Evidence for Design?

[grannymh]

I’m assuming this is from the CCC and that you didn’t write it. It makes me wonder if there is any hope for a good marriage - after all, "the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination. So - what about a man and a woman who honestly love each other, have kept their vows which they stated in a Catholic ceremony (meaning the Sacrament of Matrimony), who do not look upon each other or others with lust, who submit to each other in love.

Is that even possible or is the Church telling us that marriage is henceforth ruined and nothing we do can make it work?

It’s the same with “harmony with creation.” Is the Church telling us that nothing we do will be any good - we’ve messed it up once and that is it; and what is this about “visible” creation becoming alien and hostile toward man? What about “invisible creation?” Is "invisible creation (whatever the heck that is) not becoming alien and hostile toward man? And aren’t we part of God’s creation? So are we becoming alien and hostile toward ourselves (I can understand hostile but alien?)? Or is it other parts of creation that are alien and hostile toward man?

I’m also bothered by the shattering of “the control of the soul’s spiritual faculties over the body.” So our souls do us no good? Why then do I pray? Why do I submit myself to God? Why do I try to be obedient to Him?

Why don’t I just give up right now, leave the Church, and go back to being an agnostic/atheist (depending on my mood)? It doesn’t seem that there is any hope for me so why bother?

It is not an either-or situation.

You need to read the opening line of CCC 410 – “After his fall, man was not abandoned by God.” Then review the graces which come from the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, Reconciliation, the Eucharist, and Matrimony. Note: even when a marriage does not work out, one can keep asking for the graces of the Sacrament of Matrimony so that one can survive.

You need to find CCC 405 which says that our human nature was not totally corrupted.

Find the Scripture verses which begin with “Come to Me all you who are burdened…”

Picture yourself as the woman who touches the hem of Christ’s garment. Or the woman at the well. (This is my personal favorite.)

Gain strength from the prayer “Hail Mary”

As Inocente says: Christ died for all.

Blessings,
granny

John 3:16-17

 

[tonyrey]

Hmmm…:ehh: I didn’t see anything about *that *in the quote.

Does that mean you reject it?

 

[LittleSoldier]

All that you need to understand is that it is ludicrous to attribute the origin of such a highly complex and logical information system to the meanderings of purposeless processes.

I fully accept that God designed this entire universe and any other universes which may also exist. I also fully believe that the same God created me, and even though I might say He was dragging the bottom of the barrel when He came up with the idea of me He still did so. I believe He is fully omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. He loves me on a personal basis, He created and loves the animals who share my home (and knows every bit of every atom which join together to form every single cell in their bodies), He feels joy when I complete a good action even though He fully knew that I would complete said good action before He even created me, He will feel sad (and probably already feels sad) if I choose to forsake Him, spit in His face and throw my life back at Him, He has rejoiced when I returned to His fold, I feel safe when I think of myself as His lamb and remember how He told Simon to “Feed My lambs.” He’s looking out for me. He loves me.

However, as to the forms that this design works, I have serious misgivings about any sort of human theorizing about divine workings. We just aren’t smart enough. No matter what we come up with I would bet that when we face God when we die we will all realize that we had it all wrong - that it’s so much more complicated and beautiful than we ever thought it could be but we were stuck in our human bodies with our human brains. Even a painting of God that takes my breath away now will look like a toddler’s finger painting when I see the real God in His glory. Which saint was it that cried when she saw the painter’s rendition of the God she had seen for real? I can’t remember. No painter could get it right.

But I think God wants us to hypothesize and theorize even if our attempts are pathetic. I think He wants us to try to understand His creations. I don’t think He laughs at our measly attempts (I wouldn’t blame Him if he did - it must be like watching an ant farm and I think He must have a sense of humor because He gave us a sense of humor.

I believe that on one level there is purposelessness while on other levels this purposelessness becomes purposeful. Sometimes I think that we are all just colonies of cells, like a Portuguese Man O’ War and that our brains are simply the cells that deal with the decision making that the “body” needs in order to survive and get those genes into the gene pool. And sometimes I think this idea is just plain stupid.

Sorry - just thinking out loud.

 

[grannymh]

I think that it is perfectly appropriate to use “snarky” when referring to either a masculine or feminine mood, while “cranky” brings up connotations of monthly cycles and PMS.

Just sayin’.

Sorry for laughing. At my age I am beyond PMS so I need to stick with cranky so there is no doubt. Also, I learned the word “snarky” from the males on CAF. And I really don’t think I am as bad as they were.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Does that mean you reject it?

I accept it whole-heartedly.

 

[tonyrey]

I didn’t realize that. This is a very dangerous trend for the spiritual health of the nation – not to mention each individual child who will be deprived of religious knowledge.

Perhaps in reaction – or just meeting the need, Dr. Alastair Noble has created some excitement with his new organization in Glasgow which is studying evidence for design in nature.

c4id.org.uk/

guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/centre-intelligent-design-science-religion

Once again, there are accomplished scientists who draw the inference of design from the scientific data.

The network of people supporting the centre’s activities numbers between 50 and 100. Among them is its president Professor Norman Nevin, emeritus professor of medical genetics, Queens University, Belfast, and its vice-president Dr David Galloway, who is also vice president of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons, Glasgow. In its FAQs, the site lists the UK scientists "who are brave enough to make their support for intelligent design public. There are many more who are not willing to risk their careers by making their objections to evolution known.

The tragedy is that the scientific Establishment is deeply entrenched against any unorthodox ideas and biased against anyone who holds them when applying for an academic post or submitting an article for publication. It is the modern, secular version of the Inquisition!

 

[tonyrey]

I accept it whole-heartedly.

I guessed you did! You know you’re really an angel in disguise… :angel1:

 

[grannymh]

Yes it is from the Catechism. We also understand that consupiscence is part of our human nature. With God’s graces we can overcome much but not all. The reality is that no marriage is perfect but we can sort of be on the road to perfection.

Because you love Him.

Hope lies in God.

For a practical response, try my post 2082 which gives more of the Catholic nitty-gritty.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8978834&postcount=2082

 

[tonyrey]

I
I believe that on one level there is purposelessness while on other levels this purposelessness becomes purposeful…

You’ve hit the nail right on the head! There is an element of chance in our lives but we can put it to good use most of the time. And even if it kills us who cares?
“Don’t fear those who kill the body…”

 

[LittleSoldier]

It appears not. There are some amazing conversion stories based on miracles that were not asked for.

When I read this I immediately thought about Saul being knocked off his horse, hearing God’s voice, and being temporarily blinded. That is an amazing conversion story.

I have a weird sleep disorder and one of the things that happens to me is that I have what are called hypnopompic and hypnagogic hallucinations (which means that I dream while I’m awake). I was a lazy Catholic who went to Mass only because my parents made me go. One night I heard a very loud, booming voice say (three times) “JESUS CHRIST IS GOD!” I got scared. I said “OK, whatever you say.”

The next morning I blew it off and I still do - it was just my sleep disorder and my brain having some fun with me. It never happened again.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I didn’t realize that. This is a very dangerous trend for the spiritual health of the nation – not to mention each individual child who will be deprived of religious knowledge.

Perhaps in reaction – or just meeting the need, Dr. Alastair Noble has created some excitement with his new organization in Glasgow which is studying evidence for design in nature.

c4id.org.uk/

guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/centre-intelligent-design-science-religion

Once again, there are accomplished scientists who draw the inference of design from the scientific data.

The network of people supporting the centre’s activities numbers between 50 and 100. Among them is its president Professor Norman Nevin, emeritus professor of medical genetics, Queens University, Belfast, and its vice-president Dr David Galloway, who is also vice president of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons, Glasgow. In its FAQs, the site lists the UK scientists "who are brave enough to make their support for intelligent design public. There are many more who are not willing to risk their careers by making their objections to evolution known.

I know this is in the UK and I don’t know how things work there but I am completely against any religious instruction in public schools.

Now I’m going to duck, cover my head, and run for the hills.

 

[grannymh]

I had to take logic as part of my philosophy minor. However, my memory regarding philosophy is shot. I spaced out all philosophers who were having trouble with existence since I considered them a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic.

Still I wonder why the philosophers on this thread did not run with the suggestion in post 1154.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8905566&postcount=1154

Oooops. I forgot that “Design” has primary importance. Oh well, maybe on another thread…

Or maybe what I am suggesting is banned? And I do intend to respect the ban.

 

[tonyrey]

Extremely frequently. The Holy Eucharist is a most astonishing miracle that is renewed every day in many places around the world.

No, while they do occur, physical miracles are rare. The Catholic Church is quite explicit about that. Even in the long history of Lourdes, for example, there are only some 60+ confirmed miracle healings, even though the claims run into the thousands or even ten thousands (regardless of what you think of Lourdes and miracles in general, the point is that miracles, certainly confirmable ones, are considered rare).

As for God helping us with physical needs, I don’t see why this cannot occur along natural channels rather than by supernatural means (even though that does happen, though very rarely). For example, upon prayer God can direct us to a doctor who can help us effectively with sickness, instead of healing us directly.

Perhaps, but (upon prayer or not) God can move souls of people involved in a chain of events in order to prevent accidents without a physical miracle. I had discussed that earlier in the thread.

There is no evidence for that, no. Science can quite well predict the general frequency of earthquakes in certain spots around the globe (e.g. in the Ring of Fire forming the border of the Pacific tectonic plate), and there is no reason to think God interferes – nor for the better nor for the worse.

The Haiti earthquake was predicted (not the precise day, of course, but it was considered overdue before it happened), including the approximate magnitude (around 7 on the Richter scale).

In the natural order, God appears to intervene rarely, at least in a measurable way. This is even logically necessary, otherwise we would not know what to expect from our physical world. Imagine stepping into an airplane without predictable laws of nature …

God made the world as it is. He foresaw all the consequences of the laws of nature, and if bad things happen, good can come from that (this is classical Catholic theology, by the way). Obviously, for reasons that God knows, God did not create a world in which suffering is impossible or even prevented.

It appears not. There are some amazing conversion stories based on miracles that were not asked for.

Then we can agree that we disagree only about the extent to which God intervenes - which is hardly as significant as total disagreement. And I’m sure we would both pray if we knew some one is in great danger! On that happy(?) note I bid you good morning (It’s 3 am here!)

 

[LittleSoldier]

It is not an either-or situation.

You need to read the opening line of CCC 410 – “After his fall, man was not abandoned by God.” Then review the graces which come from the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, Reconciliation, the Eucharist, and Matrimony. Note: even when a marriage does not work out, one can keep asking for the graces of the Sacrament of Matrimony so that one can survive.

You need to find CCC 405 which says that our human nature was not totally corrupted.

Find the Scripture verses which begin with “Come to Me all you who are burdened…”

Picture yourself as the woman who touches the hem of Christ’s garment. Or the woman at the well. (This is my personal favorite.)

Gain strength from the prayer “Hail Mary”

As Inocente says: Christ died for all.

Blessings,
granny

John 3:16-17

Thank you for providing the link - I missed this post completely.

This shows why it’s important to find the context of a reading. I knew there was more to the Church’s teaching than was presented (and also that only a limited amount can be presented in one post).

Sometimes I think that I would be happy if I could just touch the ground where Jesus had just been walking - as He lifted His foot I would want to place the palm of my hand on His footprint(or sandal-print or whatever). Can you imagine how even the dirt where He trod was so blessed just by being close to Him? That would be enough for me.

As for the Sacrament of Matrimony, I don’t think I can receive any graces from it. I probably have this all wrong (and it should be in another thread, anyway) but I think that the reason there is a Sacrament of Matrimony is that people need that grace to form a covenant with each other and God and to procreate and bond and live together as God deems they should live together; whereas a cloistered nun does not need that particular grace. When one spouse dies the marriage is over - I don’t know if there is any more grace that can be obtained from the Sacrament (I made it sound like a well that’s gone dry! That’s not really what I mean! ) unless the remaining spouse gets married again (which, in my case, is not gonna happen).

I have some reading to do.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I guessed you did! You know you’re really an angel in disguise… :angel1:

Ssssshhhhh…It’s supposed to be a secret.

 

[reggieM]

Extremely frequently. The Holy Eucharist is a most astonishing miracle that is renewed every day in many places around the world.

I thought this was a very good reply – especially in your statement of faith above. I would give you a high-five for that and make you part of the tag team. But seriously, we do have an amazing gift with the Eucharist and God does transform many lives through it.

I disagree with some of the other points you raised, but I appreciate the time you took to explain your views.

 

[reggieM]

I had to take logic as part of my philosophy minor. However, my memory regarding philosophy is shot. I spaced out all philosophers who were having trouble with existence since I considered them a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic.

Still I wonder why the philosophers on this thread did not run with the suggestion in post 1154.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8905566&postcount=1154

I think you received some good support for that post – not only from myself.

Oooops. I forgot that “Design” has primary importance. Oh well, maybe on another thread…

Or maybe what I am suggesting is banned? And I do intend to respect the ban.

Yes, the topic is banned.

 

[reggieM]

Am i part of the tag team???

Yes, but the tag team is one thing that didn’t get put together as the result of a design. It was just the random affect of agreement on some important issues.

 

[grannymh]

I think you received some good support for that post – not only from myself.

Nada.

Yes, the topic is banned.

I do not believe an objective analysis of natural science (including ID) is banned. It just isn’t a popular CAF interest.

For example. Recently, I tried introducing the word “possibility” which is the heart of real natural science. I gave up because those who responded did not comprehend the word in regard to seeking possible scientific evidence. It is evidence which is the heartbeat needed for proper conclusions.

One of the reasons I agree with the ban on evolution discussion is that there are only a few Catholics here who can discuss natural science as it is in this decade. There are plenty of Catholics who know about science, but do not know how to apply that education to the human person.

As I see it, obtaining Catholic knowledge about the human person is crucial in this decade.

 

[cho_pilo]

An unsubstantiated assertion.

With no evidence to the contrary, I see no need for substantiation.

How do you **know **that?

Again, with no evidence to the contrary, substantiation is not needed.

Scientists agree that all existing evidence points to the fact that the human brain is the most complex phenomenon in the universe.

Unsubstantiated assertion.
The material I read from scientists say quite plainly that most ot the universe is unknown.
The ocean floor of our own planet is largely unknown.
There may in fact be something our own planet more complex than the human brain.

Animals have habits that scientists cannot explain. Just today was a news story about the Monarch butterflies that all return to one spot, and have been doing this for unknown generations, with no explanation of how or why. The Monarch butterfly may be more comple than the human brain.
Unknown means, unknown.
Scientist know, that there are phenomenon they are not aware of, how can they possibly know these unknown, are not more complex.

The best you can do, is to say that with the very limited knowledge of scientists, many of them believe the MIND (not the brain) is the most complex phenomenon they are aware of.
The human brain is no more complex than the brain of dog, it is the mind that distinguishes mankind.

Another unsubstantiated assertion.

You make a series of unsubstantiated statements, and finish with “What are your views?”
I give you my views, and now you do not like them.

Where you start the discussion, with no substantiations, you now want responders to make substantiations.
You have it backwards.
Substantiate your claims, and I can respond.

The claims you make are suppositions, no more.
What evidence is needed to refute suppositions, except more rational suppositions?