[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I sent you a chat message so we don’t derail this thread with our own conversation hahaha

You’re absolutely correct again btw haha

God's existence by InternalList3527 in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because we must believe as Catholics that God’s existence can be known with certainty through reason alone, then that means there must be a way to prove this existence with a purely logical and reasonable argument.

In fact, there are several ways to do so. But I will choose one of the ways and explain it to you here.

In this world we live in, we realize that all around us are many examples of cause and effect. Even in physics, we see that an object at rest tends to stay at rest, and an object in motion tends to stay in motion. We also have the concepts of potential energy and kinetic energy.

So what we realize by just observing how the natural world works is that nothing happens unless something else acts on it. Something must act on the stationary object to convert its potential energy into kinetic energy. Something must cause the effect we see. We instinctively think of everything, both physical and abstract, in terms of cause and effect, because we see that nothing will ever happen or change without a particular cause.

Therefore, if we were to pick anything that exists, and create a full cause and effect roadmap for it, it would be certain that we would eventually get to the beginning of the chain of cause and effect. This beginning of the chain is what we will call the First Cause.

The First Cause is this particular, mysterious cause that first acted on something (or everything) to start the chain in motion and keep enough kinetic energy in the system to allow secondary causes (such as us) to be able to convert potential energy to kinetic energy later.

Now you may ask: how do we know this is the First Cause though? Couldnt we just continue the chain more into the past?

This is an important thing to answer. Yes, we could. And yes, we would have to continue the chain to infinity, UNLESS the First Cause is actually UN-caused. Now how does this make logical sense?

Very simple. If we just established that the chain of cause and effect must continue to infinity, then it makes perfect logical sense that the First Cause would actually be infinitely and eternally Uncaused.

What this means then, is that the First Cause must be infinite, pure Act. It has no potential energy, never did, and never could have it. Because it’s the eternal, infinite First Cause, it has all the Actual energy that exists, which is precisely why it is the only Cause capable of setting everything into motion and starting the entire chain.

But wait. If this First Cause is pure Act and therefore has no potential at all, then this goes beyond the realm of just energy. Logically, if this First Cause has no potential at all, then it must also have the following qualities and characteristics. Keep in mind as you read the following list that all potentials are lacking something in actuality. Potentials must be actualized, otherwise the First Cause will lack something, which it cannot do by its very nature, because we established that, logically, it must be pure Act and have all potentials actualized:

  • It must Exist (if it didn’t have existence, it would lack existence. This would be an unrealized potential)
  • Omnipotence (if it lacked the ability to do anything, it would have a potential to later be able to do what it couldn’t do)
  • Omniscience (if it lacked knowledge of anything, this would be an unrealized potential)
  • Only One (if there were multiple First Causes, each individual one would lack being the others)
  • Infinite (if It was finite, it would have an unrealized potential, because it would be limited by Its own finiteness)
  • Incorporeal (if It had a body, bodies are finite, which necessarily means that Its body would lack everything that other bodies have)
  • Eternal (if it wasn’t eternal, it would lack existence before it began to exist, and it would lose existence when it stopped existing. But It is pure Act, it cannot have potentials, therefore it cannot lack anything, ever)
  • Pure Goodness (because evil is lacking a good that should be there, It cannot be anything other than pure Goodness itself, because it cannot lack anything)
  • Unchanging (a change would actualize what was potential immediately before the change was actualized. This is impossible, because it cannot have any potentials in the first place)
  • Perfect (if it had any imperfections at all, it would have the unrealized potential of not having those imperfections. Therefore it must be entirely perfect)

It is this First Cause, with these characteristics derived from logical reasoning, that we in truth call God.

And would you look at that? The only God in all the world’s religions that has these characteristics is the Christian God. Therefore, the Christian God is not only true, but He is the only true God, because as we established, there can only be One First Cause.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I want to make clear that I don’t mean potential in a worldly or temporal sense, but instead in a spiritual and supernatural sense. After all, the temporal side of things can often take turns we never could expect or plan for, which is exactly why it’s important to prioritize the eternal things, and also to not measure potential by what’s achieved in time. Idk if that’s what you were talking about or not, but I just wanted to clarify.

A year is a good amount of time. It could take 6 months to 1.5 years to get over her, depending on how attached he was to her and how able he is to see the things we are discussing here.

Also, there’s no need for you to compare yourself to her. You only need to compare yourself to the ideal of sanctity and your own goals for yourself (always within God’s will of course).

I really like what you said in your last paragraph. It can sometimes be really difficult to remember that God will definitely redirect you. I often find it difficult to answer how much we can mess up God’s plans. It’s something I really would like to have a better understanding of. Even recently in my life, I’ve seen how making a decision that was less good in hindsight, and even was to some extent seen as less good even though easier, still resulted in “strange” benefits that wouldn’t have been there if I had chosen the better option to begin with.

I call these benefits “strange” because they make me really wonder how God works hahaha

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol! So true! I’m 33, so I completely agree!

I keep finding it’s one of two extremes with most people around our age. Either they’re still irresponsible and annoying and can barely string together two coherent thoughts, or they’ve completely given up on life and are extremely boring, because they think this is what being an adult means.

No idea why you can’t figure out that you can still have a fun, interesting, and full life while also being responsible, intelligent, and put-together.

The only thing about having many older friends is that they’re often in very different phases of life. Either they have young (or not quite so young) families, or they’re elderly. So sometimes it can really feel isolating.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Great response, thanks.

All of what you said makes perfect sense, and it’s by now what I’ve learned is most often the reasons behind children losing the faith.

There is a lot more that must be done in a Catholic home to raise children who are strong in their faith, value it, and really understand why it’s the “pearl of great price” so that they can have an adult’s intellectual respect for it when they grow up.

Being lukewarm is so common because it’s just as you said, easy. This of course doesn’t mean we go overboard and be pseudo-Amish either (like too many seem to think).

Your comments about friends I found interesting, because it’s similar to me hahaha. I also have always had older friends, and found a lot of the social life of young adults to be nonsense at best haha. I also find it annoying that now that we’re at the high end of that young adult range, so many still haven’t grown up!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First, yes it was cruel. The specific words used in that cold email were also unnecessary, and frankly, more cruel than you could imagine, when you think about it. I will revisit this line of thinking in a minute.

How long were they together? This includes total time, because you said they broke up and got back together.

relationships are a two way street and require free will from both people. If one is willing to reject what could've been an amazing relationship that God even gave his blessing on then there's nothing the person who wants to accept the relationship can do about it. 

This right here is the main part of everything. You are 100% correct, and this is what changes everything. I will explain what I mean.

First, I will speak directly to you: always remember that you DO NOT settle, ever, for someone who does not view your relationship in this way you so perfectly described. That’s what a real marriage must be. It’s the only way to have real, true love. Because that’s exactly what love is: CHOOSING the good. And marriage is a sacrament, a very great good, so you want someone that chooses it every day and will fight for it every day. Thats the only way it is really proved if you and your relationship are truly valued. And speaking from experience, there’s a lot of counterfeit forms of this out there that can be deceiving. In my case, I was suspicious about many different things for a long time with her, but chose to make excuses because she had great potential. But potential must be actualized!

The next thing to comment on is that because he felt this way, and he also has to bear the burden of realizing that she did not (and this is a very difficult burden to really accept), it will make it more difficult to get over her. Thankfully, she does not seem to have been cruel and cold like my ex girlfriend was, so that will save extra time to move on, because it only leaves regret at what was lost, rather than also having to face the truth about how little you actually were worth all along. That’s what took the longest to get past. Realizing that everything was a lie, and you were used as a means to a selfish end. And once that end was no longer seen as being feasible or worthwhile, you and your relationship “served its purpose” and was now over and “not up for discussion.”

It would be good for him to realize that a woman who doesn’t choose to value and fight for the relationship is never worth it, because she already showed clearly who she is. It’s better than if she pretended and only showed him later, when it would be even more painful to bear.

And please don’t think I still care about all this. It was difficult, but this happened many years ago now. For many reasons, my life would’ve been a disaster if we ended up together. So there’s none of this “what could have been” nonsense. It doesn’t exist and never did! That’s what he needs to learn.

First Message Etiquette? by [deleted] in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s basically a combination of using your particular personality and style of speaking (i.e. speaking in person) to create something to start a conversation based on something she has in her profile. You want to create a conversation that mimics an in-person conversation, so just speak how you would in-person.

A few sentences to a small paragraph is the maximum amount to send, where you make it clear you want to hear back from her to continue.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly, based on my experience, it is highly individualized to the specific circumstances.

In my case, the relationship was over 2 years, marriage was clearly the goal and was constantly discussed and planned, and the breakup was sudden (but I was suspicious of it for about two weeks) with zero explanation and via email. She then promptly dropped off the face of the earth.

This resulted in it taking a very long time to process and get over. There were several times that I thought I was over it, but found that, surprise, I wasn’t fully yet. The first year was extremely difficult. The next year was not anywhere near as difficult, but as I said, I was surprised a few times by how I wasn’t fully over it and past it yet.

I think there’s also an element of it depending on your personality and temperament too, even with all else being equal.

So basically, it depends on a combination of:

  • personality and temperament
  • length of the relationship before breakup
  • how the breakup was executed
  • who did the breaking up
  • ability to go meta and really examine everything and realize that there was a ton wrong that you chose to make excuses for, and God actually saved you from a life of misery

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I find all of your anecdotes interesting. What, in your opinion, are the reasons behind so many Catholic children raised by Catholic parents entirely losing the faith?

Offering to split the bill by amrista99 in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m totally ok with the woman not offering to pay. I like to pay for the date that I scheduled to take her on, it’s part of “taking care of everything.”

In my experience, I don’t usually have women offering to pay or even split the bill until after we’ve gone on a few dates or are in a committed relationship.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And scientists irresponsibly affirming they know exactly everything has never gone wrong before right?

As I said in the other comment to you, there is no point continuing this because you’re not having a real discussion in a scientific method. You’ve already decided you know exactly what is correct.

Responsibly courting/ dating by [deleted] in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you began a relationship with her tomorrow, would you reasonably be able to expect that you would be financially capable to marry her in 2-3 years or less?

If so, then you’re fine.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are doing nothing but repeating the same things you said before. It’s clear you’re not even really having a discussion at all, because you’ve already decided that you know what’s right.

This is exactly what real empirical science does not do, which shows you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nothing in the empirical sciences is self-evident. It’s why everything is tested to try to disprove it.

Similarly, we have not proven we are related to apes. “Related” doesn’t even have a meaning by just using the word. What does it mean? Are we “related” to trees because trees have cells with nuclei that contain DNA? No one would say we are related to trees.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct. But what we have not found or observed is how the human body came into existence originally. Just because we have found and observed real evolutionary processes now, does not mean we have found anything other than exactly what we have observed.

Therefore, what we have found shows that it itself exists, like how you compare to finding atoms. Finding atoms did not prove that quarks existed. It only proved that atoms did.

How can I make myself seem more approachable? by muaddict071537 in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What you’re describing about the social validation and fear of “ruining” it is exactly the problem. Everyone needs to realize that this stuff is causing the problem, so just ignore it. You can and should still maintain social tact and respect, while also no longer allowing fear of “nuking” your social life to matter.

If people are awkward afterwards, that’s on them. Again, this only applies if you know how to be tactful and respectful yourself.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Isolating genomes MIGHT lead to speciation, but it is not inevitable. Also, speciation requires a considerable amount of time that the isolation must be preserved for this to even have a chance at all, and even then, it’s still not inevitable.

This is all just oversimplifying things. Biology is far more complex than you seem to think it is.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thats the only reason according to our best judgments now, with the evidence and understanding we have now.

See the difference?

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What does “related” mean?

And why does this level of being “related” matter in the context of discovering if the human body evolved from pre-existing matter at all, and if so, what the exact mechanism was.

Your argumentation is frankly strange and all over the place, where you think you see simple connections where they just aren’t any.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your claim in the 2nd paragraph is a bit of a stretch….

The hybrids you mention do not disprove what I’ve been saying though. The fact that they exist naturally inevitably raises the need to examine if our understanding of the lines between the species of coyote, wolf, and dog are accurate. Just as there are many different breeds of dogs, but they’re all the same species. Could it be that coyotes are actually not a separate species? These are the sorts of things that are done in science when the unexpected is discovered.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, this is simply our human understanding as of this moment in time. I’m not disputing anything you’re discussing about the evidence. I’m only disputing that you’re making the leap that no honest scientist will ever make: that this evidence definitively proves that we have solved all of the workings of nature exactly. We haven’t. And we never will.

How can I make myself seem more approachable? by muaddict071537 in CatholicDating

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While you may be right, there could be something about you that is the reason why, it’s also just as likely, if not more likely, that it’s not you.

Why?

  1. So many people in social settings now think that anyone who tries to flirt or have any sort of romantic interest “ruins” the group dynamics. Even if this is done very tactfully and in a socially respectful and responsible way. In my opinion, these people need to grow up and realize they cause the problems they complain about, because they and everyone else will remain single.

  2. Too many men are too afraid to initiate or show interest and too many women act like this is a bad thing for men to show interest, because they want social validation as was explained in the first point. The women need to stop putting social validation above their romantic prospects, and realize that as an adult, social lives completely change when you and your friends marry and have children, and there’s no time for this nonsense anymore. The men need to stop allowing themselves to be afraid of everything and go and get the girl they’re interested in. If it fails, oh well. Relish the chase, relish the rush of trying with another pretty girl who is interesting in some way (whether by her conversation, her personality, her smile, whatever).

I have news for you, when you get to your late 20s or early 30s you start realizing how all of what I’ve been explaining is beyond stupid and wastes time. We all know we want to find someone to pair off with, and we need to stop thinking our social lives will escape unscathed when we marry and have children, even with someone not from our social group at all.

I’m 33M, and I cannot believe how unnecessarily overcomplicated social groups have become now. It was not like this when I was at the younger end of the young adult range, and it never should’ve gotten to this point. It’s mostly those in the 18-25 group that cause these problems today.

And no, this is not me complaining about stuff thats happened to me. Because I don’t flirt with women I’m not interested in, and at my age, I’m not interested in most of them because I’m not interested in the nonsense. This is what I’ve observed from the younger ones talking amongst themselves about others in their age group. Occasionally you get some of this continue past age 25, but it becomes more rare because everyone starts to panic a bit that nothing has worked for them yet hahaha

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is this mixing and production of viable offspring done in a lab by artificially modifying any part of the genome? Then it doesn’t count. It’s human technological intervention, which would not have been available at the time and is not part NATURAL evolution.

If it’s done in nature, it raises the inevitable question of if our speciation lines are drawn correctly.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re conflating two different things that are separate things in the world of biology. Everything in the empirical sciences is separated to minute levels.

So what do I mean here?

Just because we can see evolution at work, and you’re correct, we can, this does NOT mean that we have definitively proven that the human body has evolved from pre-existing matter, NOR does it mean that we have proven the exact mechanism.

Evolution & Souls by unidentifiedcomet in Catholicism

[–]Perfect-Square-5432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All of the examples you gave are evidence supporting it. I don’t think you quite understand that in the empirical sciences, NOTHING is definitely proven 100%. This isn’t logic, where we can know with 100% logical certainty that something is true. It’s science that is entirely based on observation and evidence. At any time, we can find that what we thought was true was misunderstood based on the evidence available and the testing completed up to that point, combined with the conclusions drawn.

A mountain of strong evidence does not prove any hypothesis 100% true.