How can we reconcile the argument of intelligent design with supposed design flaws?

[inocente]

God’s plan **includes **purposeless coincidences which are inevitable in an immensely complex universe.

Or, more simply, “God’s plan includes purposeless coincidences and nothing else”, which is the same as saying God has no plan. Think again young man.

It doesn’t follow that everyone finds precisely the same purpose and meaning because everyone is different in some respect or other. We have different talents and vocations but we all have the same fundamental purpose: to know, love and serve God and His creatures.

Or, more simply, we’re all humans so we’re bound to have some things in common. There would be no disagreement on that, whereas many may disagree with what you say is our purpose, or like Sartre not even share your view that we have any fundamental purpose.

So they don’t have to answer your charge that imposing meaning “would be wishful thinking in a futile attempt to conceal the eternal darkness from which we would come and to which we would return”.

Your personal theology is perhaps a bit personal.

 

[tonyrey]

Or, more simply, “God’s plan includes purposeless coincidences and nothing else”, which is the same as saying God has no plan. Think again young man.

Or, more simply, we’re all humans so we’re bound to have some things in common. There would be no disagreement on that, whereas many may disagree with what you say is our purpose, or like Sartre not even share your view that we have any fundamental purpose.

So they don’t have to answer your charge that imposing meaning “would be wishful thinking in a futile attempt to conceal the eternal darkness from which we would come and to which we would return”.

You’re distorting my argument and there’s no point in answering.

 

[tonyrey]

Meanings are not imposed on us, but they are objective nonetheless. God invites us to discover those objective meanings, not to invent them willy-nilly out of our own imagination or preference, which is the method of protestantism and atheism.

I’m glad you understand my posts.

 

[inocente]

You’re distorting my argument and there’s no point in answering.

Bit premature, hadn’t even finished editing it. It’s how I read your argument, not trying to play games.

 

[tonyrey]

Bit premature, hadn’t even finished editing it. It’s how I read your argument, not trying to play games.

Why submit an unedited post?

“God’s plan includes purposeless coincidences and nothing else” is an absurd distortion of my argument.

 

[inocente]

Why submit an unedited post?

Because we can.

"God’s plan includes purposeless coincidences and nothing else" is an absurd distortion of my argument.

If your claim is that God’s plan includes purposeful design as well as purposeless coincidences, then you would need to demonstrate that everything falls into one or the other category. But if those are your only two categories, which one does a Zika virus fall into? It’s too complex to be a coincidence, and God doesn’t purposely design viruses which cause birth defects. Therefore those two categories are insufficient to describe creation.

 

[tonyrey]

Because we can.

Irrational!

If your claim is that God’s plan includes purposeful design as well as purposeless coincidences, then you would need to demonstrate that everything falls into one or the other category.

God’s plan doesn’t “include” purposeful design; the terms are synonymous

But if those are your only two categories, which one does a Zika virus fall into? It’s too complex to be a coincidence, and God doesn’t purposely design viruses which cause birth defects. Therefore those two categories are insufficient to describe creation.

Coincidences are the** result **of complexity! The more complex a universe is the more coincidences there are… They occur within the context of Design.

 

[cfauster]

I highly recommend the book Aquinas and the Cry of Rachel: Thomistic Reflections on the Problem of Evil by John F.X. Knass, published by Catholic University of America Press in 2013.

Starting on p. 145 the author has a “Summary of Aquinas on the Existence of Evil.” The distinctions between various kinds of evils are helpful.

“Natural corruptions” are willed by God insofar as God wills the natural perfection of the universe. God can be said to intend such evils not per se, but only per accidens as means to a good end.

The other main category of evils - attack of the lower on the higher, as Aquinas put it - are not willed by God, not even indirectly. Rather, God permits them. Knass articulates why God permits them, according to Aquinas.

 

[Peter_Plato]

But we don’t, each person works out his own meaning, it seems that existence precedes essence, and “man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world – and defines himself afterwards” (Sartre). Did God give us free will to have meaning imposed on us or to each find our own meaning?

How about neither?

God gave us free will to find ultimate meaning and our relationship to it.

That means meaning is neither “imposed upon us” nor invented or created by us.

We do not “find our own meaning” unless we are meant to be existential islands existing a se for eternity. That, as far as I can tell, is as close to a definition of Hell as it gets – existing forever in our own little ego shell. A reality that cannot be real precisely because it is a figment of our overreaching imagination, rather than the truly self-subsistent Eternal Reality which is Existence Itself: Ipsum Esse Existens.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

How about neither?

God gave us free will to find ultimate meaning and our relationship to it.

That means meaning is neither “imposed upon us” nor invented or created by us.

We do not “find our own meaning” unless we are meant to be existential islands existing a se for eternity. That, as far as I can tell, **is as close to a definition of Hell as it gets **– existing forever in our own little ego shell. A reality that cannot be real precisely because it is a figment of our overreaching imagination, rather than the truly self-subsistent Eternal Reality which is Existence Itself: Ipsum Esse Existens.

“Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven…” presumes there is a design willed by God, a plan that God wishes us to grasp if we are not going to say, in opposition to Him … “My will be done, on earth as it is in hell.”

 

[tonyrey]

God’s plan doesn’t “include” purposeful design; the terms are synonymous
Coincidences are the** result **of complexity! The more complex a universe is the more coincidences there are… They occur within the context of Design.

It is simplistic to believe we have to choose between two extremes: everything is purposeful** or** everything is purposeless. In an immensely complex universe there are bound to be anomalies.

 

[Aloysium]

. . .So they don’t have to answer your charge that imposing meaning “would be wishful thinking in a futile attempt to conceal the eternal darkness from which we would come and to which we would return”. Your personal theology is perhaps a bit personal.

I’m not sure that’s what he said, but I’ll say it.

It’s all personal by the way; what could be more so than the ultimate foundation of our being?

Fact is that to love is imposed on us. That is, whether people see it or not, the way the universe is structured, towards the good; and what isn’t dies. Do I want to give everything I have to others and follow God? All of me does, and all of me doesn’t. Looking reality square in the face, what would all the money and things of the world give me but empty glitter. It’s too late for all the pleasures. As to honour, perhaps I should have done more towards that end; but actually more than one person I know who did, killed themselves so it did not improve their lives. Power? The world is messed up enough. I really have no choice.

There is only one common element to everything that has meaning and that is love. We can cover the emptiness that is a life without it, chase after and try to fill it with the transient and illusory. God is, so there is no “would”. Not to follow His imperative to love, not to seek He who is love, cannot but result in the eternal darkness that is a life without Him.

 

[inocente]

Irrational!

The edit button lets you fix typos.

God’s plan doesn’t “include” purposeful design; the terms are synonymous
Coincidences are the** result **of complexity! The more complex a universe is the more coincidences there are… They occur within the context of Design.

Coincidence = a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection (OED).

We know the causes of earthquakes so they are not “a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection”.

But we’ve gone round that a number of times. I just wanted to comment on your “God’s plan includes purposeless coincidences”, because what is a coincidence/purposeless/purposeful to you isn’t necessarily a coincidence/purposeless/purposeful to others.

 

[inocente]

How about neither?

God gave us free will to find ultimate meaning and our relationship to it.

That means meaning is neither “imposed upon us” nor invented or created by us.

We do not “find our own meaning” unless we are meant to be existential islands existing a se for eternity. That, as far as I can tell, is as close to a definition of Hell as it gets – existing forever in our own little ego shell. A reality that cannot be real precisely because it is a figment of our overreaching imagination, rather than the truly self-subsistent Eternal Reality which is Existence Itself: Ipsum Esse Existens.

Googling around, I found some Christians saying the fundamental meaning of life is to worship God (Is 43:7), others to trust God (Matt 11:28-30), others to love/serve God and people (Matt 22:34-40), Muslims to accept His will, Buddhists to end suffering…

So unless all of them and more just accepted whatever they were told, it still seems to me they each worked out their own meaning, none of which sound much like your little ego shell.

 

[inocente]

inocente;14038461:

So they don’t have to answer your charge that imposing meaning “would be wishful thinking in a futile attempt to conceal the eternal darkness from which we would come and to which we would return”.

I’m not sure that’s what he said, but I’ll say it.

Post #863 “We could impose meaning but it would be wishful thinking in a futile attempt to conceal the eternal darkness from which we would come and to which we would return…”

*It’s all personal by the way; what could be more so than the ultimate foundation of our being?

Fact is that to love is imposed on us.* That is, whether people see it or not, the way the universe is structured, towards the good; and what isn’t dies. Do I want to give everything I have to others and follow God? All of me does, and all of me doesn’t. Looking reality square in the face, what would all the money and things of the world give me but empty glitter. It’s too late for all the pleasures. As to honour, perhaps I should have done more towards that end; but actually more than one person I know who did, killed themselves so it did not improve their lives. Power? The world is messed up enough. I really have no choice.

There is only one common element to everything that has meaning and that is love. We can cover the emptiness that is a life without it, chase after and try to fill it with the transient and illusory. God is, so there is no “would”. Not to follow His imperative to love, not to seek He who is love, cannot but result in the eternal darkness that is a life without Him.

“Fact is that to love is imposed on us”? Don’t see how. 1 Cor 13 says “Love is patient, love is kind”, which seems the opposite of imposed.

So I can’t agree that’s a fact, but if you want to impose the meaning “that to love is imposed on us” then Tony’s statement above is categorical, you’d be wishful thinking.

Alternatively perhaps we could say that being loved is imposed on us, as a negative way of saying we can’t stop anyone loving us unconditionally, but we’d still fall into that wishful thinking trap.

Seems the only way to avoid the trap is to not impose meaning.

 

[tonyrey]

Irrational!

Irrelevant!

God’s plan doesn’t “include” purposeful design; the terms are synonymous.

No response…

Coincidences are the** result **

of complexity! The more complex a universe is the more coincidences there are… They occur within the context of Design.Coincidence = a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection (OED).

We know the causes of earthquakes so they are not “a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection”.

An earthquake which occurs in an inhabited location is an example of an inexplicable coincidence. There is no reason for the conjunction of events.

But we’ve gone round that a number of times. I just wanted to comment on your “God’s plan includes purposeless coincidences”, because what is a coincidence/purposeless/purposeful to you isn’t necessarily a coincidence/purposeless/purposeful to others.

What is the purpose of an earthquake which destroys a city?
Do you believe every natural disaster is intended by God as a punishment for sin?
If not why does He permit them to occur?

 

[Richca]

It is simplistic to believe we have to choose between two extremes: everything is purposeful** or** everything is purposeless. In an immensely complex universe there are bound to be anomalies.

Yes, the universe is immensely complex. This consideration should raise us to admiration to the creator and to his wisdom in creating such a vast complex universe. The finite vast universe falls infinitely short, however, of the infinite God who created it. That is, the immensely complex universe falls infinitely short of the Creator’s comprehension. Accordingly, it is written “The whole world before you is like a speck that tips the scales, and like a drop of morning dew that falls upon the ground” (Wisdom 11:22). To the creator, there is no such thing as an anomaly that escapes his knowledge, universal causality and providence. Indeed, second causes are dependent on the first cause. Accordingly, it is not possible for some second cause to produce some effect independent of the first cause. God by his providence directs all things that he has made, the little and the great. Thus, it is written “thou hast ordered all things in measure, number, and weight” (Wisdom 11:20).

 

[Charlemagne_III]

It is simplistic to believe we have to choose between two extremes: everything is purposeful** or** everything is purposeless. In an immensely complex universe there are bound to be anomalies.

Certainly, and even the anomalies may not be anomalies just because we cannot see their purpose, whereas God would see everything and allow everything, since without his creative mind and hands nothing would be made or fashioned, certainly nothing made in his image and likeness.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Alfred north Whitehead, Mathematician, Philosopher

“You use arithmetic, but you *are *religious. Arithmetic of course enters into your nature, so far as that nature involves a multiplicity of things. But it is there as a necessary condition, and not as a transforming agency. No one is invariably “justified” by his faith in the multiplication table. But in some sense or other, justification is the basis of all religion. Your character is developed according to your faith. This is the primary religious truth from which no one can escape. Religion is force of belief cleansing the inward parts. For this reason the primary religious virtue is sincerity, a penetrating sincerity.”

 

[tonyrey]

It is simplistic to believe we have to choose between two extremes: everything is purposeful** or**

God certainly knows everything, has ultimate control of everything and ensures that this is the best of all possible worlds but that does not imply everything is perfect:

385 God is infinitely good and all his works are good. Yet no one can escape the experience of suffering or the evils in nature which seem to be linked to the limitations proper to creatures: and above all to the question of moral evil.

The key word is “limitations” which explains why God permits anomalies like disease, accidents and natural disasters which cause apparently needless suffering and premature death. St Thomas pointed out that evil is incidental, a fact which is consistent with your statement “The finite vast universe falls infinitely short, however, of the infinite God who created it”. We have to accept our vulnerability to misfortune but Jesus consoles us with the Beatitudes:

“Blessed are they who mourn, for they shall be comforted.”

The thought that He shares our suffering should help us to accept it and look forward with joy to being reunited with our loved ones in Heaven…