Evidence for Design?

[tonyrey]

Indeed, it is blasphemy to suggest God is some kind of amateur who constantly needs to tinker with his creation.

It is blasphemy to suggest God does the absolute minimum to prevent and alleviate the suffering of His children…

A mere assertion, from the evidence one could just as easily conclude that there is no God constantly intervening.

From the “evidence” one could just as easily conclude that there is no God. If we are to accept your assumption that God does the absolute minimum to prevent and alleviate the suffering of His children Christians will become the laughing stock of society…

 

[tonyrey]

I did not see that as a requirement in the OP.

It is a requirement for any rational discussion. Nothing shall come of nothing…

 

[tonyrey]

That is very good. We do have designed undesign in God’s creation. But undesigned design is the impossibility that we’re asked to believe in.

By “designed undesign” I mean the inevitable coincidences which disrupt the harmony of nature.

“undesigned design” speaks for itself - as an oxymoron!

 

[atheistgirl]

I agree in principle here, but Catholic schools have a lot of corrective work to do in terms of Catholic Identity and real Catholic Teaching.

I found out I know someone who knows someone who is related to someone who attends a Catholic school. :hypno:

The Bible they have has 66 books, not 73

My understanding is a Catholic Bible has 73 Books.

That seems like falling at the very first hurdle, to me

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

1. No atrocities have been committed by those who follow the example of Jesus

That suggests the Catholic Church is guilty of not always following the example of Jesus

Sarah x

 

[tonyrey]

Tonyrey and Reggie,

I am glad we have arrived at a better understanding with regard to positions on miracles.

While we disagree on how God designed things, we agree that God designed the universe and everything in it.

Here is a bit more on my position with respect to that:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7893029&postcount=523

I agree with the element of contingency which often makes it impossible for us to know whether a particular event is directly willed by God - although if the consequences are improbable and beneficial that is obviously more likely.

Coincidences may also be regarded as contingent in the sense that they are unintended and “accidental” combinations of causes - like the occurrence of an earthquake in an inhabited area. On the other hand they are due to physical necessity within the existing system. So perhaps they should be called “necessary contingencies” rather than “contingent necessities”.

 

[tonyrey]

That suggests the Catholic Church is guilty of not always following the example of Jesus.

There is no doubt whatsoever that members of the Catholic Church have been, are and will be guilty of not following the example of Jesus.

 

[grannymh]

How do they get involved in non-Catholic schools when they are a small minority?

The point is to bloom where one is planted. Catholics start with Catholic schools first.

 

[grannymh]

I found out I know someone who knows someone who is related to someone who attends a Catholic school. :hypno:

The Bible they have has 66 books, not 73

My understanding is a Catholic Bible has 73 Books.

That seems like falling at the very first hurdle, to me

Sarah x

One has to physically check the table of contents in order to know what is in a “Bible” and if it is a “Bible” or a “study bible” or a children’s version or a publisher’s choice of contents. Checking the title page will give additional source information.

 

[grannymh]

That suggests the Catholic Church is guilty of not always following the example of Jesus

Sarah x

It is the true presence of Jesus Christ (Catholic Eucharist) within the Church Who makes the Catholic Church holy. Jesus is always the example of true holiness. Yet, Jesus, Himself, had His betrayer as an Apostle. In the time of Christ and in our own time, humans have free will to accept or deny.

 

[cho_pilo]

It is a requirement for any rational discussion. Nothing shall come of nothing…

A lack of positive statements is not ‘nothing’.

I see none of your 7 statements, suppositions, premises, as being scientific evidence of a designer.
And I am a Theist (Deist).

If I made ‘positive’ statements, about statements I considered false, that would be irrational.

~ ~
Maybe this will help.
I am reminded of a ‘paper’ I wrote about 30 years ago.
A disscusion between an Atheist, and a Theist. I forget the exact assignment, but it was to present two sides to a position.

My Theist made arguments such as you make. The Intelligent Design concept was not around in those days, the underlying concept, but not by that name.
I remember having the Theist say “When we plant carrot seeds, we always get carrots. Only apples grow on apple trees. This can not be by accident.”

The Atheist replies, “If I planted carrot seeds, and sometimes I got corn, or beets, you would tell me this could only happen if there were a god.
No matter what you see, you can say it is a result of god.”

Historically it has been ‘miracles’ that were a sign of god.
Something that defied logic and reason, something that ‘could not happen’, was evidence a god must have been the cause.
Fast forward to the Enlightenment, let science it simmer for a while and now it is ‘logic, reason, consistency’ that is a sign of god.

The orderliness, and consistency of the natural world, is your evidence of the supernatural.
You retain the ‘miraculous’ origin of life, as being the supernatural hand of god, but then things follow the (natural) ‘laws of nature’, and this is your further evidence of god, of the supernatural.
( I am not saying that you deny the ‘daily miracles of god’, just that it is not a part of your position here.)

When I hold a paintbursh, everything needs painted.
When I hold a hammer, everything needs a nail.
When some Theists look at the world, they see god everywhere.

I see no material, natural, evidence for god.
My evidence for god is mental state of being.
I intuit the existence of god.
This is evidence to no one but this Being, and I have no problem with that.
Others have had a similar intuitive experiences, but always it is a personal experience.

You tell me ‘Look, I have this concrete, logical, rational, evidence for the existence of god. What do you think?’
I think - ‘hogwash’.

 

[reggieM]

“Complex organisms require two interrelated
levels of programming. The first involves
specifying their structural and functional
components (proteins and their derived
products). The second involves specifying
how these components are arrayed and
assembled into higher levels of organization
(cells and organs), together with the control
systems that manage their function, which
include components that act as environmental
sensors and relays.All of this** information**
must ultimately be **encoded **in the genome.”
ai.stanford.edu/~serafim/CS374_2006/papers/Mattick_NRG2004.pdf

It amounts to deciding whether

"A hierarchical organization of concepts (ontology) with
three organizing principles: molecular function, the tasks
done by individual gene products; biological process that
are accomplished by** ordered assemblies **of molecular
functions; and cellular components, subcellular
structures, locations and macromolecular complexes "

is the product of a series of** purposeless** events or Design…

That is truly remarkable. Two levels of programming in the cell which specify different functions.

We can observe the power of purposeful intelligence to design multi-dimensional codes that contain functional dependencies (a sub-code relies on a meta-code in order to carry out functions). Like the sub-plot in a story - it relies, by design, on the overall structure of the work. The same is found in computer code – smaller modules rely on a larger code structure.

So, we know that intelligence can create these kind of processes. The complex functions in the cell are even more sophisticated than what human intelligence can create.

At the same time, we have no examples of a purposeless (random) series of events can produce this kind of function that we see in the cell.

So, what is the more reasonable option to consider?

 

[reggieM]

By “designed undesign” I mean the inevitable coincidences which disrupt the harmony of nature.

That’s what I was thinking of – although maybe I’d explain it differently. The undesign that we perceive is part of the master design – it exists for a reason and purpose.

In order to understand harmony, one must encounter chaos, randomness and undesign.

In order to identify design, one must distinguish it from that which is not designed.

In order to better understand purpose, one must be able to see purposelessness.

In order for one to better see the effects and dangers of sin – and thus the benefits of the Good, one must be able to witness the effects of sin in reality.

To fully see the power of the virtues of foresight, intelligence, prudence, circumspection and wisdom – one must see them contrasted with blind, unintelligent, purposeless, random, chaotic forces.

 

[reggieM]

From the “evidence” one could just as easily conclude that there is no God. If we are to accept your assumption that God does the absolute minimum to prevent and alleviate the suffering of His children Christians will become the laughing stock of society…

That’s the great danger of Deism. It’s the god who does nothing at all. It’s the same as atheism except with an escape-clause. There’s an ambiguous being at the beginning that has no role in the world, does not require worship, does not offer justice, goodness or mercy to mankind.

Some early deists were atheists, but that wasn’t socially acceptable. So, they posited a god who does nothing. A being “out there” – with no true relationship with the universe.

For some of them, that “solved” the problem of design – the Deist god was the watchmaker who created laws and prime matter and then just let it all run on its own.

Everything was the product of these fixed natural laws and the god of Deism had nothing to do with it – that god had no responsibility at all – it was just a blind force that set things in motion.

For Catholics to argue that God the Father does the bare minimum to alleviate suffering is, indeed, blasphemous. That idea is contradicted by millions of believers who experience God’s help in the everyday events of life.

 

[reggieM]

More design - The Fingerprint of God

The Fingerprint of God (part 2)

That is truly awesome – in the best sense of that word.

Fibonacci sequences are found in diverse aspects of nature. Flowers, bee hives, nautilus shells … and also in spiral galaxies. Mathematical fine-tuning in biology?

“… if nature is really structured with a mathematical language and mathematics invented by man can manage to understand it, this demonstrates something extraordinary. The objective structure of the universe and the intellectual structure of the human being coincide.” – Pope Benedict XVI

 

[buffalo]

DNA has no language, it is not a set of instructions, it is a template. It physically creates the proteins that carry out specific functions within the cell because of the proteins physical properties. DNA contains no information, it requires no translation, understanding or intelligence to create the systems of life.

I am speaking of the language of DNA not the molecule itself.

Start here: The Linguistics of DNA: Words, Sentences, Grammar, Phonetics and Semantics

 

[buffalo]

I found out I know someone who knows someone who is related to someone who attends a Catholic school. :hypno:

The Bible they have has 66 books, not 73

My understanding is a Catholic Bible has 73 Books.

That seems like falling at the very first hurdle, to me

Sarah x

Agreed.

They should start by going back to the Baltimore Catechism and its unique Q and A approach to learning.

 

[buffalo]

That suggests the Catholic Church is guilty of not always following the example of Jesus

Sarah x

Correct - Humans have failed to accept and live the Catholic proposition since the beginning. The message is truth, the failures are by men.

The difference is that practicing Catholics do just that - practice their faith. Are they perfect? No. Do they fail? all the time. However, a practiving Catholic gets better at it over time. We fail, but we get back up and try again.

Why Catholic? The Catholic Church is a hospital for sinners. Everyone who is a member is a sinner. That’s where we go for spiritual healing.

 

[buffalo]

That is truly remarkable. Two levels of programming in the cell which specify different functions.

We can observe the power of purposeful intelligence to design multi-dimensional codes that contain functional dependencies (a sub-code relies on a meta-code in order to carry out functions). Like the sub-plot in a story - it relies, by design, on the overall structure of the work. The same is found in computer code – smaller modules rely on a larger code structure.

So, we know that intelligence can create these kind of processes. The complex functions in the cell are even more sophisticated than what human intelligence can create.

At the same time, we have no examples of a purposeless (random) series of events can produce this kind of function that we see in the cell.

So, what is the more reasonable option to consider?

ReggieM, in addition Sanford found that their is messaging forward and backward. That is a feat for anyone to do.

** Dr. John Sanford “Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome” **

** “a vastly superior operating system”**

** “a galaxy of design and complexity”**

** “over 90% of the genome is actively transcribed”**

** “the genome has multiple overlapping messages”**

** “data compression on the most sophisticated level”**

---

** “more and more the genome looks like a super super set of programs”**

---

** “more and more it looks like top down design”**

---

** “the reality is everybody is mutant”**

** “the selection process really has nothing to grab hold of”**

** “so it’s kind of a trade secret amongst population geneticists,any well informed population geneticist understands man is degenerating”**

** “so in deep geological time we should have been extinct a long time ago”**

** “the human race is degenerating at 1-5% per generation”**

** “so personal and so immediate, because there is no circle of life where things where things stay the same, and it’s not an upward spiral of evolution, things keep getting better and better, it is a downward spiral exactly as described in Scripture”**

** “I realized it had major implications for evolution, but I had no… I couldn’t have guessed how profound the biblical implications are, how profoundly the evidence supports the biblical perspective of a dying universe and a dying world, we are dying because of the fall”**

** “and our only hope is Christ” **

** Dr. John Sanford "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome"1/2**

** Dr. John Sanford “Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome” 2/2
**

 

[reggieM]

I am speaking of the language of DNA not the molecule itself.

Start here: The Linguistics of DNA: Words, Sentences, Grammar, Phonetics and Semantics

The use of symbols in coded language requires rules – as with rules of grammar.
Symbols are the representation of one thing for another. Symbolic code has meaning not contained in the symbols – that is what information is – meaning encoded in symbols.

The only two sources that materialism can offer for meaning-encoded symbols are:

1. Chance
2. Physical laws

Chance is excluded since, by definition, it could not follow rules (or create rules).
Physical laws are excluded because there are no physical laws that determine what symbols must represent. There is no physical law that determines that DOG means and animal and also CHIEN means that same animal (in French). In the same way, there is no physical law that requires certain DNA sequences must specify certain amino acids and not others.

Where there is language, there is intention.