I'm not a Catholic because

[atheistgirl]

Isn’t the creation proof of the creator? Like if you see a chair, you know someone made it, right? So, aren’t all the creations of this earth proof of a creator? Or did it all just spontaneously erupt out of the primordial ooze? And if so, then who created the primordial ooze? I admit, the concept of God is a huge one, and I have a hard time getting my head around it. So that’s why the chair analogy works well for my limited intelligience. LOL ; Peace be with you.

And I hope you have a peaceful wonderful day too.

Abiogenesis will be cracked in the next 10 years I believe, with the work of people like Craig Venter, and Hawkins theory the universe can spontaneously create will be proven by the work currently being undertaken in CERN.

We live in incredibly exciting times. A thousand years ago every religious believed in the literal story of Adam and Eve, and the earth rested on pillars, was flat, and was the centre of the universe, all created in a literal 6 days.

Along came Capernicus, Darwin and the likes and all religions that were open and honest about understanding had to rethink hitherto inviolable beliefs. The catholic church deserves much credit at being at the forfront of scientific understanding and discovery. But the books, or the understanding of the books, had to be rewritten.

We know we’re not the centre of the universe, we know we live on an insignificant planet one of trillions of trillions, we know the earth will perish in a fireball, we know its not 6000 years old but billions - and we now know and understand evolution, all confirmed by the fossil and dna records. When the origins of the universe is fully understood, and we can recreate self replicating molecules in the lab, what then I wonder?

Interesting and exciting times indeed.

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

So here is my question for you. What will happen when you die? Is it just going to be a big black space where nothing happens? HMMMMM? Is this life all that there is? If God didn’t exist, then we would have no reason to live.

Thats such a depressing and life demeaning view, with all due respect. Of course there is reason to live, the joy of nature, the joy of new life, the joy of raising a family, the fun and joy of living day by day with all its encumbent trails and tribulations - the enormous sense of satisfaction of learning and knowledge and making a difference in the application of that knowledge, the beauty in a childs smile, or a bird singing, or a puppy playing, passing on your genes through your family, feeling the love of your family and friends … I could go on and on and on … this is how far we have evolved from our common ancestors.

BUT when we die, my view, I stress again, my view, is that is it. There is no big black space where nothing happens, as you put it - there is simply nothing. My earthly flesh will be recycled, and my genes will life on in my kids, and my memory, although initially fresh, will eventually fade.

Thats why Im not only not catholic, but I dont hold with any faith/belief system what so ever.

My evidence leads me to think the above is true, while any belief in an afterlife is completely unsustainable.

And it also helps me life the best life I can, filling evey waking minute, becuase I know (again I stress for me) this is the only life I have. I personally do not look forward to an eternity. I make the most of every single minute I have here.

Sarah x

 

[Bballer32]

Thats such a depressing and life demeaning view, with all due respect. Of course there is reason to live, the joy of nature, the joy of new life, the joy of raising a family, the fun and joy of living day by day with all its encumbent trails and tribulations - the enormous sense of satisfaction of learning and knowledge and making a difference in the application of that knowledge, the beauty in a childs smile, or a bird singing, or a puppy playing, passing on your genes through your family, feeling the love of your family and friends … I could go on and on and on … this is how far we have evolved from our common ancestors.

BUT when we die, my view, I stress again, my view, is that is it. There is no big black space where nothing happens, as you put it - there is simply nothing. My earthly flesh will be recycled, and my genes will life on in my kids, and my memory, although initially fresh, will eventually fade.

Thats why Im not only not catholic, but I dont hold with any faith/belief system what so ever.

My evidence leads me to think the above is true, while any belief in an afterlife is completely unsustainable.

And it also helps me life the best life I can, filling evey waking minute, becuase I know (again I stress for me) this is the only life I have. I personally do not look forward to an eternity. I make the most of every single minute I have here.

Sarah x

Nice. You enjoy life and in the end die and dissinagrate. That is awesome. Let me ask you this. Do you believe Jesus walked on this earth?

 

[atheistgirl]

Nice. You enjoy life and in the end die and dissinagrate. That is awesome.

Well, it’s not awesome as such, it’s just natural.

Let me ask you this. Do you believe Jesus walked on this earth?

I honestly dont know.

But if there was such a person, then to me, so please dont take offence as Im replying to the question you asked me honestly, to me, he could be no more or less than a human being.

Sarah x

 

[joe370]

Thank you for the time in linking and your reply. But I have to tell you, in all honesty, the stories confirm my skepticism. It fascinates me the amount of apparitions that have happened involving devout impressionable younf children. Or very devout simple people.

Why speak only to four little kids and not all those around? Why not publically appear on TV?

And the miracle promised hasnt happened yet, apparently.

As for seeing things - mass hysteria and confirmation bias are well understood and well documented.

Just so you know, I did read you links, and I followed on from them to do a bit more reading I could find online. And Im grateful to you for bothering. And I hope my candor doesnt offend you.

But I dont find anyone of it either impressive or believable and Im afraid it wouldnt work for me.

Sarah x

Different strokes for different folks.

By the way, I personally believe the key factor, regarding apparitions appearing mostly to children, have everything to do with the purity and innocence of children.

Good luck with whatever you are looking for Sarah.

 

[joe370]

Isn’t the creation proof of the creator? Like if you see a chair, you know someone made it, right? So, aren’t all the creations of this earth proof of a creator? Or did it all just spontaneously erupt out of the primordial ooze? And if so, then who created the primordial ooze? Peace be with you.

Exactly…

 

[joe370]

atheistgirl

Hey Sarah, a few quick questions: Let’s assume that one day science will have the answers to all the questions about why the universe is the way it is etc…

Is it safe to say that intelligent humans are not the source of the creation of the universe in your opinion?

Is the preconceived notion that the universe was created, wrong, in your opinion?

What are some other possible causes for the creation of the universe, if not a designer that existed prior to the big bang? The fine tuning of the universe, universal natural systems such as EMF and gravity, certainly demand an intelligent designer, logically speaking, or no?

 

[atheistgirl]

Good luck with whatever you are looking for Sarah.

Lol. Thanks. Im not looking for anything. I enjoy conversation on interesting subjects and I enjoy looking at things from different perspectives, and well run forums, and this board certainly is one of them, but as to some quest or search or looking for something. Naw. I have everything I want or need right here with me now.

Have a great day

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

Is it safe to say that intelligent humans are not the source of the creation of the universe in your opinion?

Well of course humans didnt create the universe.

Is the preconceived notion that the universe was created, wrong, in your opinion?

In the sense that it was created, (came to be) we will eventually be able to understand the mechanism of that process, describe and explain it and who knows, maybe even one day recreate it

What are some other possible causes for the creation of the universe, if not a designer that existed prior to the big bang? The fine tuning of the universe, universal natural systems such as EMF and gravity, certainly demand an intelligent designer, logically speaking, or no?

No one knows - there are hypothesis, but no solid theories as to the cause yet. Correction, Hawkings believes he does know, and his theories may well be proven right by CERN in the next decade or two.

No logically speaking things only appear fine tuned for our benefit. If one stops assuming all this was done for the benefit of man, and remove man from the centre of it all, one sees much more clearly what a wonderful awe inspiring universe we live in and just how lucky we are to have had evolved to be a part of it.

And another thought I have about this fine tuning! The way I look at it is if something was designed for life, then there is redundancy built into the system to protect that life. But we dont see that - if the atmosphere is damaged beyond repair, thats it - whoosh! If a huge asteroid hits us, and it could we have just been lucky its just little ones so far, then whoosh! We actually KNOW now the sun will burn out, destroying the earth anyhow, just not for billions of years - little microscopic bacteria can wipe us all out - reference black death etc - so no, I dont see ‘‘fine tuning’’ as some kind of evidence to support design - I see just how precarious the balance of our existance is!!!

Studies have been done to show if the tape of life was rewound and replayed, its as certain as can be we wouldnt evolve a second time as we are today given the monumenal numbers of branches of the common ancertry that just pettered out.

For me personally, its a wonderful happy accident.

Sarah x

 

[Portrait]

Well of course humans didnt create the universe.

In the sense that it was created, (came to be) we will eventually be able to understand the mechanism of that process, describe and explain it and who knows, maybe even one day recreate it

No one knows - there are hypothesis, but no solid theories as to the cause yet. Correction, Hawkings believes he does know, and his theories may well be proven right by CERN in the next decade or two.

No logically speaking things only appear fine tuned for our benefit. If one stops assuming all this was done for the benefit of man, and remove man from the centre of it all, one sees much more clearly what a wonderful awe inspiring universe we live in and just how lucky we are to have had evolved to be a part of it.

And another thought I have about this fine tuning! The way I look at it is if something was designed for life, then there is redundancy built into the system to protect that life. But we dont see that - if the atmosphere is damaged beyond repair, thats it - whoosh! If a huge asteroid hits us, and it could we have just been lucky its just little ones so far, then whoosh! We actually KNOW now the sun will burn out, destroying the earth anyhow, just not for billions of years - little microscopic bacteria can wipe us all out - reference black death etc - so no, I dont see ‘‘fine tuning’’ as some kind of evidence to support design - I see just how precarious the balance of our existance is!!!

Studies have been done to show if the tape of life was rewound and replayed, its as certain as can be we wouldnt evolve a second time as we are today given the monumenal numbers of branches of the common ancertry that just pettered out.

For me personally, its a wonderful happy accident.

Sarah x

Dear Sarah,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

What I think must be said is that if evolution has occured, then it is decidedly the work of God. Every creature, whether animate or inanimate, is dependent upon God at every instant for its existence and its activity. It therefore follows that, if we assume evolution as a theory, we must assert that God is its Author. It must have been He who gave the living thing its capacity to vary, and so ordered its surroundings, and all the influences affecting it, so as to make it develop precisely as it did. If evolution did occur, divine intervention would have been necessary for:

1/ Creation itself of the first matter from which the entire universe is composed.

2/ The appearance of basic life.

3/ The elevation of vital organisms to plant level.

4/ The elevation of plants to animal level.

5/ The elevation of an animal body to be fit for animation by a human soul.

6/ The creation of the soul of the first man, something which could never arise from sub-human life, since it is spiritual.

Evolution may be a fact, but there really is no scientific proof of it. A scientific proof will surely only be forthcoming when some incontestable law of nature has been discovered, which can be tested by experiment and which will account for all the transformations alleged by the evolutionists. Whilst there may be evidence for the modification of living things within many smaller groups, there is no evidence as to how any of the greater groups originated. Mutations *within *species have been observed; mutations that transform one plant or animal into a different species have not been observed.

Thankyou for your contributions.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[atheistgirl]

It therefore follows that, if we assume evolution as a theory, we must assert that God is its Author.

I recognise and respect the fact that religious must assert God as the author. However, I dont, and neither do just about all of the peer reviewed scientists involved in the work.

If evolution did occur, divine intervention would have been necessary for:

Im sorry but that is simply not true. Evolution, by virtue of the fact it is evolution, does not need divine intervention.

Evolution may be a fact, but there really is no scientific proof of it.

Oh my gosh.

Well, ok. Perhaps its best we just leave it at that then.

You have a great day.

Sarah x

 

[Portrait]

I recognise and respect the fact that religious must assert God as the author. However, I dont, and neither do just about all of the peer reviewed scientists involved in the work.

Im sorry but that is simply not true. Evolution, by virtue of the fact it is evolution, does not need divine intervention.

Oh my gosh.

Well, ok. Perhaps its best we just leave it at that then.

You have a great day.

Sarah x

Dear Sarah,

Hello again and thankyou for your response above.

My point was that the theory of evolution is unsustainable without divine intervention because of those six reasons to which I refered - the alleged transformations must needs be accounted for satisfactorily if we are to rule out divine intervention. Evolution, without reference to God, is extremely problematic, to say the very least.

Evolutionists have failed to discover, thus far, any verifiable laws governing the development of species. Had they succeeded, the animated controversy over the causes of evolution would be at an end. Many biologists believe that evolution has occured, but they do not agree on its mechanism. Some argue for continual gradual changes, whilst others, on the contrary, for large changes in relatively short periods. The various versions of naturalistic evolution do have one thing in common, however: their adherence to philosphical materialism and their intense dislike for divine creation.

Goodbye for now and have a jolly good weekend whatever you plan to do.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait:tiphat:

Pax

 

[PJM]

=atheistgirl;8561206]Yes, honestly.

The formation of the planets is well understood in cosmology. We are getting closer and closer to understanding the cause that initiated it all. When physics and cosmology can explain it all, what then?

Again, the evolution of sight and hearing is well understood by those in the field.

Again, neurologists have a brillant understanding, and it improves by the day, of how things like love, the imagination, empathy, all have a location in the brain. And they have only began to scratch the surface of understanding how the brain works, but it is awesome, but can and will be explained without recourse to the supernatural.

Accepted in the spirit it was given Thank you

Sarah x

Thanks! No problem, except you do not provide any evidence; only opinion and hope. HOPE is good

God Bless you, have a great life.

Love and prayers,
Pat

 

[atheistgirl]

Thanks! No problem, except you do not provide any evidence; only opinion and hope. HOPE is good

Just look up any scientic or biological peer reviewed (thats the important bit) site - theres a site that gives access to thousands of scientific papers cant rememeber what its called though and have nt time to look for it now … its not HOPE - the evidence is all there, and the experts in the field are learning and understanding more every hour of the day, every day of the week. Like I said, we truely live in very exciting times.

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

Evolution, without reference to God, is extremely problematic, to say the very least.

It isnt the least bit problematic. There are gaps in our knowledge for sure, but these are problems, the work continues and no evolutionary biologist feels the need to recourse to the divine.

Some argue for continual gradual changes, whilst others, on the contrary, for large changes in relatively short periods.

Well, so - the fact that scientists dont all agree on the mechanism doesnt in any way what so ever bring the fact of evolution into dispute. Can you reference a peer reviewed evolutionary biologist that thinks we need divine intervention? The scientists that write for answersingenesis are not peer reviewed by the way - if you want a laugh, look at their criteria for publication You have to agree no matter what you ‘‘discover’’ or research, nothing you publish or say or teach will contradict a literal interpretation of genesis lol So much for credibility. There is NO controversy over evolution among scientists - this is a creationist deliberate misrepresention. Oh and plants did not evolve to a point of sophistication and then gave rise to animals With all due respect, where are you getting your information from on evolution. Never mind, honestly, dont answer that

Sarah x

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

It isnt the least bit problematic. There are gaps in our knowledge for sure, but these are problems, the work continues and no evolutionary biologist feels the need to recourse to the divine.

I think he’s pointing out that it is a problem based on the fact evolution is proof positive of teleology thus evidence of design. Note, this is not the argument based on irreducible complexity but the fact of common regularities in evolution show an end goal or directed goal. Also note, it’s a complete philosophical argument that has little to do with biological properties. The framework of this argument is Aristotle’s four causes, which leads to the 5th proof of St. Aquinas.

 

[atheistgirl]

I think he’s pointing out that it is a problem based on the fact evolution is proof positive of teleology thus evidence of design.

I accept totally that those of a religious persuasion will see evidence of design and take that into their philosophical arguements.

But there is no evolutionary biologist sees or argues that within evolution they can see evidence of design.

In fact, the complete opposite is the case.

And you only have to look at the flaws with the human eye, ear, appendix, or even the pathways in the brain, to show clearly, that, despite such complex and wonderful organs, they are the eiptome of sloppiness in their design, and if they were designed, it would have to have been by a complete and total amateur.

 

[SteveVH]

I accept totally that those of a religious persuasion will see evidence of design and take that into their philosophical arguements.

But there is no evolutionary biologist sees or argues that within evolution they can see evidence of design.

In fact, the complete opposite is the case.

And you only have to look at the flaws with the human eye, ear, appendix, or even the pathways in the brain, to show clearly, that, despite such complex and wonderful organs, they are the eiptome of sloppiness in their design, and if they were designed, it would have to have been by a complete and total amateur.

I am absolutley dumbfounded by your comments. The very idea that the world around us, the seasons, the vegetation, the animals, and most especially human beings with a rational mind, with the ability to love, to recognize beauty, are all a happy accident caused by some chance meeting of certain chemicals swirling around in the universe is beyond imagination.

I will not go into all of the flaws in the evolutional theory; the frauds such as Pitdown Man, exposed in 1953 as a forgery, which consisted of the lower jawbone of an orangutan that had been deliberately combined with the skull of a fully developed modern human, or the famous moth shown in all of our science books which had purportedly changed its color due to coal dust, also found to be a fraud. To this day, no evidence has been brought forward to suggest any linkage between species (monkey to man); only theories.

I am sorry, but your comments are the height of arrogance. The organs of a human being are the epitome of sloppiness which would have had to be designed by a complete and total amateur? Well, I challenge you to create a simple blade of grass, much less an eye, or an ear or any another part of a living body. Do that, and then tell me how amatuerish is its design. This cannot be accomplished by our greatest experts, much less an amatuer. When you have accomplished this let me know and then I’ll take you seriously.

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

I accept totally that those of a religious persuasion will see evidence of design and take that into their philosophical arguements.

But there is no evolutionary biologist sees or argues that within evolution they can see evidence of design.

In fact, the complete opposite is the case.

And you only have to look at the flaws with the human eye, ear, appendix, or even the pathways in the brain, to show clearly, that, despite such complex and wonderful organs, they are the eiptome of sloppiness in their design, and if they were designed, it would have to have been by a complete and total amateur.

Yes but are you understanding this is not the typical ID argument, where some will say “the cell is so complex, it is evidence of design”? This argument says, “since evolution, an unconscious and unintelligible process, shows a directed goal, a final cause, of regularities where x (evolution, natural selection) is the efficient cause of y (complex life) and y is always the final cause of x and never anything else, an intelligent designer must exist.” It’s a template you can use for anything, just so happens we’re applying evolution to the format. I rather suggest books and articles on this subject but this 5 minute video on youtube seems to have reduced the argument fairly good: youtube.com/watch?v=v0iq5kR81MM

 

[LayingHands]

Good and VERY GOOD,

But my friend is Jesus too God?

And How are your sins forgiven? [Assumong that like the rest of us; you too have sinned?]

God Bless you, and thanks for your post.

Pat

Dear friend, of course our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of GOD, sent by GOD, to relay GOD’s love, liberation/salvation and those laws and processes to deliver one’s spirit soul on the return path back to GODHEAD. Remember, Jesus Christ always deferred to his FATHER, GOD. What did Jesus say was the greatest sin?

Everyone is forgiven by GOD. In GOD’s written incarnationed words, he says all the demigods can accept prayers and desires, request for forgiveness and mercy in miracles…however…even the demigods are controlled by GOD and he is the only one who decides everything for everyone…the Cause of ALL Causes…in this way, he insists we should always come directly to him, GOD, for everything,…GOD forgives or not, by his mercy…