Evidence for Design?

[tonyrey]

“It is quite conceivable that despite their complexity and apparent freedom man’s thought processes are determined solely by inherited traits, training, instruction and present environmental influences. Causal and logical laws alone have determined the course of events. It is unthinkable that in the comparatively short space of 70 to 100,000 years since homo sapiens first appeared these laws should suddenly have ceased to hold good and free will should from then on be determining the cause of brain processes and thus infringing the law of the conservation of energy.”

B.Rensch - Homo Sapiens, p.156

These words were written 50 years ago but from the point of view of the scientist they are still true. Yet without free will we cannot be morally responsible for our behaviour. Our knowledge of the distinction between right and wrong is not enough to make us innocent or guilty if we are incapable of controlling ourselves. If there is only one possible course of action the concept of guilt becomes redundant. There is no such thing as a responsible biological organism.

If we cannot choose to think we cannot be rational in the true sense of the word. Computers are not rational because they have no insight or choice of activity. If we are programmed by our genes and our environment there is no guarantee that our conclusions about the nature of reality are correct. Our thoughts would be as fallible as our instincts - which are notoriously unreliable. Yet the success of science demonstrates that we are capable of attaining the truth in a way which is impossible for any other living organism. Pascal remarked that we are aware that the universe exists whereas the universe knows nothing. So it is reasonable to believe we transcend our physical nature with our power of hindsight, insight and foresight. Every time we make a choice or decision we are using a form of supernatural energy. In other words we don’t have to look far for miracles: they are occurring constantly within ourselves! This is further evidence of Design…

 

[tonyrey]

We do not have the same level of knowledge as God. So we should stop trying to be like a “god” in understanding everything.

We are not “trying to be like a god in understanding everything”. We are trying to explain why God permits evil and performs miracles:

"As Christianity gradually separated from Judaism and came to feel its own character as a new faith, competing with various ethnic, philosophic, and mysterious religions in the Roman world and facing objections and persecution, it began to be conscious of itself and** its responsibility to give answers to the criticisms and attacks** that were made against it…

Quite apart from the apologetic writings’ effect on the pagans to whom it might, or might not, be delivered, it had the effect of supplying less educated and less experienced Christians with arguments to use when they were exposed to persecution. Thus one finds that the work of Athenagoras carries arguments and turns of phrase which appear again in the Acts of the martyr Appolonius who was put to death in Rome by Commodus in 185 A.D."

copticchurch.net/topics/p…/chapter1.html

 

[Sair]

If we cannot choose to think we cannot be rational in the true sense of the word. Computers are not rational because they have no insight or choice of activity. If we are programmed by our genes and our environment there is no guarantee that our conclusions about the nature of reality are correct. Our thoughts would be as fallible as our instincts - which are notoriously unreliable. Yet the success of science demonstrates that we are capable of attaining the truth in a way which is impossible for any other living organism. Pascal remarked that we are aware that the universe exists whereas the universe knows nothing. So it is reasonable to believe we transcend our physical nature with our power of hindsight, insight and foresight. Every time we make a choice or decision we are using a form of supernatural energy. In other words we don’t have to look far for miracles: they are occurring constantly within ourselves! This is further evidence of Design…

It’s very interesting that you would choose to posit the success of scientific endeavour as evidence of our superior capacity for knowledge, yet in the same post condemn the findings of science because they don’t glorify human consciousness enough!

Is it okay to accept the findings of science when they help us make demonstrable advances - say, in curing diseases or developing various assistive and interrogative technologies - but to reject the findings of science when they paint a picture of ourselves that just doesn’t sit well with our cherished conception of our specialness? The processes employed - observation, hypothesis, experiment, repetition, theory - are the same in both cases. So why reject one set of findings whilst accepting others derived through the same methods?

I don’t see how it is reasonable to believe we ‘transcend’ our physical nature with our supposed powers of hindsight, insight and foresight when it is readily apparent that these abilities are derived from our physical attributes. There is a large and growing body of evidence pointing to the dependence of mental abilities upon physical structures and processes; by contrast, there is no evidence that mental capacities exist independently of such physical phenomena.

And what, exactly, is this ‘supernatural energy’ we supposedly have at our disposal? Where does it come from? How do you distinguish it from natural energy? How would I know that this ‘supernatural energy’ is coming from within myself, rather than from external sources that are adapted and used by my physical body? Does my supernatural energy increase when, say, I eat a banana? My physical energy certainly does. Do we still have supernatural energy when our bodies are devoid of physical energy? How would one test such a hypothesis? Is supernatural energy part of a closed system, or does it interact with natural energy and matter?

 

[cho_pilo]

That is actually nonsense. DNA IS information and it IS code. However, the coder is not a designer, but simply cumulative natural selection. Living organisms are driven not just by the laws of physics, but by information accumulated over billions of years of history – information gathered by cumulative natural selection.

Increase of information can take place by, for example, gene duplication (a common, routine phenomenon), and mutation of one copy of the gene, making two genes. No designer required for that, once the laws of nature are in place – if these are designed is another question (I would reply in the affirmative).

Do you then contend that Hydrogen atoms contain information or code on how to produce water? The DNA molecule is different in degree, but not in kind. You still are having a problem recognizing the Map(information, code) as not actually being the Territory(the molecule of DNA). All the information or code we see in DNA is a construct or model of what the DNA molecule does simply by following it’s physical properties. Does a Carbon atom contain instructions on how to create a diamond? Does it also contain instructions on how to form Carbon Dioxide? Does it also contain information on how to form Graphene? Gasoline? Nanotubes? Buckyballs? Motor Oil? Asphalt? Soot? There are 10s, if not 100s of thousands of molecules that carbon can form(we have a whole section of chemistry devoted to those chemicals that Carbon can form), does the Carbon atom contain information or code for all of them? No, it does not. But given the presence of other molecules and under the right conditions it still succeeds in forming all of them and many more. This is due to Carbon’s physical, chemical properties. You exist because of a continuous, unbroken chain of increasingly complex chemical reactions starting with the first self replicating molecule(itself formed by the chemistry of the early Earth). A “fire” that started billions of years ago and has grown to stupendous levels of chemical complexity(about which we create more and more information)but it is still just a chemical reaction in which every part simply follows the laws of chemistry and physics. The concept of information is a construct of our intelligence, the chemical reactions require no information on how to physically create the various molecules that carry out functions in the cell, they simply carry out these functions because of the physical properties within their structures, no code required or present. Code and information are maps for the behavior we see to aid our understanding, the chemicals need no understanding, they do what they do because of what they are not because they are directed to do so by information or code.

 

[grannymh]

We are not “trying to be like a god in understanding everything”. We are trying to explain why God permits evil and performs miracles:

My misunderstood point is that there comes a time when we need to humbly recognize that some, not all, of God’s ways are a mystery. Even the CCC recognizes that.

Adam let his trust of his Creator die in his heart. There are times when we are tempted to do the same. When we do not have all the answers we want or think we should have – that is when we need to practice the virtue of humility.

Could the strongest apologetics be that we really cannot explain God completely, but we know enough to place our trust in Catholicism.

 

[grannymh]

DNA IS information and it IS code.

Of course this is correct.

Companies are making money interpreting DNA information for customers interested in their particular genome. Interesting is that some companies will offer an opt out for information about certain hereditary genes connected to diseases. Note: this is a “buyer beware” situation because not all methods are equal in thoroughness.

Not only is DNA information, it is evidence of what a particular organism can do and not do. The human immune system’s genetic information is key in disease research regardless of any design factor.

 

[Al_Moritz]

Do you then contend that Hydrogen atoms contain information or code on how to produce water? The DNA molecule is different in degree, but not in kind. You still are having a problem recognizing the Map(information, code) as not actually being the Territory(the molecule of DNA). All the information or code we see in DNA is a construct or model of what the DNA molecule does simply by following it’s physical properties. Does a Carbon atom contain instructions on how to create a diamond? Does it also contain instructions on how to form Carbon Dioxide? Does it also contain information on how to form Graphene? Gasoline? Nanotubes? Buckyballs? Motor Oil? Asphalt? Soot? There are 10s, if not 100s of thousands of molecules that carbon can form(we have a whole section of chemistry devoted to those chemicals that Carbon can form), does the Carbon atom contain information or code for all of them? No, it does not.

Precisely that is the point, which you make so nicely for me. A carbon atom does not contain a code, otherwise it would always make a specific product.

A DNA molecule is code exactly because it always makes a specific product when read by the cell’s ribosome.

You can also see it this way:

0 is not a code, 1 is not a code either. But 01 and 10 are a code (in binary form, either 0 or 1), because they form a sequence. And 000111 and 001101 are most definitely codes (when read in binary [computer] language). The point is that they form a sequence of instructions, just as DNA forms a sequence of instructions. And a sequence of instructions is a code.

The product of DNA is very specific because it is based on a sequence of instructions.

Also, you ignored my post about the fact that code is a scientific term for DNA:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8987881&postcount=2197

Or do you want to start to argue with the scientific community? That would be just as insane as creationists trying to argue that the scientific community is in a conspiracy to lie about evolution.

 

[Al_Moritz]

Of course this is correct.

Companies are making money interpreting DNA information for customers interested in their particular genome. Interesting is that some companies will offer an opt out for information about certain hereditary genes connected to diseases. Note: this is a “buyer beware” situation because not all methods are equal in thoroughness.

Not only is DNA information, it is evidence of what a particular organism can do and not do. The human immune system’s genetic information is key in disease research regardless of any design factor.

Precisely. Mr. cho pilo needs to study some science, I am afraid (apart from taking some exercises in common sense).

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Then either God is a diabolical monster or is privy to information we don’t have. I vote for the second.

Wouldn’t only a diabolical monster allow the ocean to cover all those Egyptian soldiers who were only doing their jobs? Didn’t they have wives and children who loved them? Didn’t they have people who depended on them? Yet God DROWNED them! How cruel God can be?

And what about Noah and the flood? Evidently God again DROWNED a large number of people, including babies and young children. Also, God allowed an evil ruler to MURDER little children (the Holy Innocents). Wouldn’t only a diabolical monster allow that? God allowed it, didn’t He? WHY?

I’m sure we would agree that God loves us. So why would He allow so many to suffer so much? What about the people who live in the dumps in India? Those dumps fill up with gasses until they eventually explode, killing the people who live there and then new people move in. To live in dumps.

Poverty is horrendous. Why would God allow little kids to be so hungry that an observer can count their bones just by looking and their stomachs protrude and they are covered with flies and don’t have the strength to even whisk them away and their eyes and lips are encrusted? They have no clean water and they have worms living in their legs and all they do is suffer. Why would God allow this? Those little kids DIE, never knowing anything other than misery.

Please tell me why God would allow such horrible suffering.

It makes no sense unless God intended the world to Naturally Evolve with as little intervention in human affairs as possible.

 

[tonyrey]

My misunderstood point is that there comes a time when we need to humbly recognize that some, not all, of God’s ways are a mystery. Even the CCC recognizes that.

Adam let his trust of his Creator die in his heart. There are times when we are tempted to do the same. When we do not have all the answers we want or think we should have – that is when we need to practice the virtue of humility.

Could the strongest apologetics be that we really cannot explain God completely, but we know enough to place our trust in Catholicism.

St Thomas Aquinas made the point long ago that all our intellectual knowledge of God is analogical or by the via negativa. Philosophers more than anyone else are aware of the limitations of human reasoning with regard to the Supreme Being because they study epistemology. The fact remains that if you give no reasons for what you believe you have no hope of influencing sceptics to change their mind. Perhaps you would feel more at home on another forum in which specifically Catholic doctrines are discussed rather than philosophical issues…

 

[buffalo]

Do you then contend that Hydrogen atoms contain information or code on how to produce water? The DNA molecule is different in degree, but not in kind. You still are having a problem recognizing the Map(information, code) as not actually being the Territory(the molecule of DNA). All the information or code we see in DNA is a construct or model of what the DNA molecule does simply by following it’s physical properties. Does a Carbon atom contain instructions on how to create a diamond? Does it also contain instructions on how to form Carbon Dioxide? Does it also contain information on how to form Graphene? Gasoline? Nanotubes? Buckyballs? Motor Oil? Asphalt? Soot? There are 10s, if not 100s of thousands of molecules that carbon can form(we have a whole section of chemistry devoted to those chemicals that Carbon can form), does the Carbon atom contain information or code for all of them? No, it does not. But given the presence of other molecules and under the right conditions it still succeeds in forming all of them and many more. This is due to Carbon’s physical, chemical properties. You exist because of a continuous, unbroken chain of increasingly complex chemical reactions starting with the first self replicating molecule(itself formed by the chemistry of the early Earth). A “fire” that started billions of years ago and has grown to stupendous levels of chemical complexity(about which we create more and more information)but it is still just a chemical reaction in which every part simply follows the laws of chemistry and physics. The concept of information is a construct of our intelligence, the chemical reactions require no information on how to physically create the various molecules that carry out functions in the cell, they simply carry out these functions because of the physical properties within their structures, no code required or present. Code and information are maps for the behavior we see to aid our understanding, the chemicals need no understanding, they do what they do because of what they are not because they are directed to do so by information or code.

How about protein folding?

You may want to check out the Genetic Piano.

Imagine an intelligence sitting at a piano and playing music. Not all keys are used in every song or in combination.

 

[Al_Moritz]

The fact remains that if you give no reasons for what you believe you have no hope of influencing sceptics to change their mind.

Since we do not know God’s precise intentions, sometimes we have to be satisfied with giving no reasons. It is certainly better than giving bad reasons by running around obsessed with a strange idea of a constantly intervening God where it clearly does not apply.

Perhaps you would feel more at home on another forum in which specifically Catholic doctrines are discussed rather than philosophical issues…

I am afraid that Granny’s posts on this issue show a lot more philosophical common sense than yours.

 

[tonyrey]

If we cannot choose to think we cannot be rational in the true sense of the word. Computers are not rational because they have no insight or choice of activity. If we are programmed by our genes and our environment there is no guarantee that our conclusions about the nature of reality are correct. Our thoughts would be as fallible as our instincts - which are notoriously unreliable. Yet the success of science demonstrates that we are capable of attaining the truth in a way which is impossible for any other living organism. Pascal remarked that we are aware that the universe exists whereas the universe knows nothing. So it is reasonable to believe we transcend our physical nature with our power of hindsight, insight and foresight. Every time we make a choice or decision we are using a form of supernatural energy. In other words we don’t have to look far for miracles: they are occurring constantly within ourselves! This is further evidence of Design…

A strange assertion! I have not even mentioned science in relation to consciousness because I know full well scientists agree it is one of the most formidable problems for neuroscience.

Is it okay to accept the findings of science when they help us make demonstrable advances - say, in curing diseases or developing various assistive and interrogative technologies - but to reject the findings of science when they paint a picture of ourselves that just doesn’t sit well with our cherished conception of our specialness?

Precisely what is the picture of a person painted by science? Why should it be inconsistent with the view that our power of reason surpasses that of any other known being?

The processes employed - observation, hypothesis, experiment, repetition, theory - are the same in both cases. So why reject one set of findings whilst accepting others derived through the same methods?

What have I rejected?

I don’t see how it is reasonable to believe we ‘transcend’ our physical nature with our supposed powers of hindsight, insight and foresight when it is readily apparent that these abilities are derived from our physical attributes. There is a large and growing body of evidence pointing to the dependence of mental abilities upon physical structures and processes; by contrast, there is no evidence that mental capacities exist independently of such physical phenomena.

There is no evidence whatsoever that our mental abilities depend** entirely** upon physical structures and processes. True scientists would never make such a dogmatic assertion - given the provisional nature of scientific theories…

And what, exactly, is this ‘supernatural energy’ we supposedly have at our disposal?

The energy which is used to direct and control our natural impulses, instincts and tendencies.

Where does it come from?

Where does physical energy come?

How do you distinguish it from natural energy? How would I know that this ‘supernatural energy’ is coming from within myself, rather than from external sources that are adapted and used by my physical body?

If you doubt that it is coming from yourself commit a crime and plead not guilty in a court of law…

Does my supernatural energy increase when, say, I eat a banana? My physical energy certainly does. Do we still have supernatural energy when our bodies are devoid of physical energy?

The power of mind is well attested.

How would one test such a hypothesis?

Try exercising self-control… using your will-power to force yourself to do something you detest.

Is supernatural energy part of a closed system, or does it interact with natural energy and matter?

It must interact if it is the means by which we make choices and decisions.

1. Do you believe your choices are made for you or by you?
2. Are you a biological machine?
3. If not what are you?

 

[tonyrey]

• The fact remains that if you give no reasons*

**Who **decides when?

It is certainly better than giving bad reasons by running around obsessed with a strange idea of a constantly intervening God where it clearly does not apply.

Your allegation is unsubstantiated because you have failed to refute the points I have made.

.
BTW I delete provocative remarks which do absolutely nothing to further the discussion and ignore them with the contempt they deserve…

 

[LittleSoldier]

1. God does not cause any form of evil.
2. Suffering has natural causes which are essential for life and survival.
3. Much of the suffering in the world is caused by man’s abuse of free will and lack of love for others…

Then why did you say that only a diabolical monster would allow such suffering to occur? I don’t understand what you are trying to say!

 

[LittleSoldier]

In my humble opinion, many of the comments on this thread regarding suffering are wobbling this way and that way. That can happen when people are trying to understand everything about life. We do not have the same level of knowledge as God. So we should stop trying to be like a “god” in understanding everything. This does not, I repeat does not, imply that we should give up trying to understand life. We are able to understand what is important about life which is the eventual union with our Creator.

Yes! This is what I have been trying to say! We aren’t divine, we aren’t God, and we don’t know how He thinks or why He acts the way He does. We should try to understand His gifts, such as our stewardship of this world, but He is so far above us that we are not going to understand fully, no matter how hard we try. But that’s OK. We know He loves us and is helping us while letting us use our free will. A child’s faith is so beautiful and in some cases that is what I must resort to having - as when I think about where God came from or what eternity is. I’m limited by my very human brain. In other cases I can intuit and assume and with others’ help learn more about God and about what He has told us in Scripture and through Apostolic Tradition.

The most important things for all of us to learn are how to become saints and how to help others become saints.

Even in pain, we seek answers. This is natural. My mother had a variety of health issues, one after another. She attended daily Mass when she could. She was a good example of Catholic living. One time, a friend chided her for all her praying because apparently God wasn’t answering. My mother declared firmly that God did answer her prayers. God’s answer was “No, not now.”

I doubt if my mother happily accepted God’s “answer”. But she did accept her condition as part of God’s future plans for her. She did not stop talking to God or doing the little things she could do to help the parish. I know she had doubts, but even doubts can be a form of prayer. At her death, I like to think that she told God that unworthy as she considered herself, she still would like to be with Him eventually. I am sure that God did answer that request. His answer was “Yes, the time to be with Me in loving peace is now.”

I agree with your Mom and with you. Sometimes I get so frustrated and so tired, both physically and emotionally, that I “have it out” with God. I’m not a saint on earth. I do try to accept the cup like Jesus did (and of course His cup was a much harder cup to accept). I know that suffering is working and that it is what I am meant to do. I try to accept it with dignity but sometimes I hurt so much and am just so tired of it that I act like I did yesterday. I think the news about my ex-psychiatrist was part of it, too. I felt guilty for being happy that he had surrendered his license even though I know that he should have lost it when I was seeing him. He really hurt people; some of them may have taken their own lives because of his lack of compassion and his greed for power and money. People in authority need to understand that with that authority comes responsibility. He shirked his responsibility and that was dangerous and wrong. I’m also concerned because I know he was raised as a Catholic and I fear for the condition of his soul. I believe it is probable that he led some people away from the Church.

I need to pray for him and I will.

And I need to be as Christ-like as I can be. Father, I do not want this cup that You have given me but I want Your will to be done and so I accept it and I will try to keep drinking from it with dignity. I ask that You tell me what else You want me to do. I ask for help with my lack of faith and trust. I am happiest when I think about being Your lamb and knowing how much You love me - that if I am hurt or wander off You will come find me and help me. Please help me now.

Something just occurred to me. Yesterday I was complaining about not being able to get my M.D. or my Ph.D. and how I was unhappy because it seemed that God took away everyone that I love. Yet I am happiest when I think of myself as one of God’s lambs. It’s like there are two extremes and I am happiest when I am at the humblest of the extremes. So why don’t I just stay there and not worry about those opportunities which have been denied to me? There is nothing wrong with being one of God’s lambs and there is much right about it.

I’ve read about a saint (I don’t remember her name) who suffered physically. I believe she was cloistered and some of the other nuns were unhappy because they didn’t feel she was carrying her own weight and they had to complete some of her chores for her. Her room was a typical cell with a cot and she spent a lot of time lying on that cot, suffering. Sometimes some of the other nuns would tell her to stop napping and start working and she would snap “What do you THINK I’m doing? I’m WORKING right now!” They didn’t understand. I don’t either but I’m going to continue trying.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I sympathise with you very deeply. I have experienced severe pain and I know it is enough to drive you out of your mind and wish you were dead. Life seems very black especially when others don’t care what happens to you, are successful and apparently having a wonderful time but sooner or later** all of us** are all confronted with pain, suffering and death.

That is why Our Lord chose to let Himself be mocked, scourged, tortured, jeered at and crucified unjustly. He identifies Himself with all who are victims of evil so that we can identify ourselves and be united with Him. Pascal said Jesus is in agony until the end of the world. The martyrs and saints have endured extreme physical suffering and mental anguish without the drugs we have but their faith, courage, prayers, support for one another and love for their Master have enabled them to follow His example and say “Thy Will be done” and “Into Your hands I commend my spirit”…

We are never alone and abandoned by God…

Thank you, Tony. I’m sorry I wrote that post. I was feeling so overwhelmed. Why did Pascal say that Jesus in agony until the end of the world? Is it because He identifies with us? And at the same time we are trying to identify with Him! It amazes me about how the martyrs found the strength to undergo such awful tortures. It must have really amazed those who were torturing them! Maybe it caused some seeds to be planted and some of those torturers became Christian. I hope so. Back then the more cruel the punishment the better it was considered to be. Now that it is Lent I am going to try to finally watch The Passion of the Christ. I’ve heard it’s very difficult to watch but I think that Jesus’ suffering has been “cleaned up” way too much. We need to know how awful His suffering was. I need to know.

I will do my best to submit to the Will of God - no matter how bad the pain is or how long it has lasted.**

 

[LittleSoldier]

Precisely that is the point, which you make so nicely for me. A carbon atom does not contain a code, otherwise it would always make a specific product.

A DNA molecule is code exactly because it always makes a specific product when read by the cell’s ribosome.

You can also see it this way:

0 is not a code, 1 is not a code either. But 01 and 10 are a code (in binary form, either 0 or 1), because they form a sequence. And 000111 and 001101 are most definitely codes (when read in binary [computer] language). The point is that they form a sequence of instructions, just as DNA forms a sequence of instructions. And a sequence of instructions is a code.

The product of DNA is very specific because it is based on a sequence of instructions.

Also, you ignored my post about the fact that code is a scientific term for DNA:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8987881&postcount=2197

Or do you want to start to argue with the scientific community? That would be just as insane as creationists trying to argue that the scientific community is in a conspiracy to lie about evolution.

Very, VERY well put!

 

[Al_Moritz]

Yes! This is what I have been trying to say! We aren’t divine, we aren’t God, and we don’t know how He thinks or why He acts the way He does. We should try to understand His gifts, such as our stewardship of this world, but He is so far above us that we are not going to understand fully, no matter how hard we try. But that’s OK. We know He loves us and is helping us while letting us use our free will. A child’s faith is so beautiful and in some cases that is what I must resort to having - as when I think about where God came from or what eternity is.

Yes, we are children before God, and we should not have the hubris to think we can explain all the suffering in the world. Sometimes we just cannot give reasons, because we cannot look into God’s mind who is so far above us.

On this issue, trying to come up with detailed reasons for everything may be playing God. If we cannot satisfy skeptics with an answer, so be it. Rather this, than carelessly engaging in inappropriate theology.

 

[grannymh]

St Thomas Aquinas made the point long ago that all our intellectual knowledge of God is analogical or by the via negativa. Philosophers more than anyone else are aware of the limitations of human reasoning with regard to the Supreme Being because they study epistemology. The fact remains that if you give no reasons for what you believe you have no hope of influencing sceptics to change their mind. Perhaps you would feel more at home on another forum in which specifically Catholic doctrines are discussed rather than philosophical issues…

St. Thomas Aquinas’ philosophical issues lead to theological doctrines at the Council of Trent. Considering the philosophy of Descartes which eventually developed into Communism, according to my survey of philosophy course, philosophies and how they are handled need to be challenged. Some philosophies have attempted to dismiss or change Catholic doctrine. Therefore, I am totally at home in the Philosophy Forum. Thank you.

Naturally, as you can tell from my posting, I do give reasons for what I believe. Often, I give Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition citations for my beliefs so that others can do their own reading.