"pointers to God"

Collins says belief is ultimately a matter of faith—that God's existence can't, in the end, be proved by science. And yet he sees plenty of "pointers to God," natural phenomena that imply the existence of a biblical God. Here are Collins's "pointers":

• There is something instead of nothing.

• The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics, which make simple and beautiful laws.

• The Big Bang: out of nothingness, the universe came into being. That cries out for explanation, since we have not observed nature to create itself . . . it causes us to postulate a creator, and the creator must be outside of time or you haven't solved the problem.

• The precise tuning of the physical constants in the universe. If gravity was a little weaker, things would all start flying a part. You can see a creator in these constants. Francis Collins
  

  
  

The Deadliest Catch

The wife and I have been watching The Deadliest Catch to wind down the day. The series has gotten the two thumbs up. What makes the show fascinating is the type of people that have a calling to that kind of work. These fishermen are somehow able to give up control to the ocean. They are not normal. They work days with only a few hours sleep. They are constantly exhausted moving 800 lb cages in and out of the water. One false move and they are in the ocean with a high likelihood of death. You don’t last long in the cold water and survival highly depends on how well they work together. They do all this just to make a living. It takes a certain type of person to be able to thrive in that kind of environment and it shapes them all in very similar ways although I really can’t put my finger on how. I guess you can say that they are the salt of the earth type people.

I think by watching the show you can get a feel for what Peter and Andrew must have been like before they dropped their nets to follow Jesus. It also give some great insights into the metaphor of the bark of Peter. The ocean gives and it takes away. Maybe in some ways these men are more in touch with reality because the stakes are so high and they know that they are not in control, the ocean is.

Rembrandt's Jewish Bride

(Click on Image)

She is weighing up the responsibilities of loving and being loved, of receiving and of giving. It is not by chance that her other hand rests upon her womb, since children are the ultimate responsibility of married love.

Love binds, love weighs, love is the most serious experiences that we can ever know in our life. It is Rembrandt's awareness of this profound truth, and the glorious visual beauty with which he makes it accessible to us, that makes the "Jewish Bride" so unforgettable. Sister Wendy Beckett

Prolife Movement Weakness

In the Biblical story of David and Goliath, David initially put on a coat of mail and a brass helmet and girded himself with a sword: he prepared to wage a conventional battle of swords against Goliath. But then he stopped. “I cannot walk in these, for I am unused to it,” he said (in Robert Alter’s translation), and picked up those five smooth stones. What happened, Arreguín-Toft wondered, when the underdogs likewise acknowledged their weakness and chose an unconventional strategy? He went back and re-analyzed his data. In those cases, David’s winning percentage went from 28.5 to 63.6. When underdogs choose not to play by Goliath’s rules, they win, Arreguín-Toft concluded, “even when everything we think we know about power says they shouldn’t.” Malcolm Gladwell

The prolife movement is in the underdog position. As such it needs to acknowledge its weakness and chose an unconventional [indirect] strategy. The weaknesses as I see them and a quick answer….

1. It makes us uncomfortable to make others uncomfortable. (blessed are those that mourn)
2. We don’t want to look intolerant. (blessed are the meek)
3. We don't want to be judgmental. (blessed those who hunger and seek righteousness)
   
4. We don’t want to make people face hard realities and give up potential goals and resources. (blessed are the poor)
5. We fall for the compartmentalization of separation of Christian ethics from government. (blessed are the pure of heart)
6. We don’t like to fight. (blessed are the peacemaker)
7. We don’t want to further hurt those who have had abortions. (blessed are the merciful)
8. We don’t want to be hated. (blessed are persecuted for seeking righteousness for my sake)

The unconventional strategy should be to follow Jesus in the beatitudes without hesitation.

Divine Freedom

"So What'cha Want"

I'm feeling a little old school. Here is the money quote...

Let it flow like a mudslide
A when I get on I like to ride and glide
I've got depth of perception in my text y'all
I get props at my mention 'cause I vex y'all

So what'cha what'cha what'cha want (what'cha want?)?
A you're so funny with the money that you flaunt (that'cha flaunt)
Where'd you get your information from huh?
You think that you can front when the revelation comes?

YEAH
You can't front on that!

Practical Romance

And the key thing is to be held to account for the risks and rewards of the romantic adventure. Chesterton writes: "If I bet I must be made to pay, or there is no poetry in betting. If I challenge I must be made to fight, or there is no poetry in challenging. If I vow to be faithful I must be cursed when I am unfaithful, or there is no fun in vowing. . . . For the purpose even of the wildest romance results must be real; results must be irrevocable." And marriage, he says, is the ultimate example of a real and irrevocable result. (BRAD MINER)

Evolutionary Pantheism

Nevertheless, if we develop Darwin’s insight, we can see the emergence of purpose, as of life itself, by small degrees, not from above, but by small increments, from below. The first purpose was the organization of matter in ways complex enough to sustain and replicate itself—the establishment, in other words, of life, or in still other terms, of problems and solutions. With life emerged the first purpose, the first problem, to preserve at least the improbable complexity already reached, and to find new ways of resisting damage and loss. Brian Boyd

There is a line with evolution where you are no longer doing science and enter the realm of religion. The above quote is more theology than science. The author is constructing a modern creation myth. Anthropomorphising evolution as if it has a master plan to create purpose to solve problems is a lot like saying that gravity wants to keep me connected to the planet.

It is essential to keep theology separate from science. There is a tension between the two points of view that makes it more likely to question. Giving the why questions the same answer as the how questions makes the world one dimensional. If evolution becomes the only reality then there is no need to question. Any question that is asked has the answer of evolution and because of this there is no longer any need to think or question.

Mathematic Agnostic

The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics creates many intriguing puzzles: Does mathematics have an existence entirely independent of the human mind? In other words, are we merely discovering mathematical verities, just as astronomers discover previously unknown galaxies? Or, is mathematics nothing but a human invention? If mathematics indeed exist in some abstract fairyland, what is the relation between this mythical world and physical reality? How does the human brain, with its known limitations, gain access to such an immutable world, outside of space and time? On the other hand, if mathematics is merely a human invention and it has no existence outside our minds, how can we explain the fact that the invention of so many mathematical truths miraculously anticipated questions about the cosmos and human life not even posted until many centuries later? Mario Livio

Forecasts for the Future

This stuff scares the shit out of me. Good thing I have my tinfoil hat, daisy bb gun air rifle and 20 year old Mormon food storage left to me by my mother in law. I'm ready for Armageddon.

Catechism of the Catholic Church on Torture

2298 In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors.

Sad state of affairs when you have to state the obvious. Torture is wrong.

Samurai Saints

ROMA, November 26, 2008 – A samurai carrying the cross is not a conventional image. But there were some of these among the 188 Japanese martyrs of the seventeenth century who were proclaimed blessed two days ago in Nagasaki. There were noblemen, priests – four of them – and one religious. But most of them were ordinary Christians: farmers, women, young people under the age of twenty, even small children, entire families. All of them were killed for refusing to renounce the Christian faith.

The beatification of "Fr. Peter Kibe and his 187 companions" – as the title of the ceremony put it – was the first ever celebrated in Japan. The new blesseds joined 42 Japanese saints and 395 blesseds, all of them martyrs, elevated to the honors of the altar beginning with Pius IX.

The new blesseds were martyred between 1603 and 1639. At the time, there were about 300,000 Catholics in Japan, evangelized first by the Jesuits, with St. Francis Xavier, and then also by the Franciscans. Sandro Magister

HT Mark P. Shea

Religion involves the whole person

Here is a quote for my anonymous buddy to freak out on in the comments section.

But religion, once the glow of conversion [to atheism] had worn off, was not a matter of argument alone. It involves the whole person. Therefore I was drawn, over and over again, to the disconcerting recognition that so very many of the people I had most admired and loved, either in life or in books, had been believers. Reading Louis Fischer’s Life of Mahatma Gandhi, and following it up with Gandhi’s own autobiography, The Story of My Experiments With Truth, I found it impossible not to realise that all life, all being, derives from God, as Gandhi gave his life to demonstrate. Of course, there are arguments that might make you doubt the love of God. But a life like Gandhi’s, which was focused on God so deeply, reminded me of all the human qualities that have to be denied if you embrace the bleak, muddled creed of a materialist atheist. It is a bit like trying to assert that music is an aberration, and that although Bach and Beethoven are very impressive, one is better off without a musical sense. Attractive and amusing as David Hume was, did he confront the complexities of human existence as deeply as his contemporary Samuel Johnson, and did I really find him as interesting? A N Wilson

Gianna Jessen

Babies might be more conscious than adults

Modern science has largely agreed, spending decades outlining all the things that babies couldn't do because their brains had yet to develop. They were unable to focus, delay gratification, or even express their desires. The Princeton philosopher Peter Singer famously suggested that "killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person. Very often it is not wrong at all."

Now, however, scientists have begun to dramatically revise their concept of a baby's mind. By using new research techniques and tools, they've revealed that the baby brain is abuzz with activity, capable of learning astonishing amounts of information in a relatively short time. Unlike the adult mind, which restricts itself to a narrow slice of reality, babies can take in a much wider spectrum of sensation - they are, in an important sense, more aware of the world than we are. Jonah Lehrer

Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18:3)

Pieta by Cassy King

My dad showed me this beautiful poem in the paper ceated by Cassy King.

Mary Grieves.

How hard it must be,
to balance the mangled body
between her knees
and in her mind.

Draped like the folds of her dress
he spills across her.
One arm hangs like a broken wing.

She sits because
she cannot rise,

what she holds in her mind
is more than a prayer
more than a plea

words, yes,
and memories
spill over the sides.

She longs to speak to
him
one more time
to wake him
have him brush her cheek
to tell him
all the thing whispered
when he was young

Things she taught him,
Things he learned on his own,
Things he just knew:

How to lace his sandals;
the meaning of woman
touching his garment hem;
His soul too large to cradle;

She wonders without thinking-
Alpha and Omega - Is this
the end or the beginning?

Deep Wounds, Brian Knep

HT The Artful Manager

Review of In Bruges

Last Judgment Workshop of Hieronymus Bosch (This painting is used give a Twilight Zone style ending to the movie)

The CD jacket said that In Bruges is a dark comedy. If it wasn't for this, I probably would not have known it was a comedy. It's like those British comedies that are sometimes on PBS late at night. I can feel the jokes flying over my head. The laugh track only highlights that I don't get it and it's quite frustrating for me. In Burges doesn't have a laugh track but I didn't laughed once during the movie. Due to my track record with British comedies, I can only assume the the problem resides in me and not in the movie.

Starting this review out with my little issue you would think that I didn't like the movie In Burges. The truth is that I liked the movie. The movie has a rich layer of meaning to analyze and it has a good ending that reminds me of the old Twilight Zone episodes.

In Burges is about two hit men Ray and Ken who hide out in a small medieval town named Bruges. They are hiding in Burges due to Ray accidentally killing a young boy while taking out the Priest he was paid to kill. The hit men's boss, Harry, tells Ken that the murder of the child caused too much publicity and he orders Ken to kill Ray for his mistake. While Ken is about to kill Ray he stops Ray from killing himself. Ray wants to kill himself due to guilt of having killed the innocent boy. Harry then goes to Burges to kill both Ken and Ray due to Ken refusing to kill Ray. Then the movie ends with a showdown. The movie is more complicated than this but this gives a quick overview.

In Bruges asks the question, in a post-Christian world how do you gain redemption? Ray goes into a confessional to kill a Priest that has a hit out on him. Ray shoots the priest and while the priest tries to run an innocent boy is hit in the cross fire while praying in a pew waiting for his confession. To me this was analogous to saying that by rejecting the Church you threw out the baby with the bathwater and the rest of the movie looks into how to you gain back what was lost.

Harry's means of redemption in the movie was to follow a strict unforgivable honor code but when he thinks that he has not fulfilled the letter of his own law he commits suicide. Kens means is to suffer and die for his friend but even by doing this he may not have the power to redeem his friend. Ray's only means is true remorse and trying to cling to the good. The movie doesn't give an answer to the question. It leaves the answer for the viewer to ponder. I have to give the movie props because it does ask the question in a honest way. There are some gruesome scenes but if you have a strong stomach I would say go see it.

Jimi Hendrix - The Wind Cries Mary

I know this song is not technically about the Virgin Mary but about Jimi's girlfriend. I reserve the right to interpret and hear whatever suits me in art so for me the songs is about the Mother of our Lord. Anyway it's a great song and at the very least you will get a good laugh at the two white dudes with Afros.

Prisoner's Dilemma

Economics as a science has helped improve the lives of many people and I am thankful for this. But economics tends to overreach science into the realm of ethics. The economic principle of "rationality" is one example of this. Rationality is defined by economics as someone acting to maximize their own "utility". That is, to act in their own best interest. On a scientific level this is not true. There are many times when people do not act in their own best interest but for a greater good. Since people don't always act "rationally" economics then moves from the level of science (what is) to the level of ethnics (how people should act).

From a Catholic perspective rationality requires the theological virtues of "faith, hope and love" because without these virtues it is not possible to see reality. If your not reasoning from the perspective of faith, hope, and love then the reasoning will be faulty. According to Christ there are times when we should act counter to our own self interest.

I want to look at game theories scenario of the "prisoner's dilemma" to look out how economics theory reasons how people should act. Here is the scenario...

Two suspects are arrested by the police. The police have insufficient evidence for a conviction, and, having separated both prisoners, visit each of them to offer the same deal. If one testifies (defects from the other) for the prosecution against the other and the other remains silent (cooperates with the other), the betrayer goes free and the silent accomplice receives the full 10-year sentence. If both remain silent, both prisoners are sentenced to only six months in jail for a minor charge. If each betrays the other, each receives a five-year sentence. Each prisoner must choose to betray the other or to remain silent. Each one is assured that the other would not know about the betrayal before the end of the investigation. How should the prisoners act? Wikipedia

There are a lot of assumptions to the argument which I will not quote to make the reasoning valid (you can go read them yourself) but here is the economic conclusion...

In the classic form of this game, cooperating is strictly dominated by defecting, so that the only possible equilibrium for the game is for all players to defect. No matter what the other player does, one player will always gain a greater payoff by playing defect. Since in any situation playing defect is more beneficial than cooperating, all rational players will play defect, all things being equal. Wikipedia

In game theory you never pick a strictly dominated position. So in the case of both suspects being innocent, according to the game theory logic, you should still make up a story about the other prisoner so you don't get 10 years. The scary thing about this is that our legal system is actually set up to make this scenario with plea deals. The problem is that the question, "What is the right thing to do?" is not considered because it stands outside the bounds of economic, "rationality".

The other issue that I have is that by fitting real life situations into this model you lose perspective on unknown risks. For example, You could be haunted with guilt for ten years or after 10 years of plotting the betrayed prisoner will get out of prison and execute his revenge. Those "unintended consequences" are bound to turn up when you oversimplify a situation and fit it into an artificial economic model.

From the Christian perspective I think the following is true, "Blessed are those who pick a strictly dominated strategy for a greater good."

It is important to understand the economic principle taught by the prisoners dilemma. Lawyers, economist, and politicians are probably going to go with a dominate strategy and we should factor this in when making our decisions of what is the right thing to do. If not you may be faced with the Charley Brown Dilemma....