Maybe that’s why they have better luck with miracles than the rest of us do.

Jesus also says that the prayers of a righteous man are powerful. Perhaps that’s because a truly righteous man is “in God’s name”, and he is also “in Jesus who is in the Father.”

 

[ricmat]

That depends on the exact details of the two DNAs.

No I am not. What I am saying is absolutely standard. Every living organism on Earth evolved from a first ancestor, or group of ancestors, about 3.5 billion years ago. Every organism has an evolutionary ancestry stretching back to those original simple organisms. This is basic biology. The branchings in the tree, between fish and amphibians or between reptiles and mammals, came a lot later.

rossum

Tree of life - I don’t have one in front of me But I thought it was also “basic biology” that mammals branched off from amphibians a few hundred million years ago. That’s why human embryos have gill slits (or so I was taught in “basic biology class”.) If mammals branched off from amphibians, then through the magic of natural selection, mammals should have added on even more capabilities, instead of losing capabilities that amphibians have. Certainly being able to regrow limbs would be highly advantageous to mammals.

 

[rossum]

Tree of life - I don’t have one in front of me But I thought it was also “basic biology” that mammals branched off from amphibians a few hundred million years ago.

Not quite. Reptiles branched off from amphibians. Reptiles split into Synapsids and Diapsids. Synapsids evolved into mammals while Diapsids evolved into dinosaurs and later birds. We do not stop counting ancestors when the description changes. Some of our ancestors were fish and before that they were bilaterian worms.

If mammals branched off from amphibians, then through the magic of natural selection, mammals should have added on even more capabilities, instead of losing capabilities that amphibians have.

That is false reasoning. Natural selection selects properties that are advantageous in a given environment. Amphibian water breathing was lost because it was not useful on land. Since mammals have high pressure blood systems, the amount of blood lost when a limb is severed will usually kill the animal anyway, rendering regrowth useless. Limb regrowth is only useful in animals with low pressure blood systems where blood loss is not so severe or is allowed for in the case of lizards that can shed their tails.

rossum

 

[ricmat]

Not quite. Reptiles branched off from amphibians. Reptiles split into Synapsids and Diapsids. Synapsids evolved into mammals while Diapsids evolved into dinosaurs and later birds. We do not stop counting ancestors when the description changes. Some of our ancestors were fish and before that they were bilaterian worms.

That is false reasoning. Natural selection selects properties that are advantageous in a given environment. Amphibian water breathing was lost because it was not useful on land. Since mammals have high pressure blood systems, the amount of blood lost when a limb is severed will usually kill the animal anyway, rendering regrowth useless. Limb regrowth is only useful in animals with low pressure blood systems where blood loss is not so severe or is allowed for in the case of lizards that can shed their tails.

rossum

Good explanation. Thanks.

 

[tonyrey]

Of course. I’m merely noting that there are categories of potential miracles that seem to be ruled out. God does not perform miracles that would be seem in principle to be inexplicable.

Why not?

 

[grannymh]

When Christ is your personal Saviour the Church is redundant and you alone decide which is the true interpretation of the Bible and His teaching. That is why there are thousands of different Christian sects.

If only Catholics realized how personal Christ the Savior is,
there would be lines of people wanting to attend the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
What can be more personal than receiving our Lord and Savior in the Holy Eucharist?

 

[StAnastasia]

Why not?

Only God knows. From what we know of church history, limb regrowth seems to have been off the miracles table for most of Christian history.