T
Techno2000
Guest
Easy…very very slowly, millions… maybe billions of years.
Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true
- Status
B
Bradskii
Guest
M
Metis1
Guest
We can wear different “hats”, and being a mammal is one of them.
A
Aloysium
Guest
I’m trying to be as clear and as concise as I can be. They may be mutually exclusive.
I’m going try again in what follows, trying to clarify these points in reverse order.
Not so sure I’ve succeeded.
A
Aloysium
Guest
You and I exist. We exist as relational beings, which means that we can perceive and know the world around us.
The reader, here and now, can decide to skip the argument or try to understand it; it’s a choice, and what happens in the future will be affected in some small way, as a result of this act of will. Those future moments, as is this moment, will be happening in their moment. Everything happens “Now”, the place where Existence is.
All this is part of being human. No matter what is one’s genetic make-up, and no matter how that genome is expressed, one is human. We are all persons, and as such, we are unique in our existence. No one else, as much as we may share and empathize, experiences what is happening right here in the reader. No one else can replace our existence, although our roles might easily be filled by many others. These attributes can be understood as being inherent to humanity, of which each of us is a manifestation. A person is a spiritual soul, with the capacity to love, to give to others the gift that they have been given, that of themselves.
No animal possesses that kind of soul. They act instinctively; as complex and as learned as is their behaviour might be, it is reflexive within the context of their given limited world view. We can stand back and consider our choices, not only in terms of a so much greater understanding of how the world works, but also with respect to their significance within the spiritual structure of reality - the beauty and goodness inherent in the act and its consequences.
Animals which share in having mammary glands, exhibit similarities in their perceptual, emotional and behavioural nature that reflects this. They also may have have physical and psychological attributes that distinguished them from other kinds of mammals. As mammals share features in common with other life forms, we share some of theirs.
The entirety of all that is going on here, reaching out everywhere, we know in small part. Rather than considering it as just stuff, we can think of its reality as “information”, which the information that we carry in our minds reflects. In other words, reality informs the relationship we have with the world. And reality is structured along what we categorize as physical and psychological dimensions. There is one reality, but we can take different perspectives on it.
There exists a triune, relational, nature to everything, reflecting that of Existence itself. Atoms react with others, and together form complex molecules, whose shape gives them, their much more sophisticated behaviour. We don’t think of them as having souls, but they do truly exist in themselves. It’s the soul of a single cell that brings these molecular parts together into a new unity of being having very different properties than its constituents. As we go up the hierarchy of living forms, we see cells subsumed into greater wholes. We ourselves, here contemplating these ideas are, each of us, one whole entity, a person in relation to all space and time, and the eternal Ground of our being. At the same time we, maintaining our essential uniqueness, are one humanity, united in Love and broken in sin.
The reader, here and now, can decide to skip the argument or try to understand it; it’s a choice, and what happens in the future will be affected in some small way, as a result of this act of will. Those future moments, as is this moment, will be happening in their moment. Everything happens “Now”, the place where Existence is.
All this is part of being human. No matter what is one’s genetic make-up, and no matter how that genome is expressed, one is human. We are all persons, and as such, we are unique in our existence. No one else, as much as we may share and empathize, experiences what is happening right here in the reader. No one else can replace our existence, although our roles might easily be filled by many others. These attributes can be understood as being inherent to humanity, of which each of us is a manifestation. A person is a spiritual soul, with the capacity to love, to give to others the gift that they have been given, that of themselves.
No animal possesses that kind of soul. They act instinctively; as complex and as learned as is their behaviour might be, it is reflexive within the context of their given limited world view. We can stand back and consider our choices, not only in terms of a so much greater understanding of how the world works, but also with respect to their significance within the spiritual structure of reality - the beauty and goodness inherent in the act and its consequences.
Animals which share in having mammary glands, exhibit similarities in their perceptual, emotional and behavioural nature that reflects this. They also may have have physical and psychological attributes that distinguished them from other kinds of mammals. As mammals share features in common with other life forms, we share some of theirs.
The entirety of all that is going on here, reaching out everywhere, we know in small part. Rather than considering it as just stuff, we can think of its reality as “information”, which the information that we carry in our minds reflects. In other words, reality informs the relationship we have with the world. And reality is structured along what we categorize as physical and psychological dimensions. There is one reality, but we can take different perspectives on it.
There exists a triune, relational, nature to everything, reflecting that of Existence itself. Atoms react with others, and together form complex molecules, whose shape gives them, their much more sophisticated behaviour. We don’t think of them as having souls, but they do truly exist in themselves. It’s the soul of a single cell that brings these molecular parts together into a new unity of being having very different properties than its constituents. As we go up the hierarchy of living forms, we see cells subsumed into greater wholes. We ourselves, here contemplating these ideas are, each of us, one whole entity, a person in relation to all space and time, and the eternal Ground of our being. At the same time we, maintaining our essential uniqueness, are one humanity, united in Love and broken in sin.
Last edited:
B
Bradskii
Guest
Nope. Still broken. Try writing it as something that you would say to a guy in a bar.
S
Saint_Prince_Caspian
Guest
[First]
Evolution is the process of nature that living organisms came to be. The idea that there were certain processes that by science one would deduce how things came by processes of evolution, came to exist in the natural physical realm.
Which is fine. However, there’s an underpinning argument used with that.
Consider people from Africa who were used as slaves in the U.S. And, consider the perception of elite men that developed into the Triple-K society. Then again, consider Darwins Origin of Species, Adolf Hitler, Nietzche, and Freud. Combine all that. You look at through the view of evolution people’s as sub-par species to the human species. Or less than that. Later derived to be called: Neo-Social Darwinism.
The argument against Evolution isn’t so much the basis that it can perhaps be solidly deduced from science how organisms came to be. However, man for all that he is considered an evolutionary step from being an ape. To be said, man can arise above the ape’s and distinguish himself as to be above them. For if not, then he would not been able to looked at people from the Continent as sub-par and less than the human species.
Man has intellect. He has will. Those two characteristics separate him from the rest of the creatures on earth.
And he can separate himself from them.
It might be worth holding on account what is True in Genesis. And it truly comes by this truth: Adam named the species. None of the species could name each other. But Adam could. He also could arise above them. Wherefore, they could not arise above him, and say: This we shall call a homosapien.
Those are characteristics that are observable. Tangible. Evident. Adam, in the story, is man’s ability to distinguish himself apart from the creatures.
If evolutionary processes is how he came by to do that. Then so be it!
But nevertheless, he is not one of them.
There’s a danger of pride. When man arises above the species, he may also arise above other men. And hence, Communism followed, and Socialism its’ endeavor, to combat certain prideful people. Though this uses evolution for this purpose.
This is another distinction of man: Sin. He can do harm to his neighbor, willfully, not by instinct. He has freewill by intellect how he so chooses to distinguish himself.
Animals cannot, no matter how many evolutionary cycles they’ve gone through. They cannot condemn, they cannot sin. They cannot do evil. They cannot wage wars. They cannot inherit a court of Justice. No matter how brutish man might come to be, he cannot truly de-evolve, either. He might take some brutish inheritance among himself. But, he cannot reverse the evolutionary process, and claim he did this as an animal. Since those characteristics just do not exist anymore. Man is accountable, and culpable. He is guilty. Unlike the birds and beasts.
Thus, evolution cannot accel then to the higher endeavor of conscience and a soul. That means there’s something quite different to man. Something the evolutionary cycles cannot welcome, a human soul. With conscience and guilt. Also depicted with the serpent and temptation one Adam, and one Eve. And the further entailing of Cain who killed his brother Abel.
Evolution is the process of nature that living organisms came to be. The idea that there were certain processes that by science one would deduce how things came by processes of evolution, came to exist in the natural physical realm.
Which is fine. However, there’s an underpinning argument used with that.
Consider people from Africa who were used as slaves in the U.S. And, consider the perception of elite men that developed into the Triple-K society. Then again, consider Darwins Origin of Species, Adolf Hitler, Nietzche, and Freud. Combine all that. You look at through the view of evolution people’s as sub-par species to the human species. Or less than that. Later derived to be called: Neo-Social Darwinism.
The argument against Evolution isn’t so much the basis that it can perhaps be solidly deduced from science how organisms came to be. However, man for all that he is considered an evolutionary step from being an ape. To be said, man can arise above the ape’s and distinguish himself as to be above them. For if not, then he would not been able to looked at people from the Continent as sub-par and less than the human species.
Man has intellect. He has will. Those two characteristics separate him from the rest of the creatures on earth.
And he can separate himself from them.
It might be worth holding on account what is True in Genesis. And it truly comes by this truth: Adam named the species. None of the species could name each other. But Adam could. He also could arise above them. Wherefore, they could not arise above him, and say: This we shall call a homosapien.
Those are characteristics that are observable. Tangible. Evident. Adam, in the story, is man’s ability to distinguish himself apart from the creatures.
If evolutionary processes is how he came by to do that. Then so be it!
But nevertheless, he is not one of them.
There’s a danger of pride. When man arises above the species, he may also arise above other men. And hence, Communism followed, and Socialism its’ endeavor, to combat certain prideful people. Though this uses evolution for this purpose.
This is another distinction of man: Sin. He can do harm to his neighbor, willfully, not by instinct. He has freewill by intellect how he so chooses to distinguish himself.
Animals cannot, no matter how many evolutionary cycles they’ve gone through. They cannot condemn, they cannot sin. They cannot do evil. They cannot wage wars. They cannot inherit a court of Justice. No matter how brutish man might come to be, he cannot truly de-evolve, either. He might take some brutish inheritance among himself. But, he cannot reverse the evolutionary process, and claim he did this as an animal. Since those characteristics just do not exist anymore. Man is accountable, and culpable. He is guilty. Unlike the birds and beasts.
Thus, evolution cannot accel then to the higher endeavor of conscience and a soul. That means there’s something quite different to man. Something the evolutionary cycles cannot welcome, a human soul. With conscience and guilt. Also depicted with the serpent and temptation one Adam, and one Eve. And the further entailing of Cain who killed his brother Abel.
E
Edgar
Guest
I could very well ask you the same question, as you have misundestood my post - evidenced by your link to an article on "natural selection. I never claimed natural selection is random … I didn’t even mention natural selection! What I said was, evolution is ultimately a random process.
The process of natural selection (which is not random) is a slave to environment conditions (which are random). If environmental conditions change, natural selection responds by selecting organisms that are best suited to the new conditions. Therefore, environmental conditions ultimately determine which direction evolution takes, which means the results of evolution are random, because enviromental conditions are random.
Last edited:
E
Edgar
Guest
- In Heaven, one can hear the screams of loved ones being eternally tortured? That doesn’t sound like much of a Heaven! I think those who make it to Heaven probably won’t even be aware that Hell exists, let hear what goes on there.
- God doesn’t torture anyone in Hell, let alone forever. As far as I know, Hell is being eternally cut of from God and therefore everything He has created - which I interpret as being in eternal darkness, silence and solitude. I hope no one ends up there.
Well, I have a different take on what happens after death (not that I’d know; I just guessing): Our memories are stored in our brain cells, so after death, we will have no memories at all of this life - not even the smallest detail.
Furthermore, in Heaven nothing sinful can exist, and that includes all memores of this life and this world, which are corrupted by original sin. Therefore we will not remember who we are now, nor will we remember any loved ones from this life. But we will not miss or grieve any loved ones as we will have no memories of them at all - we will not even remember that we lived this life. So Heaven will indeed be like being “born again”. The slate of life will be wiped completely clean.
No one in Heaven will feel sorrow for anyone in Hell, because not only will they have no memories of loved ones from this life, they won’t even be aware that Hell exists.
“Behold, the dwelling of God is with men. He will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself will be with them; he will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away” - Revelation 21:3.
What’s your point?
Last edited:
R
rossum
Guest
Luke 16:22-26. Lazarus in heaven and the rich man in hell can talk to each other. Those in heaven can hear those in hell.
Your memories are part of you. If you lost your memory you would not remember your family, your friends, your whole life. You would not be you. See “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” for details.
Mindless forces with no intelligence can distinguish between different characteristics. Gravity can do it for large and small mass, karma can do it for good, neutral and evil actions.
A
Aloysium
Guest
Let’s see the post had to do with kinds of things, classifications, mammals, evolution, genetics, that sort of stuff. So how about:
What do you get if you cross an elephant with a rhino? 'ell if I know!
A
Aloysium
Guest
I would say that this life is a state of journeying to what we will ourselves to be, as we participate in the creation of our eternal selves. As a unity of matter and spirit, a memory has a neurological component, but what it seeks to express is that life, up to that point in time, the totality of which exists in eternity, known by God. There’s an interesting book by a neursurgeon who experienced a near death experience. What is relevant to this conversation is that what he went through, occurred when his brain was too sick to construct memories; yet he remembers. This is likely a grace, but it tells me that the memories we form, are messages from ourselves to ourselves and others, and that the source of the memory remains, even after the death of our bodies. In the end, what we are in reality, is what God knows we are, and that would be the final judegement, with no self-deceptions. The person we are, has all the details included in one whole life, which we now experience in bits and pieces. The totality of this life would be the living seed from which we will be brought forth in the final resurrection of the dead. That’s what I think, anyway.
Last edited:
N
Neithan
Guest
Thank you, that is so well stated.
This is a huge thread and I haven’t read it all, but, I don’t really get the opposition to evolution. So-called Darwinism, yes, but that’s an old, obsolete interpretation of the data. The big bang theory was first hypothesized by a Belgian priest in the early 20th century, and posits that the universe expanded from a singularity. All of natural existence evolved without visible intervention from a supernatural source; but that source is demonstrably necessary. It was one of Aquinas’ objections to the existence of God that nature appears to operate without divine intervention (Objection 2); but his reply is that everything, material and spiritual, is traced back to a “self-necessary first principle.” It’s a brilliant point, and also shows something of the underlying metaphysics that eventually developed the scientific method.
This is a huge thread and I haven’t read it all, but, I don’t really get the opposition to evolution. So-called Darwinism, yes, but that’s an old, obsolete interpretation of the data. The big bang theory was first hypothesized by a Belgian priest in the early 20th century, and posits that the universe expanded from a singularity. All of natural existence evolved without visible intervention from a supernatural source; but that source is demonstrably necessary. It was one of Aquinas’ objections to the existence of God that nature appears to operate without divine intervention (Objection 2); but his reply is that everything, material and spiritual, is traced back to a “self-necessary first principle.” It’s a brilliant point, and also shows something of the underlying metaphysics that eventually developed the scientific method.
Last edited:
T
Techno2000
Guest
No, Lazarus was in the upper part of the Netherworld (Abraham’s bosom/ sheol/Hades ) the rich man was in the lower part.
R
rossum
Guest
Your interpretation differs from mine.
B
buffalo
Guest
Memories in heaven? Surely there are. The point is you will be so overjoyed and focused on the beatific vision you will leave them behind.
A
Aloysium
Guest
Here are a few of the issues that I see:
- It depends on the meaning of the term “evolution”. There is no issue with finches developing larger and stronger beaks, bacteria becoming resistant to antibiotics, or genetic damage being passed on to future generations. This is all accounted for in the built in properties of organisms, which remain the kind of living being that they are, in spite of these changes.
- Events that are considered to randomly have happened, are actually intended. The shapes of proteins, for example, which is produced by the order of amino acids, is what determines the role they play in the structure and physiology of the cell. What we have discovered, that we ourselves cannot independently replicate, let alone have invented, is way too complex to have occurred in very small steps happening on their own, without an over-riding ordering principle, force or agent. They clearly have been engineered or designed.
- Where there is randomness, at what level of interactions does it occur. Clearly this does not occur at a molecular level; atoms and other forces, doing what they do, are chaotic to the order inherent in living forms. There is randomness in the sense of what people may refer to as a genetic lottery, the bite of a mosquito carrying the zika virus, or stuff that just naturally changes as it is supposed to and makes even “identical twins” not actually identical.
- What makes something what it is, is more than its physical structure. Everything exists as itself, even atoms, and participates within a larger system, that itself can be one whole unity. What makes anything one being from the component parts, we may call the soul, which establishes a new set of interaction between that new being and what is other to it. This occurs on a physical dimension, where we see living things incorporate matter outside themselves in order to grow and reproduce. There is additionally, a growing psychological dimension of perceptions, feelings, forms of understanding, and behaviour that accompanies creatures as we move up the hierarchy of life. When we get to humankind, there are addition spiritual qualities, which make us unique among other life forms. None of this could or did evolve, but was created, one step at a time.
- Natural selection is a misnomer. Living things were created as parts of the larger environment, which they form, through their interactions, and grounded in the earth with its air and water, and heated by the sun. When they can’t establish a viable relationship within that frameqwork, they will perish; death is hardly a creative process.
- There is a holism to nature that inspires awe in all those who venture beyond the realm of ideas, and participate in its reality. More than having just a utlitarian function, the capacity of organisms to diversify was built into the first of their kind, to produce works of beauty.
Last edited:
A
Aloysium
Guest
You shouldn’t have asked:
- My understanding is that creation came about in steps, where each layer of being, light being the first, was utilized to create a next level of existence, each new form of existence, more complex than the constituent parts that belonged to the previous one, thereby building a universe of different kinds of things, from atoms and molecules, to simple single cell creatures, to plants, to animals, to we ourselves, with the capacity for transcendence. This did not evolve and not always has been, but was created where there was nothing.
- Since I am speaking to Catholics, rather than atheists, one more point is in order. We are today dealing with a fallen world. Death reigned prior to Christ’s coming and still has the upper hand for a while as creation, through us, in Christ, journeys into the joys of right relationship, love, with God. The roots of existence in this world were damaged in an original fall of the angels, who were to carry out God’s will, and secondly our own, we who were created to tend to God’s garden, a destiny which through Christ we will fulfill. Spiritual truth contains the physical, and where our understanding strays from it, what we believe will be a lie.
T
Techno2000
Guest
Heaven was closed to man, until Jesus made himself the sacrificial lamb and died.Techno2000:
Your interpretation differs from mine.
R
rossum
Guest
My local Rabbi tells me differently.
- Status