Evidence for Design?

[inocente]

Do you intend an inquisition to suppress mathematical truth, while exalting science frauds? Knowledge now depends on whether the metaphysics challenges what side of the bed you got up on rather than truth?

 

[tonyrey]

So then, please, explain the Japanese Tsunami.

1. Jesus said “Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof” - which implies that it is not excessive.
2. If one rejects the explanation that the laws of nature cannot cater for every contingency one has only two alternatives:
3. To reject the truth of the statement by Jesus or
4. To admit that one has no explanation- thereby undermining the cogency of theism

 

[tonyrey]

So then, please, explain the Japanese Tsunami.

“1And there were present, at that very time, some that told him of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. 2And he answering, said to them: Think you that these Galileans were sinners above all the men of Galilee, because they suffered such things?
3No, I say to you: but unless you shall do penance, you shall all likewise perish.
4Or those eighteen upon whom the tower fell in Siloe, and slew them: think you, that they also were debtors above all the men that dwelt in Jerusalem?” Luke - 13

Jesus made it clear that suffering and death are not punishments for our sins but the inevitable results of **human **and **natural **causes…

 

[buffalo]

You’ve not read his thesis then, where he proves mathematically that complex, animated, self-replicating objects can come into existence from just a couple of rules and nothing else.

buffalo said he was curious, and Conway is a good place to start because it is a very simple route into the abstractions. As always, an open mind will learn more than a closed mind.

Yes, I was.

The problem as I see it is that this was a designed algorithm with specific rules and initial information (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[tonyrey]

As to purpose, you are an utterly insignificant little pimple on the backside of an minor planet in the suburbs of an average galaxy which is one amongst billions. In the immensity of God’s creation you are nothing, zip, nada. Yet God sent His only Son for you, and He came to live inside you. I already said all creation sings to God. Is that really not enough?

An incoherent Deus ex machina inconsistent with the belief that human beings are made in the image of God - rather than utterly insignificant little pimples…

BTW **How **do you know all creation sings to God?

 

[tonyrey]

Yes, I was.

The problem as I see it is that this was a designed algorithm with specific rules and initial information (name removed by moderator)ut.

Rather than a fortuitous collocation of molecules which emerged for no reason or purpose!

 

[tonyrey]

What I could do, if you’re interested, is show you quite a lot of statements from Catholic theologians and philosophers who have supported the ID viewpoint (as I understand it) since the time of the Fathers of the Church.

I already showed the argument from a Catholic college textbook written in 1928.

St. Thomas argues against the claim that all things happened by chance (e.g. evolutionary theory) in his Summa Theologica (On the Government of Things in General (q 103, article 1): ** Certain ancient philosophers denied the government of the world, saying that all things happened by chance**. But such an opinion can be refuted as impossible in two ways.

First, by observation of things themselves: for we observe that in nature things happen always or nearly always for the best; which would not be the case unless some sort of providence directed nature towards good as an end; which is to govern. Wherefore **the unfailing order we observe in things is a sign of their being governed**; for instance, **if we enter a well-ordered house we gather therefrom the intention of him that put it in order**, as Tullius says (De Nat. Deorum ii), quoting Aristotle [Cleanthes].So, when we enter a well-ordered house, we observe the intention (design) of him that put it in order.

We can find the same thing in the Catholic physicist, Stephen Barr’s book “Modern Physics and Ancient Faith”:This idea of God as cosmic lawgiver was from very early times central to Jewish and Christian thinking. It is the basis of the so-called Argument from Design for the existence of God. An early statement of this argument can be found, for example, in the works of the Latin Christian writer Minucius Felix near the beginning of the third century:

”If upon entering some home you saw that everything there was well-tended, neat, and decorative, you would believe that some master was in charge of it, and that he himself was superior to those good things. So too in the home of this world, when you see providence, order, and law in the heavens and on earth, believe there is a Lord and Author of the universe, more beautiful than the stars themselves and the various parts of the whole world.”… The old Argument from Design is based on the commonsense idea that if something is arranged then somebody arranged it. The reasonableness of this idea can be seen from an everyday example. If one were to enter a hall and find hundreds of folding chairs neatly set up in evenly spaced ranks and files, one would feel quite justified in inferring that someone had arranged the chairs that way.
​

The argument opposed to biological ID is that evolution explains everything in nature that appears to have been ordered by design.

Contrast these arguments with that of David Hume:

Did I shew you a house or palace, where there was not one apartment convenient or agreeable; where the windows, doors, fires, passages, stairs, and the whole economy of the building, were the source of noise, confusion, fatigue, darkness, and the extremes of heat and cold; you would certainly blame the contrivance, without any further examination. The architect would in vain display his subtilty, and prove to you, that if this door or that window were altered, greater ills would ensue. What he says may be strictly true: the alteration of one particular, while the other parts of the building remain, may only augment the inconveniences. But still you would assert in general, that, if the architect had had skill and good intentions, he might have formed such a plan of the whole, and might have adjusted the parts in such a manner, as would have remedied all or most of these inconveniences. His ignorance, or even your own ignorance of such a plan, will never convince you of the impossibility of it. If you find any inconveniences and deformities in the building, you will always, without entering into any detail, condemn the architect.

anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/dnr.htm

Yet he continues:

That the works of Nature bear a great analogy to the productions of art, is evident; and according to all the rules of good reasoning, we ought to infer, if we argue at all concerning them, that their causes have a proportional analogy. But as there are also considerable differences, we have reason to suppose a proportional difference in the causes; and in particular, ought to attribute a much higher degree of power and energy to the supreme cause, than any we have ever observed in mankind. Here then the existence of a DEITY is plainly ascertained by reason: and if we make it a question, whether, on account of these analogies, we can properly call him a mind or intelligence, notwithstanding the vast difference which may reasonably be supposed between him and human minds; what is this but a mere verbal controversy?

ibid.

 

[grannymh]

1. Please explain how **every **natural disaster could be prevented without interfering with our ability to choose what to believe and how to live.
2. Do you believe God does **absolutely nothing **to prevent disasters and mitigate the suffering in the world?
3. If not why not?
4. Can you explain how your view is consistent with the Christian belief that God is a loving Father who answers the prayers of His children?

This is really avoiding an answer to a valid question regarding why bad things happen to good people. On the other hand, the valid question in Post 1499 is very difficult for anyone to answer. Thus, I am not arguing – just making a general comment about questions in real life. I apologize to Tonyrey for my general response.

My apology Al,
if I misread your intention in Post 1499. A recent, great informational type homily (on human’s response to disasters, sickness, etc.) is still in my mind.

 

[Al_Moritz]

1. Please explain how **every **natural disaster could be prevented without interfering with our ability to choose what to believe and how to live.
2. Do you believe God does **absolutely nothing **to prevent disasters and mitigate the suffering in the world?
3. If not why not?
4. Can you explain how your view is consistent with the Christian belief that God is a loving Father who answers the prayers of His children?

“1And there were present, at that very time, some that told him of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. 2And he answering, said to them: Think you that these Galileans were sinners above all the men of Galilee, because they suffered such things?
3No, I say to you: but unless you shall do penance, you shall all likewise perish.
4Or those eighteen upon whom the tower fell in Siloe, and slew them: think you, that they also were debtors above all the men that dwelt in Jerusalem?” Luke - 13

Jesus made it clear that suffering and death are not punishments for our sins but the inevitable results of **human **and **natural **causes…

So which is it? I am waiting for a coherent answer.

 

[grannymh]

Thank you, granny. Through prayer and love…

How does one pray and love an intelligent designer?

 

[inocente]

Yes, I was.

The problem as I see it is that this was a designed algorithm with specific rules and initial information (name removed by moderator)ut.

Usually cells are randomly populated at the start, and the rules are about as simple as can be imagined. There have to be some rules, it’s statistically highly unlikely for total disorder to grasp total order from total disorder.

As I said you really need to read a book on it. Unless you’re a very quick reader, you’ve instead formed a quick opinion from the Internet, which isn’t nearly doing it justice, but it was just a suggestion, it’s up to you.

 

[inocente]

An incoherent Deus ex machina inconsistent with the belief that human beings are made in the image of God - rather than utterly insignificant little pimples…

Thanks for clarifying your question rather than just coming back with a flippant remark.

One day I might meet a Catholic who has heard of the Holy Spirit, but obviously it’s not going to be today.

*BTW **How ***do you know all creation sings to God?

I know a Catholic on CAF who gave up reading the Bible after a couple of chapters of Genesis. Shame. For instance, psalm 148:

*Praise the LORD from the heavens;
praise him in the heights above.
Praise him, all his angels;
praise him, all his heavenly hosts.
Praise him, sun and moon;
praise him, all you shining stars.
Praise him, you highest heavens
and you waters above the skies.

Let them praise the name of the LORD,
for at his command they were created,
and he established them for ever and ever—
he issued a decree that will never pass away.*

 

[grannymh]

Originally Posted by grannymh forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
Is God as the Designer limited by His design?

Anyone who truly believes in God knows that is a rhetorical question!

The question “Is God as the Designer limited by His design?” is not a rhetorical question.

It is a real question often asked on CAF in the old days. And just because there is a ban on evolution discussion, the real question of God’s creative powers does not go away. It still has to be answered in terms of Catholic doctrines.

The question–“Is God as the Designer limited by His design?” – goes straight to the heart of Catholic theology. It goes straight to the opening lines of the Nicene Creed as to what Catholics believe constitutes a “Creator”.

I may be wrong, but from what I am reading I am getting the weird impression that the “Intelligent Design” movement stops short of Catholic Doctrines.

 

[grannymh]

An incoherent Deus ex machina inconsistent with the belief that human beings are made in the image of God - rather than utterly insignificant little pimples…

While I abhor Cartesian [extreme] dualism, may I respectfully suggest learning the basic principle that the material world is different than the spiritual world. This will be helpful with it comes to discussions about man (human nature) being made in the image of God.

 

[reggieM]

So then, please, explain the Japanese Tsunami.

You might want to check out Our Lady’s visitation (approved by the Church) at Akita –

catholicnewsagency.com/news/japanese-quakes-epicenter-located-near-marian-apparition-site/

The epicenter of the earthquake that caused a deadly March 11 tsunami is located near the site of an apparition in which Mary warned about a worldwide disaster that could afflict humanity.

In 1973, the Virgin Mary was said to have predicted a number of future events – including natural disasters even more serious than Friday’s earthquake and tsunami – during three appearances to a Japanese religious sister, Sr. Agnes Sasagawa.

“If men do not repent and better themselves, God the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity,” Mary reportedly told Sr. Agnes. “It will be a punishment greater than the (biblical) flood, such as never seen before.”

The apparitions at Fatima said something equally prophetic. Because of the sins of mankind, wars and disasters occur.

Now if you would like me to explain how sins bring down punishments on humanity, I will be glad to enter into that discussion also.

We might start by meditating on Our Lord’s passion and death – notice His hours of suffering on the Cross. We can also meditate about the meaning of the term “redemptive suffering” – as well as redemption, penance, atonement and reparation.
What do those things mean and how do they work from the perspective of divine justice?

 

[reggieM]

Praise him, all his angels;
praise him, all his heavenly hosts.

I didn’t know Protestants were allowed to speak to supernatural beings other than God.

 

[inocente]

It is a real question often asked on CAF in the old days. And just because there is a ban on evolution discussion, the real question of God’s creative powers does not go away. It still has to be answered in terms of Catholic doctrines.

The question–“Is God as the Designer limited by His design?” – goes straight to the heart of Catholic theology. It goes straight to the opening lines of the Nicene Creed as to what Catholics believe constitutes a “Creator”.

I may be wrong, but from what I am reading I am getting the weird impression that the “Intelligent Design” movement stops short of Catholic Doctrines.

Interesting question which has never occurred to me. My answer is that I believe His design is founded in the physical law; that it’s obvious the physical law is perfect; and that perfection cannot limit God. So no, God isn’t limited by His design.

But if instead we look for design in things produced by the physical law, we don’t find perfection, and so then God would be limited by His design.

Thanks . That’s a neat contrast between God Almighty and the ID “agent”.

 

[inocente]

I didn’t know Protestants were allowed to speak to supernatural beings other than God.

Where did I or a Protestant say anything about speaking to them? You realize those lines are from the Bible? Do you think the Holy Spirit is a being other than God, or that Catholicism is the only religion to believe in angels, or … ?

btw I’m not a Protestant, my profile says Baptist.

 

[reggieM]

Where did I or a Protestant say anything about speaking to them?

Note the statement, addressed and directed to angels as well as to the heavenly hosts (saints):

Praise him, all his angels;
praise him, all his heavenly hosts.

Do you think the Holy Spirit is a being other than God? Or that Catholicism is the only religion to believe in angels?

What effect do you think angels have on nature?

 

[reggieM]

Interesting question which has never occurred to me. My answer is that I believe His design is founded in the physical law; that it’s obvious the physical law is perfect; and that perfection cannot limit God. So no, God isn’t limited by His design.

How would you prove or demonstrate that the physical law is perfect?