Posted on 03/02/2015 7:49:16 AM PST by Salvation
Monsignor Pope Ping!
Odd.
Love is order.
But . . but . . but it was all a random chance of evolution and Big Bang! Of course Big Bang (with its high incendiary temperatures) would have incinerated any living molecules leaving a completely sterile universe with no possibility of life. But Random Chance is different. What if we found on a remote distant planet, a fully operational computer that is powered up and had mobility and sensory inputs? Would our first thought be that this is just random materials and elements that just happened to stick together? But that is how they view humans and most life here.
Old Earth Creationism: http://www.reasons.org
Humanity as a whole (that’s you and me too) has rebelled. That is why the sometimes-manic desire to view a “random” universe. We’d rather hurl the chess pieces across the room than confess we are losing the game.
Some are, some aren't. He knows who is which.
“Y’know Nietzsche says that ‘out of chaos comes order.’”
That is, until we DO confess. And some will rather “win” by sailing right on to hell itself.
“God is dead” — Nietsche
“Nietsche is dead” — God
Dinesh D’souza’s book “What’s so great about Christianity” looks into this subject and he does a great job of explaining it. Worth reading.
Nietzsche is not much of a model for thinking, except maybe as a signpost one knows points in the wrong direction.
Still, it is true that order does arise out of chaos; there are even situations in the natural world in which this happens.
"The energy that flows through a system acts to organize that system." - Harold Morowitz
However, no force in nature organizes things as rapidly and efficiently as love, reaching heights of nuance and abstraction unattainable in any other way.
My opinion, of course. No scientific proof yet.
And since nobody can characterize love in a laboratory, it gets hooted at.
It is not physics. It is metaphysics.
Yes. Or perhaps paraphysics.
Psalms 19:
1 The heavens are telling the glory of God;
and the firmament proclaims his handiwork.
2 Day to day pours forth speech,
and night to night declares knowledge.
3 There is no speech, nor are there words;
their voice is not heard;
4 yet their voice[a] goes out through all the earth,
and their words to the end of the world.
In them he has set a tent for the sun,
5 which comes forth like a bridegroom leaving his chamber,
and like a strong man runs its course with joy.
6 Its rising is from the end of the heavens,
and its circuit to the end of them;
and there is nothing hid from its heat.
7 The law of the Lord is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the testimony of the Lord is sure,
making wise the simple;
8 the precepts of the Lord are right,
rejoicing the heart;
the commandment of the Lord is pure,
enlightening the eyes;
9 the fear of the Lord is clean,
enduring for ever;
the ordinances of the Lord are true,
and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold,
even much fine gold;
sweeter also than honey
and drippings of the honeycomb.
11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.
12 But who can discern his errors?
Clear thou me from hidden faults.
13 Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins;
let them not have dominion over me!
Then I shall be blameless,
and innocent of great transgression.
14 Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
be acceptable in thy sight,
O Lord, my rock and my redeemer.
“Aww, a God who actually cares about this joint? What are you, nuts?” — atheist
“he atheist/secularist notion of random, unguided, accidental order is itself a belief, for its conclusion is outside of what science can study or demonstrate”
This is a straw man argument. Even the random mutations occurred within the order of biology. They aren’t chaos. The bulk of evolutionary change is the result of genetic drift and guided by the environment and, of course, sutvivability. That isn’t random any more than the the mutations which are selected for is random. They are either neutral or they aid the organisms survival.
Naaaaaahhhh.....
Can’t be.
;’}
I posted that after reading about half the first paragraph. Seems the OP author was thinking along the same lines ...
Thinking about THE AUTHOR.
This is hand waving. Statistical mathematics has long told us what kind of behavior would be expected out of Darwinism and it is not the behavior we see from geological records. The tree of life fairly burgeons at the complex end. Darwinism projects far more trouble than success at that end, such as to expect it to be an overall losing game.
Now if we take what really has happened and CALL it evolution, of course we can ascribe all sorts of uncharacteristic things to evolution. But we can ascribe all sorts of uncharacteristic things to legs, if we call an elephant’s trunk a leg.
Questions of what “is” is do not behoove something calling itself a science.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.