Jump to content

Just because you don't witness god doesn't mean he isn't there.


MrAndrew1337
 Share

Recommended Posts

Cancer, (I know have been introduced to it) is here with us & we can study it but creation/evolution/forming of all the elements in the 1st place? We were not there to observe what went down & so faith.

 

Police officers are not at crime scene when crime happened, but still they are being able to reproduce step by step what happened (if they truly want to do it, and are objective, smart and acute)..

 

Geologists, paleontologists and archeologists are "police officers"/"detectives" of biology, geology, paleontology and history..

But they have to be much more intelligent, as there is much less evidence to work with..

Edited by Sensei
Link to comment
Share on other sites

....or, far more faith in the roots of their religious beliefs because the dog belongs to the people next door who picked it up as a rescue yesterday & the police have evidence in their hands to work with as well as experience of those who have come before working with real life things like people, cars tire tracks, fingerprints, DNA....(hummmm, I wonder where all of the information within DNA came from in the 1st place or the complexity of using that info?), firearms, dogs, etc but here we are talking of people making claims on incomplete information because no man was there to witness or measure & so much of his ideals are based on filling in blanks that we choose to make drift in the direction of evolution yet there is no more proof of such than there is an honest look at Creation. Well, except for Creational finger prints are all over the crime scene of order being brought out of chaos via great Intelligence designing it all while adding beauty & diversity beyond a mans ability to dream of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the police have evidence in their hands to work with as well as experience of those who have come before working with real life things like people, cars tire tracks, fingerprints, DNA....

 

What do you think the fossil record, biogeography, molecular clocks, phylogenetics, vestigial organs, shared developmental and metabolic pathways, conserved DNA regions, etc etc etc that we base evolutionary theory on are? Do you honestly not understand that there is a wealth of empirical evidence for the theory? How about plate tectonics, astronomy, particle physics, quantum mechanics, etc etc? Are you actually suggesting we pulled all these things out of thin air?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all points to Design & not something from nothing or total chaos.

 

There is difference between creation of elementary particles and the all laws controlling how they behave,

and creation of living creatures, and humans from nothing.. *)

You have to decide which one you support.

You can't support both at the same time..

And saying in posts that fossil skeletons are lie..

Because you're betraying your own God, calling him liar..

Somebody who is claiming Universe was created 6 thousands years ago, is incompetent, and is calling God liar..

As light from distant stars have to travel for millions or billions years to arrive here..

If 6 thousands years old world would be true, the whole universe that you see would be one big lie.

Stars that you see on night sky, would not be stars. They would have to be fake..

 

 

*)

I told you how to make amino acids from non-organic matter, but it was put to trash can, because you hijacked thread..

You might review it, again, and again.. until you understand that you can make your own amino acids by yourself..

Anybody can make their own organic matter by them self within minutes or hours..

Edited by Sensei
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all points to Design & not something from nothing or total chaos.

 

 

No it really doesn't. That's the point. Empirical observations are consistent with contemporary theory and we do not need magic to explain them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all points to Design & not something from nothing or total chaos.

That looks a lot like an argument from personal incredulity. As such, it's a fallacy

 

Bits of nature must have been designed by an idiot if they were designed at all.

Have you seen how the human eye is put together?

All the connections for nerves + blood vessels are in the way of the light.

Madness as a design, but perfectly understandable if it evolved.

Edited by John Cuthber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

not something from nothing or total chaos.

The potential absence of a creator being doesn't imply a chaotic initial state of reality, while absolute nothingness just seems down right impossible. There has always been something. We just don't know what it is, nor do we know what state it was in.

 

we do not need magic to explain them.

1. It's unknown whether or not magic is necessary at some level that we can't observe yet.

2. A creator being doesn't imply magic.

3. It's unknown whether or not magic exists.

 

Bits of nature must have been designed by an idiot if they were designed at all.

A creator being could've designed an evolutionary system.

Edited by Thorham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never had it explained to me why the existence of a creator god gets around the 'problem' of creation. The argument normally starts that if something exists it must have been created, hence it must have a creator. But then i ask if god exists what created it? Nothing - god is eternal - is the usual answer. But if these people are happy that god needs no act of creation, then why not just suppose this of the universe in the first place? By adding the god hypothesis nothing has been resolved but things have been made more complicated.

 

 

....great Intelligence designing it all while adding beauty & diversity beyond a mans ability to dream of.

 

Compare the imagination required to dream up quantum theory or general relativity to your banal image of god, a king of kings, sovereign to all men. Even in the domain of awe and wonder science has exceeded religion.

 

 

A creator being could've designed an evolutionary system.

 

And a creator being could've planted all those fossils and 'evidence' just to keep us amused, or test us, or for 'mysterious' reasons we'll never understand. And that's just the problem with a creator god: if it can do absolutely anything then it is absolutely meaningless. The stronger your image of god the less convincing it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If One is able to Create light & fix it to the luminaries is it much of a stretch to conceive His placing the light from here to there? Really, we are so limited by our finiteness. I am at a loss for words over the eye quote in the shortsightedness of it, what better way to express your Creative ability than to make up the eye the way it is. Creation as an act of Timelessness? Take it up with The Potter clay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And a creator being could've planted all those fossils and 'evidence' just to keep us amused, or test us, or for 'mysterious' reasons we'll never understand. And that's just the problem with a creator god: if it can do absolutely anything then it is absolutely meaningless. The stronger your image of god the less convincing it is.

 

Yeah, of course, but creator beings don't have to be omnipotent gods if they exist. They could simply be beings with greater abilities than our own, and just like we make things out of available materials, so do they. The difference would be that the materials they have available are more fundamental than the materials we have available. No need for nonsense like omnipotence, etc.

 

That is, if they exist, of course, and I have no way of knowing that. The way I see potential creator beings is, however, reasonably down to earth and doesn't seem farfetched.

 

The lack of evidence just means we can't do anything with this kind of thinking in science, but it certainly doesn't make any of it impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But who's fog? Really? Does anyone examine their standing form the other guy's or just try to solidify the faith they are standing on themselves?

 

People with religious beliefs always do the latter. A sceptic does not have a faith to solidify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and yet they do for man can not stand on his own shoulders out in the middle of "I"land while me & myself steady him as buttresses form e"i"ther side. ;)

 

 

Are you ever going to answer the questions with anything but insipid drivel? Not being able to disprove something does not make it real. You can't provide any positive evidence for any goed much less a specific one. If you want to believe fairy tales are real that is your right it's also my right to not believe things that have no evidentiary support...

 

Unlike you I am open to evidence, my mind could be changed, could yours?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way anyone's mind can be changed about such tinges is to honestly seek God's leading in words like "Am I really living in a copper top factory? Or is there more to this world than what I see through these senses?", in your own wording but genuine, honest, looking to The Creator is the only way our hearts can be softened to be opened by Him & then begins your journey to see that we have been seeing Him everywhere all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks & I you in a genuine search for truth.

 

 

Then you should embrace the single most effective way to learn about reality... Science, it works. Sit for a while and contemplate how easier you life is. 30,000 years ago cave bears and starvation was the only truth but humans persevered. compared to even a couple hundred years ago you live in a paradise created by science. Give that some thought "Air Between The Notes"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.