Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

At Evolution News: Recognizing Providence in the History of Life Is a Hint About Our Own Lives

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

An arena of fine-tuning we can all appreciate, not quantitatively but qualitatively, is how in most events of our lives, things go right, when there are so many more ways that they could go wrong. Just consider how most of the time we arrive safely to where we’re going when we take a trip by car, even in rush-hour traffic. Or, how electricity keeps flowing to our homes, without which we’d be pushed quickly into survival mode. Or how our sense of balance facilitates efficient movement of our physical bodies throughout the day.

David Klinghoffer gives his perspective on this topic, reaching a different conclusion than Dartmouth College physicist Marcelo Gleiser.

Dartmouth College physicist Marcelo Gleiser, writing at Big Think, asks, “Does life on Earth have a purpose?” Obviously, this is more than just a scientific question. It’s a very personal one for each of us. Given the venue, Gleiser’s answer of course is going to be no.

Gleiser’s own case rests on the part played by chance in life’s history. For example, the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs:

If we changed one or more of the dramatic events in Earth’s history — say, the cataclysmic impact of the asteroid that helped eliminate the dinosaurs 66 million years ago — life’s history on Earth would also change. We probably would not be here asking about life’s purpose. The lesson from life is simple: In Nature, creation and destruction dance together. But there is no choreographer.

His argument: The Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction cleared the field for mammals, allowing ultimately for the rise of “intelligent, technology-savvy humans.” No asteroid –> no humans. The asteroid was a chance, unchoreographed event. Therefore, says Dr. Gleiser, no “choreographer” intended our existence.

The Role of Providence

This is a remarkably shallow conclusion. As luck would have it (if you want to put it that way), I’ve been thinking about the role of providence, as I see it, in my own path of life. Any of us can point to certain pivotal events in our past — a seemingly chance meeting, a piece of advice received, an idea that came to us unbidden — that need not have occurred, but did. And because they did, we found the path to our current place (marriage, relationships, friendships, work, the whole thing) laid out before us.

Gleiser’s argument about the history of life is just a separate application of the depressing view that denies anything in our life paths could have been intended for us. That the view is depressing doesn’t mean that it is mistaken. That it can be asserted doesn’t mean that it is correct.

Purposeful Information

To decide about providence in the rise of complex life, you would have to look at a much wider suite of evidences than the fact that an asteroid doomed the dinosaurs. Scientific proponents of intelligent design have done this, noting vast evidence of extraordinarily careful tuning in physics, chemistry, and biology, from the Big Bang itself, to the origin of life, to the series of biological “big bangs” through which bursts of purposeful information infused the biosphere. 

The most recent treatments of this theme include biologist Michael Denton’s The Miracle of Man and philosopher of science Stephen Meyer’s Return of the God Hypothesis. Meyer’s book points to three scientific discoveries that demand a conclusion of purpose behind the cosmos (that the universe has a beginning, that it was fine-tuned for life from the start, that life is a form of information-processing technology). On the radical discontinuities in evolution that bespeak purpose and creativity, see Meyer and paleontologist Günter Bechly’s chapter (“The Fossil Record and Universal Common Ancestry”) in the volume Theistic Evolution.

“The Wheel Has Turned”

From a different perspective, Denton explains this beautifully and profoundly. What Gleiser terms “intelligent, technology-savvy humans” are exactly what almost countless coincidences in nature have been set just so in order to permit. As Dr. Denton has written here about this “prior fitness” for human beings, creatures capable of manipulating fire, and therefore of engaging in technological invention:

Even though many mysteries remain, we can now, in these first decades of the 21st century, at last answer with confidence Thomas Huxley’s question of questions as to “the place which mankind occupies in nature and of his relations to the universe of things.” As matters stand, the evidence increasingly points to a natural order uniquely fit for life on Earth and for beings of a biology close to that of humans, a view which does not prove but is entirely consistent with the traditional Judeo-Christian framework….

“Mysteries remain,” as Denton acknowledges. Yet, “The wheel has turned.” Modern science calls us to recognize the role of providence in the history of the cosmos, of our planet, and of life. If that is true in cosmology and biology, it’s a hint that it might be true, too, on the far smaller scale of our individual biographies.

Full article at Evolution News.
Comments
Bornagain77: But I am not talking to fellow Christians right now. I am talking to you. A Darwinian atheist who holds the patently false belief that humans are merely a “big bag of skin full of biomolecules”, i.e. nothing but ‘meat robots’. Lucky you! It is a complicated topic I think. Especially considering that something like one-quarter to one-third of all human conceptions are naturally aborted in the first trimester (someone designed a very wasteful system!). I would never, ever suggest that my own personal opinions should count more than any other. However, since you seem to be stalking me in order to get my personal opinion (which is a bit creepy) I would propose to start with abortions being legal for the first trimester (probably below the English Common Law standard since 'the quickening' is estimated to be about four to six months in) and put that up to a vote of the public or at least a wide-spread general discussion and see what kind of response you get.JVL
August 12, 2022
August
08
Aug
12
12
2022
07:49 AM
7
07
49
AM
PDT
"You should stop worrying about the atheists and start considering trying to convince your fellow Christians who disagree with you to come around to your point of view." But I am not talking to fellow Christians right now. I am talking to you. A Darwinian atheist who holds the patently false belief that humans are merely a “big bag of skin full of biomolecules”, i.e. nothing but 'meat robots'.
“You are robots made out of meat. Which is what I am going to try to convince you of today” Jerry Coyne – No, You’re Not a Robot Made Out of Meat (Science Uprising 02) – video https://youtu.be/rQo6SWjwQIk?list=PLR8eQzfCOiS1OmYcqv_yQSpje4p7rAE7-&t=20
bornagain77
August 12, 2022
August
08
Aug
12
12
2022
07:34 AM
7
07
34
AM
PDT
Bornagain77: But of course you didn’t mention them because you are far more interested in propaganda than you are in truth. If the sheer number of Christians who support some form of abortion outnumbers the sheer number of atheists who support some form of abortion then those Christians are more of a problem for you (because of their numbers and that you profess to believe in the same scriptures) than a few atheists because if the Christians were united the atheist opinion would be inconsequential. As it was in the early 1800s when early term abortion (before 'the quickening') was consider legal in the UK and the US having been a staple of British Common Law before that. And, as I pointed out, some Christians thinkers, including some Popes, agreed with that. You should stop worrying about the atheists and start considering trying to convince your fellow Christians who disagree with you to come around to your point of view. You'd have such a vast majority if you could accomplish this that you could (attempt to) legally outflank any atheist opinion that differed from yours. From: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/25/key-findings-about-americans-belief-in-god/
The vast majority of Americans (90%) believe in some kind of higher power, with 56% professing faith in God as described in the Bible and another 33% saying they believe in another type of higher power or spiritual force. Only one-in-ten Americans say they don’t believe in God or a higher power of any kind.
56% believe in God as depicted in the Bible. That's a majority. 10% are atheists. And you care what that 10% think over trying to unify the Christians?JVL
August 12, 2022
August
08
Aug
12
12
2022
06:34 AM
6
06
34
AM
PDT
JVL: "I didn’t say a larger percentage, I said MORE Christians than atheists support some forms of abortion. I didn’t say anything about dismemberment abortions." But of course you didn't mention them because you are far more interested in propaganda than you are in truth. It is the price you pay for trying to maintain an atheistic worldview. Yet, actual percentages would reveal a much clearer picture since Christians greatly outnumber atheists in America. i.e. A relatively small percentage of Christians who have been misled and support all forms of abortion, including dismemberment abortions, could easily swamp the number derived from a much larger percentage of atheists who support all forms of abortion, including dismemberment abortions. My bet is that, since atheists don't believe in the reality of souls, then the percentage of Darwinian atheists who believe in all forms of abortion, including dismemberment abortions, will be much higher than the percentage of Christians who do the same. The reason I believe this is because, in the following study, it was found that people who do not believe in a soul, and/or God, have a higher tendency towards "the primary psychopathic trait of callous affect"..
A scientific case for conceptual dualism: The problem of consciousness and the opposing domains hypothesis. - Anthony I. Jack - 2013 Excerpt page 18: we predicted that psychopaths would not be able to perceive the problem of consciousness.,, In a series of five experiments (Jack, in preparation), we found a highly replicable and robust negative correlation (r~-0.34) between belief in dualism and the primary psychopathic trait of callous affect7. Page 24: Clearly these findings fit well with the hypothesis (Robbins and Jack, 2006) that psychopaths can’t see the problem of consciousness8. Taking these findings together with other work on dehumanization and the anti-social effects of denying the soul and free will, they present a powerful picture. When we see persons, that is, when we see others as fellow humans, then our percept is of something essentially non-physical nature. This feature of our psychology appears to be relevant to a number of other philosophical issues, including the tension between utilitarian principles and deontological concerns about harming persons (Jack et al., accepted), the question of whether God exists (Jack et al., under review-b), and the problem of free will9. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-scientific-case-for-conceptual-dualism%3A-The-of-Jack/ea4d00aa942eb9f5b951144bd2baa5fa71aca50c Anthony Jack, Why Don't Psychopaths Believe in Dualism? – video (14:22 minute mark) http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUmmObUi8Fq9g1Zcuzqbt0_g&feature=player_detailpage&v=XRGWe-61zOk#t=862s The phenomenal stance - Philip Robbins & Anthony I. Jack - 2006 Abstract: Cognitive science is shamelessly materialistic. It maintains that human beings are nothing more than complex physical systems, ultimately and completely explicable in mechanistic terms. But this conception of humanity does not fit well with common sense. To think of the creatures we spend much of our day loving, hating, admiring, resenting, comparing ourselves to, trying to understand, blaming, and thanking -- to think of them as mere mechanisms seems at best counterintuitive and unhelpful. More often it may strike us as ludicrous, or even abhorrent.,,, http://philpapers.org/rec/ROBTPS
In short, if you really do believe the Darwinian lie that people are just 'meat-robots' with no soul then you are, obviously, going to be more callous and uncaring towards them.
Darwin’s Robots: When Evolutionary Materialists Admit that Their Own Worldview Fails Nancy Pearcey - April 23, 2015 Excerpt: When I teach these concepts in the classroom, an example my students find especially poignant is Flesh and Machines by Rodney Brooks, professor emeritus at MIT. Brooks writes that a human being is nothing but a machine — a “big bag of skin full of biomolecules” interacting by the laws of physics and chemistry. In ordinary life, of course, it is difficult to actually see people that way. But, he says, “When I look at my children, I can, when I force myself, … see that they are machines.” Is that how he treats them, though? Of course not: “That is not how I treat them…. I interact with them on an entirely different level. They have my unconditional love, the furthest one might be able to get from rational analysis.” Certainly if what counts as “rational” is a materialist worldview in which humans are machines, then loving your children is irrational. It has no basis within Brooks’s worldview. It sticks out of his box. How does he reconcile such a heart-wrenching cognitive dissonance? He doesn’t. Brooks ends by saying, “I maintain two sets of inconsistent beliefs.” He has given up on any attempt to reconcile his theory with his experience. He has abandoned all hope for a unified, logically consistent worldview. https://evolutionnews.org/2015/04/when_evolutiona/
Moreover, aside from the 'practical' benefit of believing in God and a soul, (i.e. the practical benefit of not being a psychopath and being more caring and loving towards fellow human beings), I can also appeal to advances in quantum biology to support the reality of the immaterial soul. July 2022 - Personally, I consider these recent findings from quantum biology to rival all other scientific discoveries over the past century. Surpassing even the discovery of a beginning of the universe, via Big Bang cosmology, in terms of scientific, theological, and even personal, significance. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/life-from-a-rock/#comment-761848 As Jesus once asked his disciples and a crowd of followers, “Is anything worth more than your soul?”
Mark 8:37 Is anything worth more than your soul?
bornagain77
August 12, 2022
August
08
Aug
12
12
2022
05:21 AM
5
05
21
AM
PDT
Bornagain77: While I certainly do not dispute that a lot of Christians, and people in general, have been led astray by deceptive abortion propaganda, and many Christians, and people in general, have supported positions they ought not to have supported, can you cite the specific study showing that a larger percentage of Christians than atheists support dismemberment abortions in particular? I didn't say a larger percentage, I said MORE Christians than atheists support some forms of abortion. I didn't say anything about dismemberment abortions. Why did I say that? It's common sense really. In the early 1800 in the US and the UK abortions up until 'the quickening' were consider routine and certainly not illegal. I'm guessing that there weren't many atheists around at the time and Darwin wasn't even born until 1809. So, it's clear that most Christians, at the time, supported abortions before 'the quickening'. I mentioned all this several times but I guess you just ignored that. Also, considering that early term abortion still has fairly wide-spread support in the US and the UK now and considering that atheists are still a fairly small proportion of the population then it's pretty clear that more Christians than atheists support early term abortion. Here's a fairly recent news story laying out some of the more recent polling results: https://www.deseret.com/2022/5/6/23058730/the-under-discussed-middle-ground-in-the-abortion-debate-pew-research-abortion-survey
Overall, around 6 in 10 U.S. adults (61%) believe abortion should be legal with some or no exceptions. But many members of this group say laws should take the length of the pregnancy into account and that abortion providers should notify the parents or guardians of patients under age 18.
“About a third of Americans who generally support legal abortion (33%) say the statement, ‘Human life begins at conception, so a fetus is a person with rights,’ describes their own view at least ‘somewhat’ well,” researchers noted.
So, even amongst those who think life begins at conception, some still support some abortions.
Pew found that just 27% of Americans hold an absolutist view. Eight percent say abortion should be illegal in all cases with no exceptions, while 19% say it should be legal in all cases.
So, in fact, only 8% of Americans think abortion should be illegal in all cases. That means a lot of Christians think some abortions should be allowed. Clearly.
Other Protestants and Catholics “tend to be less opposed to legal abortion than white evangelicals, but they are also less supportive of it than religious ‘nones,’” researchers noted.
I suspect there are lots of other surveys with similar results.JVL
August 12, 2022
August
08
Aug
12
12
2022
03:12 AM
3
03
12
AM
PDT
JVL: "You’re just trying to prove your point. I’m not disputing your point. I’m pointing out that a lot more Christians than atheists have and do dispute your point" HUH??? What in the world are you trying to say? My main 'point' has been to get you to be honest with yourself and others and admit that it is blatantly obvious that it is objectively wrong to rip apart unborn babies limb from limb via dismemberment abortions. Yet you claimed that "a lot more Christians than atheists have and do dispute your point". Really? While I certainly do not dispute that a lot of Christians, and people in general, have been led astray by deceptive abortion propaganda, and many Christians, and people in general, have supported positions they ought not to have supported, can you cite the specific study showing that a larger percentage of Christians than atheists support dismemberment abortions in particular? i.e. support ripping unborn babies apart limb from limb?? To repeat, most Americans simply do not have a real clue, (both morally and physically), as to the horror of what is actually going on behind the scenes in the abortion industry,
These Irish Eyes Don’t Blink Excerpt: the abortion “House of Horrors,” as the Philadelphia Women’s Medical Society at 3801 Lancaster Avenue came to be known, was also discovered quite by accident.,,, They walked into a veritable waking nightmare.,,, ,,, The most powerful testimonies in the trial, Ann said, were those of the abortion doctors themselves when describing what constituted “a good, legal abortion.” Nearly everyone on the jury was pro-choice at the outset, but some let out audible gasps as an expert witness abortionist explained in detail what she did. Nor was it just Phelim, Ann, and jury members who would reexamine their views. “Prosecutors, several journalists, and even Gosnell’s own lawyer ultimately experienced changes of heart and mind,” Ann wrote. “Basically, once you find out the truth about abortion, you drop the pro-choice easy narrative very quickly,” says Phelim. “Abortion is like an article of faith for some people, you know? They don’t think about it, but they just are pro-abortion. I’ll tell you, their faith was shattered. Everyone’s faith was shattered.” http://www.salvomag.com/new/articles/salvo42/these-irish-eyes-dont-blink.php Dismemberment Abortion – Patrina Mosley, M.A. Dismemberment abortions are a common and brutal type of abortion that involve dismembering a living unborn child piece by piece. According to the National Abortion Federation’s abortion training textbook, dismemberment abortions are a preferred method of abortion, in part because they are cheaper than other available methods.1 (2018) https://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF18F25.pdf 100 million views: People respond to the viral ‘Abortion Procedures’ videos Excerpt: In these videos, Dr. Levatino, who committed over 1,200 abortions before becoming pro-life, explains in detail what occurs when the life of a preborn child is destroyed during an abortion during the 1st, 2nd and 3rd trimesters. Each of the Abortion Procedures videos describes in detail how each abortion procedure is carried out and how the preborn child dies. The realization of abortion’s barbarity, cruelty, and inhumanity has impacted many viewers who were not expecting to see what they saw.,,, https://www.liveaction.org/news/live-action-abortion-procedures-impact/ Abortion Procedures: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Trimesters https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFZDhM5Gwhk Watch (pro-choice) minds (immediately) change on abortion (after watching the abortion procedures video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xWQHhqOAcg Abby Johnson Discusses Why She Left Planned Parenthood At The 2020 RNC | NBC News, (she witnessed a dismemberment abortion first hand) https://youtu.be/NXQjCuWFdzI?t=100 Michael Egnor – The Junk Science of the Abortion Lobby (Fetuses not only experience pain but experience it more intensely than do adults) https://mindmatters.ai/2019/01/the-junk-science-of-the-abortion-lobby/
bornagain77
August 12, 2022
August
08
Aug
12
12
2022
02:14 AM
2
02
14
AM
PDT
Bornagain77: But alas, I have now questioned you repeatedly specifically about your opinion. So your opinion is most definitely in question. By you! But my opinion has nothing to do with the situation in the US (I don't live here, I don't vote there) or even in the UK (I'm not a citizen, I can't vote on such things here). You're just trying to prove your point. I'm not disputing your point. I'm pointing out that a lot more Christians than atheists have and do dispute your point and you should consider unifying your Christian house.JVL
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
10:40 PM
10
10
40
PM
PDT
Q at 144, "You should know by now that you won’t get an answer." Even after debating atheists for a few decades now, I am still shocked at how intellectually dishonest atheists can be with themselves and others. As the old saying goes, "there are none so blind as those who refuse to see."bornagain77
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
04:33 PM
4
04
33
PM
PDT
correction: I was far too general in my claim that, "The first two positions are positions that are currently legal in all left leaning states and also legal in quite a few right leaning states." Here is the current list on State Bans on Abortion Throughout Pregnancy https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-policies-later-abortionsbornagain77
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
04:28 PM
4
04
28
PM
PDT
Bornagain77 @143,
So again JVL, I ask you, “Are you for ‘dismemberment’ abortions? If not, why not? Are you for abortion up until birth? If not, why not? Are you for infanticide of the handicapped? If not, why not?”
You should know by now that you won't get an answer. But here's an even better question. "How do you feel about the modest proposal for human tissue designated as "medical waste" being repurposed and recycled as an important and overlooked source of nutritious protein for the exploited, starving people of the world?" I've never received a straight answer on this question either! -QQuerius
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
04:19 PM
4
04
19
PM
PDT
JVL ,"If you don’t see the confusion that arises from different Christians having different opinions about whether or not early term abortion is murder then I don’t know what to say. My opinion is not what’s in question here. But alas, I have now questioned you repeatedly specifically about your opinion. So your opinion is most definitely in question. Moreover, I did not question you about early term abortion. But I asked you specifically about, let us say, far less grey areas than argumentative early term abortions. I specifically asked, "Are you for ‘dismemberment’ abortions? If not, why not? Are you for abortion up until birth? If not, why not? Are you for infanticide of the handicapped? If not, why not?" The first two positions are positions that are currently legal in all left leaning states and also legal in quite a few right leaning states. The third position is what Princeton bio-ethicist Peter Singer currently argues for, via his Darwinian morality(see post 67). I hold that the reason you refuse to honestly answer the simple questions that I put to you is because you intuitively know that it is objectively wrong to kill 'late-term' babies in such a gruesome manner as dismemberment abortion. Shoot, it is downright psychopathic. And yet if you honestly admitted to ANY objective moral standard of right and wrong, i.e. that ripping living babies limb from limb is objectively wrong, then you know that, as an atheist, is for you to admit that your 'subjective-moral' position of atheism is false.
Premise 1: If God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist. Premise 2: Objective moral values and duties do exist. Conclusion: Therefore, God exists. The Moral Argument – drcraigvideos – video https://youtu.be/OxiAikEk2vU?t=276
And to repeat post 68, most Americans simply do not have a real clue, (both morally and physically), as to the horror of what is actually going on behind the scenes in the abortion industry,
These Irish Eyes Don’t Blink Excerpt: the abortion “House of Horrors,” as the Philadelphia Women’s Medical Society at 3801 Lancaster Avenue came to be known, was also discovered quite by accident.,,, They walked into a veritable waking nightmare.,,, ,,, The most powerful testimonies in the trial, Ann said, were those of the abortion doctors themselves when describing what constituted “a good, legal abortion.” Nearly everyone on the jury was pro-choice at the outset, but some let out audible gasps as an expert witness abortionist explained in detail what she did. Nor was it just Phelim, Ann, and jury members who would reexamine their views. “Prosecutors, several journalists, and even Gosnell’s own lawyer ultimately experienced changes of heart and mind,” Ann wrote. “Basically, once you find out the truth about abortion, you drop the pro-choice easy narrative very quickly,” says Phelim. “Abortion is like an article of faith for some people, you know? They don’t think about it, but they just are pro-abortion. I’ll tell you, their faith was shattered. Everyone’s faith was shattered.” http://www.salvomag.com/new/articles/salvo42/these-irish-eyes-dont-blink.php
,,, yet, even though most Americans have no real clue what is really going on behind the scenes in the abortion industry, If a psychopath did to a child what the abortion industry routinely does to unborn children, via ‘dismemberment’ abortions, the psychopath would be sentenced to death, and/or life in prison, and the vast majority of people in America would agree wholeheartedly with that punishment.
Dismemberment Abortion – Patrina Mosley, M.A. Dismemberment abortions are a common and brutal type of abortion that involve dismembering a living unborn child piece by piece. According to the National Abortion Federation’s abortion training textbook, dismemberment abortions are a preferred method of abortion, in part because they are cheaper than other available methods.1 (2018) https://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF18F25.pdf 100 million views: People respond to the viral ‘Abortion Procedures’ videos Excerpt: In these videos, Dr. Levatino, who committed over 1,200 abortions before becoming pro-life, explains in detail what occurs when the life of a preborn child is destroyed during an abortion during the 1st, 2nd and 3rd trimesters. Each of the Abortion Procedures videos describes in detail how each abortion procedure is carried out and how the preborn child dies. The realization of abortion’s barbarity, cruelty, and inhumanity has impacted many viewers who were not expecting to see what they saw.,,, https://www.liveaction.org/news/live-action-abortion-procedures-impact/ Abortion Procedures: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Trimesters https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFZDhM5Gwhk Watch (pro-choice) minds (immediately) change on abortion (after watching the abortion procedures video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xWQHhqOAcg Abby Johnson Discusses Why She Left Planned Parenthood At The 2020 RNC | NBC News, (she witnessed a dismemberment abortion first hand) https://youtu.be/NXQjCuWFdzI?t=100 Michael Egnor – The Junk Science of the Abortion Lobby (Fetuses not only experience pain but experience it more intensely than do adults) https://mindmatters.ai/2019/01/the-junk-science-of-the-abortion-lobby/
So again JVL, I ask you, "Are you for ‘dismemberment’ abortions? If not, why not? Are you for abortion up until birth? If not, why not? Are you for infanticide of the handicapped? If not, why not?"bornagain77
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
02:14 PM
2
02
14
PM
PDT
JVL at 141, In the Catholic Church, it's all very clear. I cannot speak for other Christian denominations. Those outside the faith have been working very hard to distort Catholic teaching and to bring some Catholics into error. That cannot be ignored. Outsiders working to turn believers away from the truth through subtle arguments and some more overt. Pope Francis is aware of the need for Christian unity, as described here: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2021-01/pope-francis-general-audience-christian-unity-grace.htmlrelatd
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
12:37 PM
12
12
37
PM
PDT
Relatd: It appears that the core of your argument is: “CHRISTIANS AREN”T PERFECT !!! OH MY DARWIN !!!” My query is: why is there no unified and clear moral and ethical standard within the Christian church regarding abortion? Could it be that the God-give morals and ethics are not that clear? If your own house isn't in agreement then why are you berating those outside the faith? There are more Christians than non-Christians; if you were unified you'd win hands down.JVL
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
12:02 PM
12
12
02
PM
PDT
Asauber: Sure JVL, just blame Christians. What else is there to do with your time? You’re a Chatty Troll with no off button. You don't think there's a theological confusion when Christians disagree on the same important issue over centuries? Could it be that the God-given morals and ethics are completely clear on the topic? I'm not blaming anyone. I'm just saying your own house isn't in agreement. Maybe you should talk amongst yourselves first before you start berating those not in the faith.JVL
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
11:58 AM
11
11
58
AM
PDT
Bornagain77: But more importantly, are you, in so many words, finally honestly admitting the blatantly self-evident truth that it is objectively morally wrong to kill you own children on such a massive scale and in such gruesome manners? If you don't see the confusion that arises from different Christians having different opinions about whether or not early term abortion is murder then I don't know what to say. My opinion is not what's in question here. You're opinion is not what's in question here. The question is: if Christians disagree and have done for hundreds of years are the God-given morals and ethics clear enough?JVL
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
11:55 AM
11
11
55
AM
PDT
Seversky at 133, Is that an exact count? You got your numbers from where? Still mad at God? Get over it. It appears the core of your argument is: "EVERYTHING ISN"T PERFECT !!! I BLAME GOD !!!" 'By the way, abortion is OK. Because uh... uh... something, something. I think...'relatd
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
08:25 AM
8
08
25
AM
PDT
Seversky at 131, Back to being a Bible scholar? Forget it. You're just here to berate Christians like that other guy. And to berate God.relatd
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
08:23 AM
8
08
23
AM
PDT
JVL at 127, Nope. We're too busy watching you berate Christians. It appears that the core of your argument is: "CHRISTIANS AREN"T PERFECT !!! OH MY DARWIN !!!" Allow me to rephrase: Human Beings Aren't Perfect.relatd
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
08:18 AM
8
08
18
AM
PDT
Querius at 121, Substack? Any talentless yahoo can post there.relatd
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
08:15 AM
8
08
15
AM
PDT
Objective moral values and duties do exist. Sev: No, they don’t. Really??? You do realize that you, in your post, just presupposed the existence of objective morality in your 'argument from evil' against God do you not?
“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? - CS Lewis
But anyways, I disagree with Sev, and can prove so 'scientifically'. But seeing that Sev, as a Darwinist, could care less what the scientific evidence actually says, I invite Sev to come over to my basement and debate this point a little more personally? :) I bet I can make him 'see the light' :)
Cruel Logic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x__pGaIXKic
Of related note:
More than half a century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of older people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.” Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our Revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous Revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.” - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, 1983 Templeton Address https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/aleksandr-solzhenitsyn-men-have-forgotten-god-speech/
bornagain77
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
06:33 AM
6
06
33
AM
PDT
Bornagain77/128
BA77, “,,,JVL yawns at the “1.4+ billion (abortion) holocaust, mounting up at another million per week”, and nonchalantly states, “Who’s to say who is right?””
BA77 blithely ignores the uncounted billions of children lost by miscarriage. According to you, the human reproductive system was designed by your God. Apparently, He's not bothered by that appalling wastage due to His negligence, so why should we be concerned about abortion?
Well first off, in post 62 as I told AC, I’ve already pointed out that professing to be a Christian and actually being a Christian are, as Jesus Himself pointed out, two very different things,
No True Scotsman
But more importantly, are you, in so many words, finally honestly admitting the blatantly self-evident truth that it is objectively morally wrong to kill you own children on such a massive scale and in such gruesome manners?
I think we can almost all of us would agree it's morally wrong to kill anyone without good cause but does that consensus make it objective or just a lot of subjective opinions that happen to coincide?
Premise 1: If God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist.
Even if God does exist, that doesn't necessarily mean morals are objective.
Premise 2: Objective moral values and duties do exist.
No, they don't.
Conclusion: Therefore, God exists
Non sequitur The argument fails.Seversky
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
06:16 AM
6
06
16
AM
PDT
I bet Seversky has that 'inspirational' quote from Dawkins framed on his wall somewhere. :) Ben Stein vs. Richard Dawkins Interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlZtEjtlirc Of note: Apparently Dawkins's supposed 'science' is as shoddy as his Theology: Specifically, in 1976 Dawkins put forth the 'selfish gene' concept, Yet, at the 10:30 minute mark of the following video, Dr. Trifonov states that Dawkins's idea of the selfish gene 'inflicted an immense damage to biological sciences', for over 30 years:
Second, third, fourth… genetic codes - One spectacular case of code crowding - Edward N. Trifonov - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDB3fMCfk0E
Of related note:
,, In the following video around the 2:00 minute mark, Dr Denis Noble, (President of the International Union of Physiological Sciences), states that around 1900 there was the integration of Mendelian (discrete) inheritance with evolutionary theory, and about the same time Weismann established what was called the Weismann barrier, which is the idea that germ cells and their genetic materials are not in anyway influenced by the organism itself or by the environment. And then about 40 years later, circa 1940, a variety of people, Julian Huxley, R.A. Fisher, J.B.S. Haldane, and Sewell Wright, put things together to call it ‘The Modern Synthesis’. So what exactly is the ‘The Modern Synthesis’? It is sometimes called neo-Darwinism, and it was popularized in the book by Richard Dawkins, ‘The Selfish Gene’ in 1976. It’s main assumptions are, first of all, is that it is a gene centered view of natural selection. The process of evolution can therefore be characterized entirely by what is happening to the genome. It would be a process in which there would be accumulation of random mutations, followed by selection. (Now an important point to make here is that if that process is genuinely random, then there is nothing that physiology, or physiologists, can say about that process. That is a very important point.) The second aspect of neo-Darwinism was the impossibility of acquired characteristics (mis-called “Larmarckism”). And there is a very important distinction in Dawkins’ book ‘The Selfish Gene’ between the replicator, that is the genes, and the vehicle that carries the replicator, that is the organism or phenotype. And of course that idea was not only buttressed and supported by the Weissman barrier idea, but later on by the ‘Central Dogma’ of molecular biology. Then Dr. Nobel pauses to emphasize his point and states “All these rules have been broken!”. Denis Noble - Rocking the foundations of biology - video - 2:00 minute mark https://youtu.be/UeqEBrnai4s?t=121
bornagain77
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
06:13 AM
6
06
13
AM
PDT
Relatd/111
You also realize it’s too late for questions. You, and everyone else, are judged.
We can also judge, witness Saint Richard of Dawkins
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
If atheists must confront the evils committed by the atheistic dictatorships of the twentieth century then so must Christians confront the evils described in the Old Testament Matthew 7: 1-5
[1] Judge not, that ye be not judged. [2] For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. [3] And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? [4] Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? [5] Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
Seversky
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
05:48 AM
5
05
48
AM
PDT
JVL, actually, we can already see as JBS Haldane pointed out:
[JBSH, REFACTORED AS SKELETAL, AUGMENTED PROPOSITIONS:] "It seems to me immensely unlikely that mind is a mere by-product of matter. For
if [p:] my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain [–> taking in DNA, epigenetics and matters of computer organisation, programming and dynamic-stochastic processes; notice, "my brain," i.e. self referential] ______________________________ [ THEN] [q:] I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true. [--> indeed, blindly mechanical computation is not in itself a rational process, the only rationality is the canned rationality of the programmer, where survival-filtered lucky noise is not a credible programmer, note the functionally specific, highly complex organised information rich code and algorithms in D/RNA, i.e. language and goal directed stepwise process . . . an observationally validated adequate source for such is _____ ?] [Corollary 1:] They may be sound chemically, but that does not make them sound logically. And hence [Corollary 2:] I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms. [--> grand, self-referential delusion, utterly absurd self-falsifying incoherence] [Implied, Corollary 3: Reason and rationality collapse in a grand delusion, including of course general, philosophical, logical, ontological and moral knowledge; reductio ad absurdum, a FAILED, and FALSE, intellectually futile and bankrupt, ruinously absurd system of thought.]
In order to escape from this necessity of sawing away the branch on which I am sitting, so to speak, I am compelled to believe that mind is not wholly conditioned by matter.” ["When I am dead," in Possible Worlds: And Other Essays [1927], Chatto and Windus: London, 1932, reprint, p.209. Cf. here on (and esp here) on the self-refutation by self-falsifying self referential incoherence and on linked amorality.]
KFkairosfocus
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
05:36 AM
5
05
36
AM
PDT
"It’s not me, it the Christians, current and past" Sure JVL, just blame Christians. What else is there to do with your time? You're a Chatty Troll with no off button. Andrewasauber
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
05:13 AM
5
05
13
AM
PDT
BA77, “,,,JVL yawns at the “1.4+ billion (abortion) holocaust, mounting up at another million per week”, and nonchalantly states, “Who’s to say who is right?”” JVL: "It’s not me, it (is) the Christians, current and past, who disagree(d) with you with you that you should be worried about. I’m just one person but there’s a lot of people of your own faith who feel differently from you. Why don’t you go berate them for awhile?" Well first off, in post 62 as I told AC, I've already pointed out that professing to be a Christian and actually being a Christian are, as Jesus Himself pointed out, two very different things,
Matthew 7:23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ Matthew 7: 21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
But more importantly, are you, in so many words, finally honestly admitting the blatantly self-evident truth that it is objectively morally wrong to kill you own children on such a massive scale and in such gruesome manners? If so, welcome to Theism
Premise 1: If God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist. Premise 2: Objective moral values and duties do exist. Conclusion: Therefore, God exists. The Moral Argument – drcraigvideos – video https://youtu.be/OxiAikEk2vU?t=276
bornagain77
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
03:35 AM
3
03
35
AM
PDT
Bornagain77: JVL yawns at the “1.4+ billion (abortion) holocaust, mounting up at another million per week”, and nonchalantly states, “Who’s to say who is right?” It's not me, it the Christians, current and past, who disagree(d) with you that you should be worried about. I'm just one person but there's a lot of people of your own faith who feel differently from you. Why don't you go berate them for awhile?JVL
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
03:23 AM
3
03
23
AM
PDT
JVL yawns at the "1.4+ billion (abortion) holocaust, mounting up at another million per week", and nonchalantly states, "Who’s to say who is right?" Hmm, well golly gee whiz JVL, perhaps a few abortion survivors can give you a small clue as to why it just might be morally wrong to kill your own children on such a massive scale, and in such gruesome manners, (i.e. dismemberment abortions, etc..)?
abortion survivor stories https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=abortion+survivor+stories An Abortion Survivor's Story (Living with Facial Paralysis and Other Conditions) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPC2mUpu2D4 Abortion survivors, Melissa Ohden, Claire Culwell, and Josiah Presley share their remarkable stories at Alive from New York – a special pro-life event held in the heart of Times Square on May 4, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJalO5MYrPQ
bornagain77
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
03:19 AM
3
03
19
AM
PDT
Kairosfocus: You are indirectly trying to justify the ongoing 1.4+ billion holocaust, mounting up at another million per week. No, I am pointing out that Christians, now and in the past, have disagreed strongly on this issue. Who's to say who is right? Why should there be such a disagreement if the scriptures are clear. if mind is or is an epiphenomenon of a material computing substrate, then we including you cannot be significantly, rationally, responsibly free enough to have credible knowledge, warrant and reasoning. We'll see. Sadly, if I am right I shan't be in a position to say: I told you so!JVL
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
02:19 AM
2
02
19
AM
PDT
JVL, if mind is or is an epiphenomenon of a material computing substrate, then we including you cannot be significantly, rationally, responsibly free enough to have credible knowledge, warrant and reasoning. Computing is a GIGO-limited dynamic-stochastic process on a substrate, it is inherently non rational. Matters not, if digital, analogue, neural network or whatever. So, your dilemma is, if free enough to be rational then the mind is beyond material computation, and if you deny that transcendence then you are not free enough to make a rational, warranted judgement. KFkairosfocus
August 11, 2022
August
08
Aug
11
11
2022
01:12 AM
1
01
12
AM
PDT
1 2 3 4 7

Leave a Reply