P
Prophesy
Guest
One of my friends was an atheist, but he was baptized this Easter. He’s been constantly journeying for nearly 10 years though, it’s not often a short process.
-Prophesy
- Status
-Prophesy
R
RainbowNight
Guest
Which include a large possibility that the universe is the origin right?
T
tonyrey
Guest
There is no evidence that the universe created itself. In fact as far as we know the principle of causality applies to everything.
P
Prophesy
Guest
I wouldn’t say that it’s a large possibility, I would argue that the universe could not cause itself to exist because it hasn’t always existed. Aquinas discussed that for something to cause itself to exist, it must have existence as part of it’s very own definition (it must be necessary), so if was to be its own cause, it should be eternal.
I apologize if I haven’t worded this clearly.
-Prophesy
T
tonyrey
Guest
I apologise if you think I have been uncharitable but I was taking your statements at their face value. You were contrasting:
Theistic Evolution:
Evolution proceeds smoothly as divinely established by God to be a system that can self-propagate.
with:
Intelligent Design:
Evolution proceeds in a staircase pattern, creation proceeding constantly for a time before being directly evolved by God into the next stage and so on. Only happens by divine intervention.
This gives the false impression that Intelligent Design is a process with** unnecessary** interventions on the part of God. Does “Only happens by divine intervention” refer to evolution?
It is not evident that evolution proceeds smoothly if we are to go by the number of dead ends that have occurred…
P
Prophesy
Guest
Firstly apologize for misunderstanding your misunderstanding. The 3 theistic systems all contain the belief that the soul is a special creation of God with a belief in grace and the teachings of the Catholic Church. I hope that we can both concede this point.
Intelligent Design, as I was explained to by an proponent of ID (so this may not apply to all proponents) was explained in that way. Perhaps I can elaborate to explain my (perhaps even flawed) understanding.
So there was a time when there were dinosaurs, proponents of evolution would point to a gradual evolution of the dinosaurs into birds (or extinction as well), but a proponent of intelligent design (perhaps also putting extinction as a factor as well), would explain that God re-engineered dinosaurs directly. Instead of the process of making the bones in the arms change slowly and feathers start growing through genetic mutation and heritage, it would be argued that God replaced the arm with a wing (skipping this stage of mutation).
Is that a fair understanding, or would God have put the creature through a smaller step process of arms → weak arms → plumage → wings?
From what I gathered it would be a rapid process of arms → wings, but perhaps you can explain it better to me. I just want to make sure we’re both using the same words.
And yes, smoothly was perhaps a poor choice of adjective, but I meant to say that it worked as a natural process like the growth of a person, rather than something that is directly intervened with (such as God talking to a saint).
-Prophesy
T
tonyrey
Guest
No wonder you object to that version of ID. So do I!
I believe it is impossible to know precisely when God intervened, intervenes and will intervene but a fortuitous combination of molecules, random mutations and natural selection seem a hopelessly inadequate explanation of the origin of life and its development to rational beings - whose brain has been described as the greatest miracle in the universe. Blind processes by themselves seem totally incapable of such a fantastic feat. Sir Charles Sherrington, Nobel prize-winner for his discoveries regarding the function of neurons, believed spirit exists in most if not all forms of life.
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
tonyrey
I believe it is impossible to know precisely when God intervened, intervenes and will intervene …
I like to think of Him as constantly intervening … or rather sustaining … all things.
I imagine myself drawing a line and never lifting my pencil from the paper. That never lifting my pencil represents eternal intervention. If I lifted the pencil once, the line would end and have no power to restore itself … and so would all of Creation if God withdrew His powerful sustaining hand.
I believe it is impossible to know precisely when God intervened, intervenes and will intervene …
I like to think of Him as constantly intervening … or rather sustaining … all things.
I imagine myself drawing a line and never lifting my pencil from the paper. That never lifting my pencil represents eternal intervention. If I lifted the pencil once, the line would end and have no power to restore itself … and so would all of Creation if God withdrew His powerful sustaining hand.
A
Al_Moritz
Guest
Well said, and Thank you. That has exactly been my opinion (or rather, adherence to Church teaching) all along, even at the times when you accused me of being ‘deist’ for my acceptance of “non-interventionist” theistic evolution. I would hope we now understand each other better.
T
tonyrey
Guest
I was referring to direct intervention as well as sustaining everything and everyone. I don’t believe miracles are as rare as many people think.
P
Prophesy
Guest
Alright, but as a person who continues to believe in theistic evolution, I don’t believe in evolution as a “blind process”, nor do I believe it to be continuously intervened in.
As the old analogy goes, I believe evolution to be like a clock that God has wound up (once again with your criticism of evolution’s failures in terms of some mutations I hope we can agree that God didn’t intervene to randomly inflict a creature in such a way).
However, I make reservations for special moments, like the creation of the human soul in our first parents.
I’m willing to accept Sherrington’s proposition in a means as the rational soul, animal soul and vegetative soul.
-Prophesy
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
tonyrey
**
I was referring to direct intervention as well as sustaining everything and everyone. I don’t believe miracles are as rare as many people think.**
I don’t either. The problem is that some miracles are not detectable as such, and certainly ignored as such by those who don’t believe in miracles.
Given the analogy I made earlier, the pencil drawing a line continually might on occasion go into bold mode without being lifted from the paper. The bold mode would be equivalent to your “direct intervention”.
Yes, God can certainly be bold on occasion with His miracles!
**
I was referring to direct intervention as well as sustaining everything and everyone. I don’t believe miracles are as rare as many people think.**
I don’t either. The problem is that some miracles are not detectable as such, and certainly ignored as such by those who don’t believe in miracles.
Given the analogy I made earlier, the pencil drawing a line continually might on occasion go into bold mode without being lifted from the paper. The bold mode would be equivalent to your “direct intervention”.
Yes, God can certainly be bold on occasion with His miracles!
meltzerboy
New member
This may be more of an intuitive reason than a logical one for the existence of G-d, but I think the fact we have the capacity to love others, even strangers and adversaries, by showing concern, empathy, kindness, compassion, mercy, and forgiveness toward them, is a sure sign of G-d’s existence and His bountiful love for us.
M
MikeSar
Guest
This is the Difficult part: “Faith” is a Gift of God.
Or, if you ask a philosopher, he might answer that all scientific truths are proven true by the evidence that convinces, through logic, our mind, and we are convinced.
Faith in God, on the other hand, does not have empirical data collected in experiments that can only be explained if a God exists. There is only, at best, a “high probability” or some such vague wording. What there was, for us believers, fortunate enough to believe in God, is a choice, before there is adequate proof, that pushes, forces, or directs our mind, our intellect to simply “accept God”. Period. End of argument.
But, if you ever “fall in love” with another human, you might, or might not, remember that you really, really, had no absolute or logical “reason” to “fall in love” with anyone -or God.
The best argument: Life without Love is dreadful, life without love of God implies life without love for God or love for any of His Creatures. What else is there? Absolute Loneliness? Is that a prelude to madness? Would you ask a madman if he loves anyone? Why?
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
meltzerboy
This may be more of an intuitive reason than a logical one for the existence of G-d, but I think the fact we have the capacity to love others, even strangers and adversaries, by showing concern, empathy, kindness, compassion, mercy, and forgiveness toward them, is a sure sign of G-d’s existence and His bountiful love for us.
So true. Proof also that we are made in His image and likeness.
This may be more of an intuitive reason than a logical one for the existence of G-d, but I think the fact we have the capacity to love others, even strangers and adversaries, by showing concern, empathy, kindness, compassion, mercy, and forgiveness toward them, is a sure sign of G-d’s existence and His bountiful love for us.
So true. Proof also that we are made in His image and likeness.
T
tonyrey
Guest
The most adequate explanation of our capacity for love is that we are created to love and be loved. Nothing in the world can be more significant than that…
T
tonyrey
Guest
I hadn’t read your post when I posted mine but “great” minds think alike! Or I should say those who value love more than anything else think alike.This is the Difficult part: “Faith” is a Gift of God.
Or, if you ask a philosopher, he might answer that all scientific truths are proven true by the evidence that convinces, through logic, our mind, and we are convinced.
Faith in God, on the other hand, does not have empirical data collected in experiments that can only be explained if a God exists. There is only, at best, a “high probability” or some such vague wording. What there was, for us believers, fortunate enough to believe in God, is a choice, before there is adequate proof, that pushes, forces, or directs our mind, our intellect to simply “accept God”. Period. End of argument.
But, if you ever “fall in love” with another human, you might, or might not, remember that you really, really, had no absolute or logical “reason” to “fall in love” with anyone -or God.
The best argument: Life without Love is dreadful, life without love of God implies life without love for God or love for any of His Creatures. What else is there? Absolute Loneliness? Is that a prelude to madness? Would you ask a madman if he loves anyone? Why?
G
gentle_atheist
Guest
Wow. And you claim that atheists have big egos.
J
John_Russell_Jr
Guest
My dear friend ,
Following is a copy of my posts elsewhere. Given your an atheist I thought you might like a few of my own philosophical arguments on the subject. Hope it helps dear friend.
Q. Why did God create our universe and us ?
It’s a good question. My own thoughs on this in brief are : using the concept of something and nothing , that God is something and not nothing as nothing cannot exist , if nothing exists then nothing is no longer nothing but having existence it has become something. So something must exist and that something can have no nothing / ness in it and thus must be the most infinitely perfect something that can possibly be. If there was any nothing / ness in this something it would mean nothing / ness exists but nothing / ness cannot exist as said. The nature of something s that it must do something , only nothing does nothing, but nothing cannot exist. So if something by its very nature must do something then something must be what we call creative , and lacking no infinite perfection at all this creativity must be infinite. Hence God who is something must exist and must be infinitely creative by His very nature. God has created infinite worlds in my opinion , based on His nature. Hope his helps.
Just to clarify one point being why does God have to exist which is not explained suffice here. In the beginning if you will , there is a choice that either something or nothing exists. Now if nothing exists then nothing having existence has become something. So whether nothing or something exists , something must exist if you think about it. That something is God , and you can get a glimpse from this as to why He has always and will always exist. Indeed He is , and to say exists is not sufficient. Hoe this helps too.
God bless and Love you
John
P
Pieman333272
Guest
Wow. And you claim Theists have fallacious and useless arguments.
- Status