#6361 ·
Joseph Bailey41 said:To me, this is just more proof that "intelligent design" doesn't hold water—it isn't actually intelligent, nor is it well-conceived from a design standpoint. One opening serving two functions (breathing and eating) was developed through evolution, and then we humans just tacked on a third function: speech. Animals don't chat while they eat, after all. 😁
If it didn't acknowledge them, certain priests wouldn't be performing exorcisms or even mentioning the Holy Spirit. When Christianity spread across America, it essentially had to "assimilate" all those pagan deities that were already present in these regions—rebranding them as saints so people could continue their worship without too much friction. And those old deities didn't just pop out of nowhere; they evolved from even older ancestor cults and animistic beliefs in nature spirits. Just as everything in nature constantly transforms, develops, and changes shape to adapt to its environment, the same thing happens within society. That said, we shouldn't claim a specific way of thinking is "better" or "more advanced" just because it's newer. It isn't. It's simply better adapted to its era. The way people with schizophrenia or autism function might have been more suited to the natural and social environment during certain phases of history than our current rationalist paradigm. Look at Abraham—if he wasn't experiencing schizophrenia, then nobody was, yet he's considered the father of three major world religions. Nowadays, if a man took his son into the mountains to sacrifice him because voices told him to, only to change his mind because the voices gave him new instructions, he wouldn't be seen as a figure of respect. He'd be viewed as dangerous to the community, forcibly hospitalized immediately, and kept on antipsychotics for the rest of his life. Back then, people valued and honored him. Those who hallucinated burning bushes or apocalypses... they wouldn't fare so well today. Unless, of course, they knew how to keep quiet and turned it into a movie or something. 🕺
I feel the need to offer a correction here, as holiness is a deeply complex subject to study. In my view, Moses and Jesus had to function in a very specific way because that was part of the divine plan for salvation. The Church makes a very clear distinction between illness and holiness. I actually heard about a priest who suffered from F20. He, for instance, possessed the ability to pray for incredibly long periods. I've even personally struggled with psychosis myself—where negative thoughts start creeping in and then you have to fight through them, and so on... Essentially, the Church carefully examines what actually happened in the lives of saints. To me, human holiness represents the highest level of intelligence for that individual. In the past, we needed someone like Moses to provide a figure for humanity to look toward for salvation and to leave behind a trace of God's presence. Nowadays, modern secularism tends to brush aside that kind of connection with God. At least, that's my take on it. Regardless, Moses is my favorite saint because his journey was undoubtedly incredibly difficult. I won't even bring up Jesus here, because He is a story all His own.
