Design Through Evolution

[Benadam]

For example, I could ask why does the protein attach to the membrane at that point. You will then give me a description or a technical term of that process. I will then ask you why that process occurs and you will then give me another description.

So your game is that you will keep asking questions until someone gets tired. Then you will plant down your flag and say that God did it. Of course two could play at that game. I could ask you how good came into existence. You could say he was always there. I could ask another question. And on, and on it goes.

It’s a game alright eggs. One player is announcing check mate but is playing checkers.

 

[Fran65]

You could say he was always there. I could ask another question. And on, and on it goes.

I would say that God is eternal and is the creator of all things. There are no further questions *on that point *for someone with faith. God is what He is. He has created a universe that is full of purpose and meaning. He is the answer to the question 'Why?" What I was trying to demonstrate is that scientism cannot answer that question.

For me, its more important than a game. I’m not here just for intellectual exercise, I’m clarifying and developing my own knowledge and understanding.

 

[Detales]

Benadam~~“I doubt you believe the Universe has a beginning.”

Eggsbenedict~~ "*Do you believe God has a beginning? *

Benadam~“No.”

Then why would you believe that the Universe has a beginning? Do you know, other than by faith, which is absolutely not knowledge, that there wasn’t something before that? Why would the beginning of even John’s Gospel necessitate that there wasn’t something before “our” experiential Universe. Did Picasso only paint one painting? Do you know any artist who made only one? Are we not “created” in the image and likeness of God? And whose God are you postulating? The christianist version is one of the smaller possibilities as far as I can see, especially in the sense that that construction is anthropomorphic and derivative. God might be That which allows you to entertain the thoughts you have about a made-up God. What if the Church, true to form, is anthropomorphotheocentric, and big bang centric, as it was geocentric? It seems to me that Catholics and other religionists expend inordinate amounts of energy making their god small and thinkable in familial terms.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Detales

It seems to me that Catholics and other religionists expend inordinate amounts of energy making their god small and thinkable in familial terms.

Catholics do not make their God small, since He must be greater than all Creation, but they certainly do make Him familial.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Detales

Then why would you believe that the Universe has a beginning?

Evidently we Catholics have more faith in science than you do. You know, the Big Bang.

And Charlemagne, you again misread my intention.

Seems to be a way of life for me?

 

[wanstronian]

Wanstronian

(Some bits snipped to meet post length limit)

"…it is impossible for the human mind not to perceive and feel a conviction of design, consummate skill, and infinite power in every atom of its composition.

He’s quite wrong. It’s not impossible - I don’t feel such a conviction.

… it is impossible, I say, for the human mind not to believe that there is, in all this, design, cause and effect, up to an ultimate cause, a fabricator of all things from matter and motion…

Wrong again, I don’t believe it and I’m not alone.

We see too, evident proofs of the necessity of a superintending power to maintain the Universe in its course and order. Stars, well known, have disappeared, new ones have come into view, comets, in their incalculable courses, may run foul of suns and planets and require renovation under other laws; certain races of animals are become extinct; and, were there no restoring power, all existences might extinguish successively, one by one, until all should be reduced to a shapeless chaos.

I think that, far from validating the existence of God, this just exposes Jefferson’s naivety.

So irresistible are these evidences of an intelligent and powerful Agent that, of the infinite members of man who have existed through all time, they have believed in the proportion of a million at least to Unit, in the hypothesis of an eternal pre-existence of a creator, rather than in that of a self-existent Universe. Surely this unanimous sentiment renders this more probable than that of the few in the other hypothesis.” Thomas Jefferson

And this last piece proves nothing other than that Jefferson was convinced that numbers are more important than education. I wonder what he would say today.
Don’t forget that Darwin’s great work was not published until more than 30 years after Jefferson’s death. Not to mention Einstein, Lemaitre, Hubble et al, whose theories knock Jefferson’s opinions into a cocked hat. I don’t think we can count on Jefferson.

“I’m not an atheist … Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations.” Albert Einstein

We’ve been down this road before, Charlemagne. Not being an atheist does NOT mean that he believed in God, as I’m sure even you, with your colossally blinkered perspective, would have to admit. You can produce selective quotes from Einstein all day, but you and I both know that Einstein made at least one very explicit quote where he denied a belief in God. The quote you provide above, of course, does not even hint that Einstein believed in God.

Max Born: Quantum Physicist
“Those who say that the study of science makes a man an atheist must be rather silly.”

Proving what? Do you really think that this quote advocates the existence of God? All it’s saying is that not all scientists are atheists! It doesn’t even go so far as to say that any of them are theists!

Max Planck: Father of Quantum Physics

“There can never be any real opposition between religion and science; for the one is the complement of the other.”

I don’t think there is opposition. Religion preaches dogma, then science advances to the point where such dogma is shown to be wrong, religion retreats under the weight of evidence. They are opposites (science is based on repeatable, observable, empirical evidence whereas religion is based on rumour and superstition) but they don’t have to be in opposition, unless religious apologists start asserting that God exists, that God was the only one who could have started the Universe, etc. etc… at which point science says, “Show me the evidence.”

J.J. Thompson: Discoverer of the Electron

“In the distance tower still higher peaks which will yield to those who ascend them still wider prospects and deepen the feeling whose truth is emphasized by every advance in science, that great are the works of the Lord.”

Werner Heisenberg: Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle

“In the course of my life I have been repeatedly compelled to ponder the relationship of these two regions of thought (science and religion), for I have never been able to doubt the reality of that to which they point.”

Arthur Compton: Compton Effect, Quantum Physicist

“For myself, faith begins with the realization that a supreme intelligence brought the universe into being and created man. It is not difficult for me to have this faith, for it is incontrovertible that where there is a plan there is intelligence – an orderly, unfolding universe testifies to the truth of the most majestic statement ever uttered – ‘In the beginning God.’”

Well you found some in the end, well done. I would be genuinely interested in hearing the logic behind their belief, although I suspect this is not documented.

Does it ever occur to you that Richard Dawkins might not even be in the same class with these thinkers?

Yet again you are putting words in my mouth. Where have I referenced Dawkins as the ultimate reference?

Or do you think they are not in the same class with you? :tsktsk:

You can’t help it can you - you have to infer, and attack, statements I haven’t made. Does the eighth commandment mean nothing to you???

By the way, we are all waiting breathlessly for your scientific paper proving that abiogenesis happened by pure chance.

You do know, of course, that scientific papers are required for such a position.

Yet again, Charlamagne, you demonstrate your ignorance and arrogance by ascribing to me a position which I have never claimed to hold. I have never stated that I have proof of how abiogenesis occurred. All I - or anybody - have, is probability theory. However improbable spontaneous abiogenesis is, God, by definition, is even more improbable.

 

[Benjamin8o8]

I just finished reading this thread and I must thank all the Catholics that participated in debating. I really did gain a lot of knowledge through you and I am very appreciative I had the chance to gain knowledge from high educated Catholics who are in a mission to destroy irrational thinking. Which of course is Atheism. Reading this thread all I noticed from atheists is unanswered questions and insulting accusations, therfore, I have to admit that more I read threads like this, and statements from non-belivers when they respond to theists, the more my faith grows. I don´t believe it has anything to do with being bias, it is just so obvious who makes more sense.

It is more logicial to believe that God is the answer to why rather assuming science will eventually come to a conclusiion. We all know science has its limits and if thus far science can´t even answer the most basic answers what makes us think it ever will.

Faith is so beutiful, it´s just a mystery. That fact we can increase our faith through knowledge and wisdom makes me adore God so so much more.

Thanks again, I just wanted to make sure that all those Catholics who put their work in, you really are helping others. In this case, your helping your fellow brother Benjamin

God Bless.

all of you

 

[Benadam]

Benadam~~“I doubt you believe the Universe has a beginning.”

Eggsbenedict~~ "*Do you believe God has a beginning? *

Benadam~“No.”

Then why would you believe that the Universe has a beginning?

 

[wanstronian]

I just finished reading this thread and I must thank all the Catholics that participated in debating. I really did gain a lot of knowledge through you and I am very appreciative I had the chance to gain knowledge from high educated Catholics who are in a mission to destroy irrational thinking. Which of course is Atheism. Reading this thread all I noticed from atheists is unanswered questions and insulting accusations

*Really??? *You might want to consider reading through again.

, therfore, I have to admit that more I read threads like this, and statements from non-belivers when they respond to theists, the more my faith grows. I don´t believe it has anything to do with being bias, it is just so obvious who makes more sense.

How can it make sense without evidence? That’s all atheists are asking!! Talk about ‘unanswered questions!!’

It is more logicial to believe that God is the answer to why rather assuming science will eventually come to a conclusiion. We all know science has its limits and if thus far science can´t even answer the most basic answers what makes us think it ever will.

Okay, so science can’t answer a question. Why must theists know all the answers? Why can’t they accept that there are some things we just don’t know. There are some things we will never know. Why does that mean that God exists? Where’s the rationality? You don’t like unanswered questions - practice what you preach.

Faith is so beutiful, it´s just a mystery. That fact we can increase our faith through knowledge and wisdom makes me adore God so so much more.

What knowledge have you acquired that has increased your faith? The fact that you hold a different opinion to atheists? Isn’t that just a circular, self-reinforcing belief? Or is there some other knowledge that you’ve acquired?

Thanks again, I just wanted to make sure that all those Catholics who put their work in, you really are helping others. In this case, your helping your fellow brother Benjamin

God Bless.

all of you

Well if nothing else, your post has demonstrated that logic, reason, and the demolition of theist arguments by dint of a few simple questions by atheists, has not diminished your belief. While I sort of admire you in one sense for maintaining this stance against all rational argument, I do believe that in doing so you are proving yourself to be deluded.

“When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called a Religion.”
— Robert M. Pirsig (Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values)

 

[MindOverMatter]

Well if nothing else, your post has demonstrated that logic, reason, and the demolition of theist arguments by dint of a few simple questions by atheists, has not diminished your belief. While I sort of admire you in one sense for maintaining this stance against all rational argument, I do believe that in doing so you are proving yourself to be deluded.

What is the point of you? You know nothing of reality to call somebody deluded.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Wanstronian

Yet again you are putting words in my mouth. Where have I referenced Dawkins as the ultimate reference?

I assumed you agreed with Dawkins’ opposing intelligent design. Do you or don’t you? But if you’d like to align yourself with a much better thinker, I’m all ears.

We’ve been down this road before, Charlemagne. Not being an atheist does NOT mean that he believed in God, as I’m sure even you, with your colossally blinkered perspective, would have to admit. You can produce selective quotes from Einstein all day, but you and I both know that Einstein made at least one very explicit quote where he denied a belief in God. The quote you provide above, of course, does not even hint that Einstein believed in God.

Now you’re just being petty because all these great thinkers disagree with you and you think they would agree with you if they were alive today and you could get their ear.

Talk about a “colossally blinkered persepective”!

You apparently belong to that rapidly expanding army of misguided souls who think that because a thought was held a hundred or two hundred years ago it cannot possibly still be true … especially if atheists say it is not true because they are deathly frightened by the prospect that it might be.

I have never stated that I have proof of how abiogenesis occurred. All I - or anybody - have, is probability theory. However improbable spontaneous abiogenesis is, God, by definition, is even more improbable.

The question of improbability is between Chance and Design, not Chance and God.

The probability of design is something any atheist should be able to identify when he sees it, unless he is an atheist.

And as to your belief that Einstein did not believe in God, you need to do a whole lot more reading. He did not believe in the Christian God, but he sure did believe in a designer God. You might begin with Max Jammer’s book, Einstein and Religion.

Above all, please stop making false statements when you aren’t even read up on the subject. Don’t make up the truth as you go along. For a man to declare that he is not an atheist, you can’t then argue that he is.

“The fanatical atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who—in their grudge against traditional religion as the ‘opium of the masses’—cannot hear the music of the spheres.”

“I’m not an atheist, and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the language in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations.” Albert Einstein in Max Jammer’s Einstein and Religion.

I am quoting him again, not to irritate you, but to share with people who just now may be entering the thread. Yet it cannot be said often enough that Einstein could see design in the universe, even if you can’t.

 

[buffalo]

*Really??? *You might want to consider reading through again.How can it make sense without evidence? That’s all atheists are asking!! Talk about ‘unanswered questions!!’

Okay, so science can’t answer a question. Why must theists know all the answers? Why can’t they accept that there are some things we just don’t know. There are some things we will never know. Why does that mean that God exists? Where’s the rationality? You don’t like unanswered questions - practice what you preach.What knowledge have you acquired that has increased your faith? The fact that you hold a different opinion to atheists? Isn’t that just a circular, self-reinforcing belief? Or is there some other knowledge that you’ve acquired?

Well if nothing else, your post has demonstrated that logic, reason, and the demolition of theist arguments by dint of a few simple questions by atheists, has not diminished your belief. While I sort of admire you in one sense for maintaining this stance against all rational argument, I do believe that in doing so you are proving yourself to be deluded.

“When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called a Religion.”
— Robert M. Pirsig (Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values)

I gladly wear the “deluded” label.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Charlamagne;:

By the way, we are all waiting breathlessly for your scientific paper proving that abiogenesis happened by pure chance.

You do know, of course, that scientific papers are required for such a position.

Yeah because chemistry is pure chance.

 

[Benadam]

]"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called a Religion

."
The greatest delusion makes it’self known in those who believe that unless they see it it doesn’t exist.

No, one is even greater.

The delusion that one is wise because they can’t see what others say they see and the arrogance to teach those around them that only what they can see exists.

Jesus called them the blind teaching from blindness. The blind leading the blind to destruction.

True wisdom in their case, is simply to admit they can’t believe what they can’t see

 

[Charlemagne_II]

*Yeah because chemistry is pure chance. *

I hope you don’t believe that when you’re in the chemistry lab!

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Wanstronian

What knowledge have you acquired that has increased your faith?

Speaking for myself, the knowledge that atheism yields nothing rational and yet dedicates its temple to the god Reason.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

*Yeah because chemistry is pure chance. *

I hope you don’t believe that when you’re in the chemistry lab!

It was you that said it?

Originally Posted by Charlamagne;
By the way, we are all waiting breathlessly for your scientific paper proving that abiogenesis happened** by pure chance**.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Wanstronian

What knowledge have you acquired that has increased your faith?

Speaking for myself, the knowledge that atheism yields nothing rational and yet dedicates its temple to the god Reason.

How can it be possible that you STILL don’t understand the meaning od the word atheism. :banghead::banghead::banghead::takethat::takethat::takethat:

 

[Charlemagne_II]

*How can it be possible that you STILL don’t understand the meaning od the word atheism. *

I give up. Your trying to rewrite the dictionary and common usage will get you no tolerance from me:shrug:.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

*How can it be possible that you STILL don’t understand the meaning od the word atheism. *

I give up. Your trying to rewrite the dictionary and common usage will get you no tolerance from me:shrug:.

Atheism can be either the rejection of theism,[1] or the position that deities do not exist.[2] In the broadest sense, it is the ABSENSE of belief in the existence of deities.[3]

Common usage… en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism you dont get much more common than that.