Deteriorating species

[Moonstruck888]

Would you have a problem with creating the best in foods from plants and animals using an in vitro technique and/or the use of selective genes? At the university here, agricultural students are experimenting by obtaining eggs and sperm from the best cows for dairy production and uniting them by in vitro fertilization and transplanting them into ordinary cows. Several fruits and vegetables in our supermarkets are the result of genetic manipulation or sometimes just grafting.

Yes, I’m concerned about the way it’s being approached. Human beings are not the only creatures that can suffer my friend and I don’t think anything like enough research is being done into what happens when these genes are propagated into the biosphere.

My concern would be if these creative techniques would be applied to humans in a “brave new world” scenario.

Don’t you mean when they are applied to humans?

 

[Tuno]

We know that species go extinct all the time. So, I was thinking, if we humans are subject to the “ordinary laws of nature” (using the term just for our purposes), could it be that we will be on the edge of extinction ourselves before Christ returns, and that he will hold off until that happens, or do you think we could going on and on as we are indefinitely? I was wondering because the more we advance in medicine the more we seem to be producing children with disorders such as autism (not to single out autistics, but just as an example). And if we are, is that a part of being physical creatures in a limited natural system? Could it be that our time is limited as a species and that God is working within that “law”? Or we are outside it? And does it make any real difference?

Too often “natural law” is in the eye of the beholder. There are laws of physics and there are “theories,” that being another hugely misunderstood word among many people of faith. Many people of faith often use “theory” as if it meant “hypothesis,” which it is not. For all practical purposes, a scientific “theory” might as well be a law as it can be used for the purpose of prediction. That is not to say that such cannot be further refined or become more inclusive. that is the advantage of science over religion: science has teleology, religion has schisms. No one in science has had schisms about the scientific method itself, even though there may be debates about its application ore conclusions drawn from it. But that is why science moves ahead as a body, as distinct from religions.

As for being on the verge of extinction, we have two kinds of that: personal and racial, and I would guess some degrees in-between. We are nowadays in the unique position of engineering our own demise as a race, by not balancing resources and population, and by chemical toxicity. Your example of autism is thought to have much to do with such toxicity.

And the “return of Christ” in our religion is our particular interpretation of Scripture and tradition, so whatever it is we believe, it is our belief. Humans are notorious for confusing what they believe for what is. But there are libraries of material on those ideas, and this is not the place for them to be aired.

It is far more important to consider, I would think, about the consequences and end of one’s own life span than the hypothetical end of the race relative to an event that only some of us believe in. Therefor it is very useful in both contexts, as far as I can see. to practice the Great Commandment and both forms of the Golden Rule. A tremendous aid in this is both practicing Divine Presence and a course of self inquiry aimed at personal integrity.

As for any law? God IS the law, and humanity is in His arms as His children, to end or transcend as however might be in the interest of Love, which is, imho, the fundamental law operating whether we might see it as such or not. Because of what I see as our narrow minded perception of ourselves and creation, mostly we don’t see that and exclude ourselves. !Que lastima!

 

[Della]

Only a few scientists still dispute it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_birds

Not to be argumentative for the sake of it, but sometimes the few are right and the many wrong. That’s been the case more than once in the history of science. But, the majority may be right. Only time will tell.

I don’t think you are a champion of unbridled capitalism. I think you have far too much faith in man’s ability to make wise choices. I see no evidence that we do. I find it hard to imagine that China will exercise any more restraint than we have, although in twenty years time we could well be protected from the worst cancers of power by no longer having it.

Well, there’s a couple of factors (at the least) going on here. Firstly, China is a huge country with a lot of very poor people in it. Communism doesn’t work well and has only impoverished the country all the more. It’s going to take some time for them to recover from being a strictly communist nation to one that embraces some form of capitalism. Capitalism itself isn’t bad–it’s the rise of multi-nation corporations that have made wage slaves out of so many. I’m more of a distributist, although I don’t think pure distributism is really practical in our global economy. And secondly, although you won’t agree, I see the hand of God in restraining human beings from the worst we could do to ourselves. The way we avoided WWIII is nothing less than miraculous, IMHO.

That remains to be seen. I am very worried about the way genetic engineers plan to manipulate biology.

Of course, human beings have been manipulating biology ever since we took up farming in place of hunting/gathering to support ourselves. Still, there are definitely excesses that should be held in check/regulated by law. The problem, as I see it, is trying to bring the law up to speed to meet the swift progress of technology, and then enacting laws that are fair and reasonable.

 

[Della]

Too often “natural law” is in the eye of the beholder. There are laws of physics and there are “theories,” that being another hugely misunderstood word among many people of faith. Many people of faith often use “theory” as if it meant “hypothesis,” which it is not. For all practical purposes, a scientific “theory” might as well be a law as it can be used for the purpose of prediction. That is not to say that such cannot be further refined or become more inclusive. that is the advantage of science over religion: science has teleology, religion has schisms. No one in science has had schisms about the scientific method itself, even though there may be debates about its application ore conclusions drawn from it. But that is why science moves ahead as a body, as distinct from religions.

Of course, the purpose of religion isn’t to “move ahead”, is it? Religion isn’t discovered, it’s revealed–which is why the difference in approach. Religion requires authority to be reliable not method–the question in religion is what authority and who has it. Science doesn’t depend on any one scientist’s authority. Science generally requires consensus based on experimentation, yes? Religion requires orthodoxy if it is to be trustworthy unlike science which is based on questioning everything. So, it’s really like comparing apples and oranges to compare science and religion. Both are valuable and needed, but in order for man to be moral and honest with himself he needs good, solid theology.

As for being on the verge of extinction, we have two kinds of that: personal and racial, and I would guess some degrees in-between. We are nowadays in the unique position of engineering our own demise as a race, by not balancing resources and population, and by chemical toxicity. Your example of autism is thought to have much to do with such toxicity.

I agree. That’s just the sort of thing I was attempting to say. We have to be on guard against hurting ourselves and our children.

And the “return of Christ” in our religion is our particular interpretation of Scripture and tradition, so whatever it is we believe, it is our belief. Humans are notorious for confusing what they believe for what is. But there are libraries of material on those ideas, and this is not the place for them to be aired.

Well, some theories about the Second Coming come from poor exegesis of Scripture, from ripping it out of its proper context of Sacred Tradition, both Jewish and Christian. There are lots of books filled with just so much pudding because of this.

It is far more important to consider, I would think, about the consequences and end of one’s own life span than the hypothetical end of the race relative to an event that only some of us believe in. Therefor it is very useful in both contexts, as far as I can see. to practice the Great Commandment and both forms of the Golden Rule. A tremendous aid in this is both practicing Divine Presence and a course of self inquiry aimed at personal integrity.

True as far as it goes but we humans are very good at deceiving ourselves. It’s why Christ established his Church and gave it the authority to speak in his name–so we wouldn’t have to wonder if we were doing what is pleasing to God or not. History bears this out quite nicely.

As for any law? God IS the law, and humanity is in His arms as His children, to end or transcend as however might be in the interest of Love, which is, imho, the fundamental law operating whether we might see it as such or not. Because of what I see as our narrow minded perception of ourselves and creation, mostly we don’t see that and exclude ourselves. !Que lastima!

Love is definitely the queen of the virtues and ought to be primary in informing our relationship with God and man, but truth is just as important. Truth is what keeps love from devolving into mere sentiment or into self-deception. Love keeps truth from being too harsh and truth keeps love from going wrong. Many a bad thing has been done in the name of both, but only together can they keep us on the proper course.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Of course, human beings have been manipulating biology ever since we took up farming in place of hunting/gathering to support ourselves. Still, there are definitely excesses that should be held in check/regulated by law. The problem, as I see it, is trying to bring the law up to speed to meet the swift progress of technology, and then enacting laws that are fair and reasonable.

It’s not just a matter of laws and ethics, although that is a huge concern. Frankly, I don’t think we really know enough about genes to start footling around too much at the moment.

 

[Tuno]

Of course, the purpose of religion isn’t to “move ahead”, is it? Religion isn’t discovered, it’s revealed–which is why the difference in approach. Religion requires authority to be reliable not method–the question in religion is what authority and who has it. Science doesn’t depend on any one scientist’s authority. Science generally requires consensus based on experimentation, yes? Religion requires orthodoxy if it is to be trustworthy unlike science which is based on questioning everything. So, it’s really like comparing apples and oranges to compare science and religion. Both are valuable and needed, but in order for man to be moral and honest with himself he needs good, solid theology.

Yes, and as we can see, the “revelation” of religion according to "authority"is one of the thorniest topics we could enter. As I said, what we believe, is just that: belief, regardless of the multitudinous claims to Divine Authority every religion has. Saying “Mine’s right because…” is not a sufficient argument, especially when we know that there is a more direct approach. And trustworthy compared to what? The Moslem or the Shintoist or the Cargo Cultist is no less sincere or convinced than you or I. God IS, yes. But belief is insufficient. and both science and religion are apples, anyway. They only look different, but grow on the same tree: your attention. There is not a “science” you or a “religion” you unless you compart-menatlize your experience.

Goodness is independent of theology, as is “demon”-strated both within and without the Church. The occurrence of good is statistically independent of religion. There are about as many Catholics in jail proportionally as there are Catholics in the world population. And yet more ought to be, given, say, the latest scandals reported from Belgium. The only ethic that is functional universally is the recognition that the “other” is equal in value to one’s self. Even Jesus taught that.

Well, some theories about the Second Coming come from poor exegesis of Scripture, from ripping it out of its proper context of Sacred Tradition, both Jewish and Christian. There are lots of books filled with just so much pudding because of this.

I am not talking about Abrahamic religions here. Two clues found in the poverty of Christian Scriptures might be, among others, the multi-leveled nature of parables and Mark 4:33,34. ONe might consider the ideas about this in Maurice Nicoll’s The New Man. For those who are already of good intent, religion may be sufficient. But remember, the root of religion means to tie back to. That implies that what is being tied can’t stand by itself. Religion is yet the the house built on sand that Jesus spoke of. It will last as long as it does, and serve in the mean time for some. Faith itself may yet be a barrier to Understanding.

True as far as it goes but we humans are very good at deceiving ourselves. It’s why Christ established his Church and gave it the authority to speak in his name–so we wouldn’t have to wonder if we were doing what is pleasing to God or not. History bears this out quite nicely.

Yes, we are so good that we even submit ourselves to a third party authority in what could be the most important aspect of one’s life. Go ahead, I won’t. My study of both the history and the Church and the phenomenon of religion combined with my experience makes that impossible for me. If it works for you, great. We are each where we are by the law of our Being.

Love is definitely the queen of the virtues and ought to be primary in informing our relationship with God and man, but truth is just as important. Truth is what keeps love from devolving into mere sentiment or into self-deception. Love keeps truth from being too harsh and truth keeps love from going wrong. Many a bad thing has been done in the name of both, but only together can they keep us on the proper course.

Amen. As one man said balance is “When the head and the heart dance together.”

 

[Della]

Yes, and as we can see, the “revelation” of religion according to "authority"is one of the thorniest topics we could enter. As I said, what we believe, is just that: belief, regardless of the multitudinous claims to Divine Authority every religion has. Saying “Mine’s right because…” is not a sufficient argument, especially when we know that there is a more direct approach. And trustworthy compared to what? The Moslem or the Shintoist or the Cargo Cultist is no less sincere or convinced than you or I. God IS, yes. But belief is insufficient. and both science and religion are apples, anyway. They only look different, but grow on the same tree: your attention. There is not a “science” you or a “religion” you unless you compart-menatlize your experience.

Claims to authority are not the same thing as true, God-given authority. Even children know that there is and isn’t proper authority. For example, I used to babysit when I was a teen. The kids would often try to act up and not obey me by saying: “You’re not our boss!” (I am quoting real words by real children here). I would say, “Oh yes I am. Your mother put me in charge and I will be telling her everything you said and did.” That always got their attention and respect. They knew I had real authority because it came from their own parents. Catholicism makes the same claim. Either it has the right to that claim or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t nothing it teaches can be taken as authoritative even if laudable. Do you see the difference? As for compartmentalizing science from religion, of course they have to be studied separately because each discipline operates on different principles. But, each comes at truth and desires to share the truth. The truths of science support those of religion and vice versa. It’s too bad some want them to be at war with one another when there is no need for it.

Goodness is independent of theology, as is “demon”-strated both within and without the Church. The occurrence of good is statistically independent of religion. There are about as many Catholics in jail proportionally as there are Catholics in the world population. And yet more ought to be, given, say, the latest scandals reported from Belgium. The only ethic that is functional universally is the recognition that the “other” is equal in value to one’s self. Even Jesus taught that.

No, goodness is taught by theology it’s not independent of it. And you are confusing impeccability with infallibility. They are entirely different things. The Church has had some truly awful leaders from popes on down, but the Church’s teachings are still infallible because it is not a mere human institution, but a divine one. Like its head, Christ, it is human and divine. The human part is not yet perfect (far from it), but the divine part is utterly perfect and cannot be wrong or sin. So, it is no surprise that the Church has fostered great saints and also seen some of the greatest villains. Remember Judas? He was a part of the Church until he betrayed Christ. Unfortunately, we all betray Christ when we sin, some more than others, but we all do.

I am not talking about Abrahamic religions here. Two clues found in the poverty of Christian Scriptures might be, among others, the multi-leveled nature of parables and Mark 4:33,34. ONe might consider the ideas about this in Maurice Nicoll’s The New Man. For those who are already of good intent, religion may be sufficient. But remember, the root of religion means to tie back to. That implies that what is being tied can’t stand by itself. Religion is yet the the house built on sand that Jesus spoke of. It will last as long as it does, and serve in the mean time for some. Faith itself may yet be a barrier to Understanding.

It is apparent that you Mr. Nicoll knows nothing about religion or the Scriptures or the mission of Christ, poor thing. Religion isn’t something that is tacked on–it is what connects us to the source of goodness to Goodness himself. You are reading the wrong books, my friend. “Why spend your money on that which is not food?” as Isaiah asked. You need to read some good apologists, such as G. K. Chesterton or even C. S. Lewis. Faith is hardly a barrier to understanding. It works just the other way around. Faith is the door to understanding.

Yes, we are so good that we even submit ourselves to a third party authority in what could be the most important aspect of one’s life. Go ahead, I won’t. My study of both the history and the Church and the phenomenon of religion combined with my experience makes that impossible for me. If it works for you, great. We are each where we are by the law of our Being.

The Church isn’t a “third party” it’s the first party. We are her children not her sycophants. When you were a child did you trust your parents? I hope you could–that they were worthy of your trust–most are. Well, that’s what the Church is–a parent. God is Father and Friend and Lord and Lover and on and on… He gave his Church authority so we would be able to love and serve him truly and rightly. No one who has followed the Church has ever been the worse off for believing and trusting in her. No one. I invite you to talk to your local priest and be reconnected to her again. I invite not out of some form of triumphalism, but out of joy and and love of truth, beauty, and peace.

Amen. As one man said balance is “When the head and the heart dance together.”

Well, the head can be deceived as well as the heart. They both need to be well-formed and informed in order to not dance off the edge of a cliff.

 

[puzzleannie]

We know that species go extinct all the time. So, I was thinking, if we humans are subject to the “ordinary laws of nature” (using the term just for our purposes), could it be that we will be on the edge of extinction ourselves before Christ returns, and that he will hold off until that happens, or do you think we could going on and on as we are indefinitely? ?

don’t know about the whole species but I am deteriorating rapidly.
Your suggestion seems to imply that the causes for the extinction of a species are contained in the actions of that species, something I doubt would stand up to scientific scrutiny

there have been flaws and disorders in some members of the species throughout our history, but the only ones that would have evoluntionary impact are those that would adversely affect the ability to survive and reproduce. Autism and other disorders only recently diagnosed or defined may not fit that criteria.

 

[Della]

don’t know about the whole species but I am deteriorating rapidly.
Your suggestion seems to imply that the causes for the extinction of a species are contained in the actions of that species, something I doubt would stand up to scientific scrutiny

there have been flaws and disorders in some members of the species throughout our history, but the only ones that would have evoluntionary impact are those that would adversely affect the ability to survive and reproduce. Autism and other disorders only recently diagnosed or defined may not fit that criteria.

Well, I was just ruminating about us as a species and the return of Christ and was curious if the seeds of destruction have been planted in us–through our own mishandling of science–chemicals, biological tinkering, putting too much stress on us through lifestyle and that sort of thing and if we are seeing the results through a lessening in our vitality–our ability to keep on going for hundreds or thousands or perhaps millions of years, if Christ should not come within onr of those time limits. We’re probably good for the next few hundreds of years and maybe thousands, but millions might be pushing it. If we tamper too much with our biology and environment, though we could be shortening our time on earth by quite a lot, bringing about our own demise much sooner than it would have happened in the natural order of things. If all this sounds a bit muddled, it isn’t you, it’s only me working these things out in my own funny head.

 

[Tuno]

Either it has the right to that claim or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t nothing it teaches can be taken as authoritative even if laudable. Do you see the difference?

Yes, I do, very clearly. If you feel that the Church has such authority, then you are bound to your beliefs. I am not bound that way. Having been “in your shoes” in this matter, I completely respect your position. I also would say that much the Church teaches is laudable, and would be so with or without the belief in its claimed authority. It just doesn’t go deep enough. It can’t, Angel.

The truths of science support those of religion and vice versa. It’s too bad some want them to be at war with one another when there is no need for it.

I don’t quite see ti that way, though I know they both stem from the same Source.

No, goodness is taught by theology it’s not independent of it. And you are confusing impeccability with infallibility. They are entirely different things.

Yes, they are. If I go to a piano teacher and don’t learn my scales, that is likely my fault if I don’t study and practice. But the Church is teaching, as far as I can tell, not the piano I wanted to learn as a concert grand, but as one of those single octave kids toys. And there is still the matter that the alleged Divinely sponsored Church has no better record of producing “good” than other or no religions. Goodness is a point of maturity, and attributable to God, but not to a religion as such.

Religion isn’t something that is tacked on–it is what connects us to the source of goodness to Goodness himself.

Actually, if you look closely, you will find that it is. As for knowing religion, my devotion, knowledge, and zeal made me a wonderful proselytizer for the Church before I woke up. And there are no “wrong” books, only mistaken or immature understanding. God is not effected by sincere inquiry. But we remain small in experience despite our rather astounding potential if we fear to look, as far as I have seen.

“Why spend your money on that which is not food?” as Isaiah asked. You need to read some good apologists, such as G. K. Chesterton or even C. S. Lewis. Faith is hardly a barrier to understanding. It works just the other way around. Faith is the door to understanding.

Good advice from Isaiah! I have read both, CS Lewis extensively. The both fail in the crunch, especially Chesterton. At least Lewis could weave a good story worthy of consideration.

The Church isn’t a “third party” it’s the first party. We are her children not her sycophants. When you were a child did you trust your parents?

I was lucky; mostly I could. many are not so lucky. In any case, that is how we learn things that are not necessarily so, isn’t it. And that is how the Church is a parent. It is only apparent. In my own experience it misses the point of Jesus teachings. But that is fine, such as it teaches is useful to many. It just isn’t the whole picture, and certainly not with any clarity. You can’t see that at the moment, and that is fine. God can’t respect belief in any case though God is the light to even belief.

Yes, I did that for years. I spent some time nearly every day talking to priests even when not in school. And they, save one, were stumped with my questions and really had nothing useful to offer. “just have faith” is not an answer. I also knew enough Catholic theology to win first prize with my teammates in our state wide school system. They, the priest, sincere men all, were, finally, my reason for leaving. I kept in touch with the one till he passed. Few even came close to equalling him.

Well, the head can be deceived as well as the heart. They both need to be well-formed and informed in order to not dance off the edge of a cliff.

That is for sure! LOL! Nice chatting with you. You dance well.

 

[StevenDunn]

We know that species go extinct all the time. So, I was thinking, if we humans are subject to the “ordinary laws of nature” (using the term just for our purposes), could it be that we will be on the edge of extinction ourselves before Christ returns, and that he will hold off until that happens, or do you think we could going on and on as we are indefinitely? I was wondering because the more we advance in medicine the more we seem to be producing children with disorders such as autism (not to single out autistics, but just as an example). And if we are, is that a part of being physical creatures in a limited natural system? Could it be that our time is limited as a species and that God is working within that “law”? Or we are outside it? And does it make any real difference?

Does this idle speculation bring you closer to God? This is an unanswerable question you’ve asked everyone here, and a long one, too! Clearly you’ve been thinking about it. People who ask themselves questions like this try to - on some level - understand God, who can never be understood. God is experienced, not understood. Worrying about this kind of thing is just opening a door to the Evil One. Don’t worry about it and trust in God. He will let come to pass what He wants to come to pass.

 

[Della]

Yes, I do, very clearly. If you feel that the Church has such authority, then you are bound to your beliefs. I am not bound that way. Having been “in your shoes” in this matter, I completely respect your position. I also would say that much the Church teaches is laudable, and would be so with or without the belief in its claimed authority. It just doesn’t go deep enough. It can’t, Angel.

I don’t quite see ti that way, though I know they both stem from the same Source.

Yes, they are. If I go to a piano teacher and don’t learn my scales, that is likely my fault if I don’t study and practice. But the Church is teaching, as far as I can tell, not the piano I wanted to learn as a concert grand, but as one of those single octave kids toys. And there is still the matter that the alleged Divinely sponsored Church has no better record of producing “good” than other or no religions. Goodness is a point of maturity, and attributable to God, but not to a religion as such.

Actually, if you look closely, you will find that it is. As for knowing religion, my devotion, knowledge, and zeal made me a wonderful proselytizer for the Church before I woke up. And there are no “wrong” books, only mistaken or immature understanding. God is not effected by sincere inquiry. But we remain small in experience despite our rather astounding potential if we fear to look, as far as I have seen.

Good advice from Isaiah! I have read both, CS Lewis extensively. The both fail in the crunch, especially Chesterton. At least Lewis could weave a good story worthy of consideration.

I was lucky; mostly I could. many are not so lucky. In any case, that is how we learn things that are not necessarily so, isn’t it. And that is how the Church is a parent. It is only apparent. In my own experience it misses the point of Jesus teachings. But that is fine, such as it teaches is useful to many. It just isn’t the whole picture, and certainly not with any clarity. You can’t see that at the moment, and that is fine. God can’t respect belief in any case though God is the light to even belief.

Yes, I did that for years. I spent some time nearly every day talking to priests even when not in school. And they, save one, were stumped with my questions and really had nothing useful to offer. “just have faith” is not an answer. I also knew enough Catholic theology to win first prize with my teammates in our state wide school system. They, the priest, sincere men all, were, finally, my reason for leaving. I kept in touch with the one till he passed. Few even came close to equalling him.

That is for sure! LOL! Nice chatting with you. You dance well.

I found just the opposite of you. In the Church I found the depth I was lacking in the world and other Christian groups. In the great saints, in particular. A word in defense of Chesterton–he wrote several works of fiction and was a member of a mystery writers club that included Agatha Christie and other bright lights. He was no slouch. I think you have short-changed him.

There are answers to all your questions. Not all priests are good theologians/apologists. Indeed, most aren’t, especially not pastoral priests. That isn’t their primary focus. Certainly there are aspects of God we can’t understand because he is God who cannot be fully fathomed by any human being except Christ. There are mysteries and seeming paradoxes and counter intuitive truths that baffle geniuses, but that only shows that we are mere creatures who cannot see/understand everything because it is too great for us. It is hubris (not that you are demonstrating it) to think we could know/understand God utterly and completely. But, we can know what he has revealed about himself–Christ Jesus. Him we can know and trust. I suppose none of this means anything to you–you’re probably yawning right now, but still, I will keep you in my prayers (as I do all who are sincerely unable to trust God in his Church).

 

[Della]

Does this idle speculation bring you closer to God? This is an unanswerable question you’ve asked everyone here, and a long one, too! Clearly you’ve been thinking about it. People who ask themselves questions like this try to - on some level - understand God, who can never be understood. God is experienced, not understood. Worrying about this kind of thing is just opening a door to the Evil One. Don’t worry about it and trust in God. He will let come to pass what He wants to come to pass.

If it were idle speculation I wouldn’t engage in it. It’s not a bad thing for us to be on guard against thinking that all we need do is ride out whatever stupidities the human race perpetrates against itself and nature because Christ will come and set all to rights. We have an obligation to do what we can to help our fellow man by saving him from himself, if possible. If we are destroying ourselves we are duty bound to do what we can about it. And staying informed is essential to that. There are no idle questions if they lead us to doing what is right and necessary. Yes?

 

[Tuno]

I am very happy for you that you found something of meaning and significance. You will discover much by sincerely perusing what you find. I am also enamored of some of the Saints. I’m currently reading *Love Letters From God *which includes six Catholic Saints among the anthologized authors. Reading them leaves me in tears or laughter, and always with insight. As for Chesterton, he may be a fine story teller. I don’t know, not having read him. I only question for myself the validity of his theological perspective. It doesn’t jibe with what I know to be so.

I am aware that there are answers to all my questions, and that is part of the dynamic that is the problem, as you may be lucky enough to find out some day. And apologists aren’t plowing in the field that is of significance in the matter of “salvation.” Neither are, as you correctly state, the pastorals. The Christ is inestimable in this dynamic, and trust is a very significant factor, as you indicate. As for the bafflement of geniuses, and paradoxes, it only means there is hope that some may find their way through the crack in the world.

Of course, we cannot know or understand God as person. But I personally do not count what the Church teaches as revelation. In my life, though faith gave it some structure, that became inadequate to the exigencies of my own mystical experiences. My friends told me pretty much what you have, and even recommended me to the ministrations of a counselor after my most life changing experience. The most vehement of them found me ten years later. He apologized for his comments and we had a wonderful long chat about his similar experience. I guess to understand, you had to “be there” in that state to make any sense of what I’m saying. It is not possible to convey in words; but having “been there,” the same ideas seem to spontaneously emerge in those who are so graced.

And no, I am not yawning at what you are saying. You are honest and have integrity with what you believe. I have nothing but respect for that, having been in what amounts to the same situation. But that is where we differ. I found, or was given, a way from belief. If I was to say what happened with some greater accuracy, I would say that I did not leave the Church. At one point it just fell away from me. If you are clinging to a life preserver in the ocean, and a boat comes, you leave the life preserver and get in the boat. While you are in the water and there is no boat, that life preserver is as important to you as dry land. You might not even think there is a boat or a ship or just forget. But suddenly, unbidden and unexpected, there it is. Go figure.

What is interesting to me relevant to this thread, is that after I was able to integrate my insight, the entire reading of Scripture came into a sharp focus for me that in never had when I was going by faith. And I found that I was far from alone.So, if anything, that points to a possible improvement in the species.

 

[StevenDunn]

If it were idle speculation I wouldn’t engage in it. It’s not a bad thing for us to be on guard against thinking that all we need do is ride out whatever stupidities the human race perpetrates against itself and nature because Christ will come and set all to rights. We have an obligation to do what we can to help our fellow man by saving him from himself, if possible. If we are destroying ourselves we are duty bound to do what we can about it. And staying informed is essential to that. There are no idle questions if they lead us to doing what is right and necessary. Yes?

What would, realistically, constitute and answer to this? Nothing. Nobody knows except God. And what does this line of thought lead to? Nothing.

Could it be that we will be on the edge of extinction ourselves before Christ returns, and that he will hold off until that happens, or do you think we could going on and on as we are indefinitely?

This is idle speculation unless you believe humans are going to become near-extinct in your lifetime. It serves no purpose. Instead of worrying about unknowables like this, focus on solutions to real problems in your community. The time you spend thinking about the ‘deterioration of the species’ is time you could spend effecting real change.

 

[Della]

What would, realistically, constitute and answer to this? Nothing. Nobody knows except God. And what does this line of thought lead to? Nothing.

This is idle speculation unless you believe humans are going to become near-extinct in your lifetime. It serves no purpose. Instead of worrying about unknowables like this, focus on solutions to real problems in your community. The time you spend thinking about the ‘deterioration of the species’ is time you could spend effecting real change.

You have no interest in the topic and know nothing about me or what I spend my life doing–so I have to ask, which of us is wasting his time? I will let God decide if my life is on track or not, thank you just the same.

 

[Della]

I am very happy for you that you found something of meaning and significance. You will discover much by sincerely perusing what you find. I am also enamored of some of the Saints. I’m currently reading *Love Letters From God *which includes six Catholic Saints among the anthologized authors. Reading them leaves me in tears or laughter, and always with insight. As for Chesterton, he may be a fine story teller. I don’t know, not having read him. I only question for myself the validity of his theological perspective. It doesn’t jibe with what I know to be so.

I am aware that there are answers to all my questions, and that is part of the dynamic that is the problem, as you may be lucky enough to find out some day. And apologists aren’t plowing in the field that is of significance in the matter of “salvation.” Neither are, as you correctly state, the pastorals. The Christ is inestimable in this dynamic, and trust is a very significant factor, as you indicate. As for the bafflement of geniuses, and paradoxes, it only means there is hope that some may find their way through the crack in the world.

Of course, we cannot know or understand God as person. But I personally do not count what the Church teaches as revelation. In my life, though faith gave it some structure, that became inadequate to the exigencies of my own mystical experiences. My friends told me pretty much what you have, and even recommended me to the ministrations of a counselor after my most life changing experience. The most vehement of them found me ten years later. He apologized for his comments and we had a wonderful long chat about his similar experience. I guess to understand, you had to “be there” in that state to make any sense of what I’m saying. It is not possible to convey in words; but having “been there,” the same ideas seem to spontaneously emerge in those who are so graced.

And no, I am not yawning at what you are saying. You are honest and have integrity with what you believe. I have nothing but respect for that, having been in what amounts to the same situation. But that is where we differ. I found, or was given, a way from belief. If I was to say what happened with some greater accuracy, I would say that I did not leave the Church. At one point it just fell away from me. If you are clinging to a life preserver in the ocean, and a boat comes, you leave the life preserver and get in the boat. While you are in the water and there is no boat, that life preserver is as important to you as dry land. You might not even think there is a boat or a ship or just forget. But suddenly, unbidden and unexpected, there it is. Go figure.

What is interesting to me relevant to this thread, is that after I was able to integrate my insight, the entire reading of Scripture came into a sharp focus for me that in never had when I was going by faith. And I found that I was far from alone.So, if anything, that points to a possible improvement in the species.

I have to say this, and say it plainly. The Scriptures belong to the Church. Apart from the Church you cannot understand it properly. The Bible does not and cannot exist apart from the Sacred Tradition in which it was revealed and preserved. I’m afraid you don’t understand it, as demonstrated by your claim that Jesus failed because he chose not to explain his parables to everyone. He had a reason for doing that–he knew they couldn’t understand because they had not yet received the Holy Spirit, which he sent upon his believers later on at Pentecost. It would have been like giving steaks to babies for nourishment. Jesus was/is the Son of God. He understood exactly what he was doing and why. What Jesus said and did cannot be ripped from the context of his times, his mission, and who he was/is. Any attempt to read the Bible apart from having this basic knowledge can be downright dangerous. The Bible isn’t yours or mine to interpret as we like because it is God’s word given to us by his Church. Since you don’t believe in or trust the Church from which the Bible came, please leave it alone–for the sake of your own soul if not for those of others you may inadvertently lead astray by your misinterpretations. As to what you believe and how you journey to God, that is, of course, up to you. I wish you all the best.

 

[buffalo]

Does this idle speculation bring you closer to God? This is an unanswerable question you’ve asked everyone here, and a long one, too! Clearly you’ve been thinking about it. People who ask themselves questions like this try to - on some level - understand God, who can never be understood. God is experienced, not understood. Worrying about this kind of thing is just opening a door to the Evil One. Don’t worry about it and trust in God. He will let come to pass what He wants to come to pass.

Since Adams sin the 2nd law has not been suspended. That means continued corruption. The Blessed Virgin implores us to pray. I believe prayers can slow down or hold off the effects of the 2nd law.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Since Adams sin the 2nd law has not been suspended. That means continued corruption. The Blessed Virgin implores us to pray. I believe prayers can slow down or hold off the effects of the 2nd law.

It seems you’re wrong. I heated my kettle to boiling point and poured two cups of water, praying to the blessed virign over one of them and leaving the other in my spare room. I repeated the experiment several times, praying to different Gods. In all cases, when I checked the water temperature with a thermometer, the cups of water had cooled by the same amount.

 

[buffalo]

It seems you’re wrong. I heated my kettle to boiling point and poured two cups of water, praying to the blessed virign over one of them and leaving the other in my spare room. I repeated the experiment several times, praying to different Gods. In all cases, when I checked the water temperature with a thermometer, the cups of water had cooled by the same amount.

You do not have a personal relationship with either God or His mother.

Go ask some random guy on the street to loan you lots of money. Nice try though.