Jump to content

Strong evidence that everything was created by an intelligent designer: God.


blackbird

Recommended Posts

I came across another article that debunks the evolutionism or Darwinism as well.  It says in part:

Quote

Naturalistic evolution (Darwinism) is the idea that systems, especially biological systems, get more complex by themselves, without the need for some mind or spirit to guide their development.   

Darwinism proposes that minor changes which give certain biological organisms a survival advantage compound over time to produce major variations and changes, and that ultimately this can explain the origin of species, including man. If this is so, then mankind is nothing more than a more intelligent animal, and God was not really needed for creation (so why not deny his existence altogether, by an application of Occam’s razor?)

No informed person doubts that natural selection occurs in biological systems, favoring some kinds of genetic combinations over others in certain environments. But the assertion that fluxes of physical energy and natural selection explains changes from amino acids to DNA, from reptiles into birds, or from apes into humans cannot really be justified scientifically. The reasons for this I outline below.   unquote

Darwinism Debunked - Evolution Exposed | Christian Faith (christian-faith.com)

Of course to the atheist, this is heresy and many cling to their discredited theory as it has become a religion to them.

 

intelligent-design-horses.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 11/15/2021 at 10:22 PM, blackbird said:

There is an interesting article which gives strong evidence why we had to have a Creator God who designed and created everything.  At the time of Darwin's theory of evolution in about 1859, little or nothing was known about one of the most basic life forms, the cell.  All living things are made up of cells.  At that time it was thought to be not much more than a blob and not much thought was given to it.  Since then, science has led to immense discoveries about the living cell and how it operates.  It turns out to be extremely complex.  Embedded in this article are several short video clips of around a minute or so each showing how complex the operations of a cell are and how unlikely such a complex system could just come about by evolution or without a designer.

"Note that this whole system (DNA, RNA and fully functional enzyme machinery) must be present in any living cell. To get enzymes you need RNA, to get RNA you need DNA, to get DNA you need enzymes … get the picture? No one has any idea how such a sophisticated set of nanomachines could have made themselves without intelligent design. This had to be designed by a super-intelligence. This is one characteristic of the Creator of all described in the Bible: omniscient / all knowing."

Created or evolved - creation.com

Billions of years of replication and survival.
 

Looked at another way: You said that when Darwin created his hypotheses, the cell was just thought of as a blob. Although that’s factually incorrect, here’s the point: Humankind has always striven to explain the existence of things, what they are made of, how they work, why they are here.  
 

When there was no explanation, they created God. 

“Why is the sky blue?” God

”Why does it rain?” God

”Why is there a Moon?” God

And when scientists made observations and explained how some of these things worked, it was a threat. It was not a threat to God, because you cannot change God. It was a threat to the well-being of political and religious leaders. So they imprisoned Galileo, and Copernicus hid his works.

 

Religious leaders have always hated science. But where do they turn to when they’re sick? Who cures their lung infections, their tooth decay, their burst appendix? Who gets them to work? Do they pray their way to work, or do they drive there? 
 

God is God and you cannot change God. No science can change God. No science can disprove God. With everything we know about Big Bang Theory and Evolution, does it mean God played no role? No! Science does not disprove God. But does science prove that the world is billions of years old, and that biological evolution and DNA are the tools of our creation? Yes, definitely so.  Of course God could have been behind this; science only explains the mechanisms. 
 

By doubting obvious scientific facts, you doubt God. 
 

 

Edited by Rebound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rebound said:

Billions of years of replication and survival.
 

Looked at another way: You said that when Darwin created his hypotheses, the cell was just thought of as a blob. Although that’s factually incorrect, here’s the point: Humankind has always striven to explain the existence of things, what they are made of, how they work, why they are here.  
 

When there was no explanation, they created God. 

“Why is the sky blue?” God

”Why does it rain?” God

”Why is there a Moon?” God

And when scientists made observations and explained how some of these things worked, it was a threat. It was not a threat to God, because you cannot change God. It was a threat to the well-being of political and religious leaders. So they imprisoned Galileo, and Copernicus hid his works.

 

Religious leaders have always hated science. But where do they turn to when they’re sick? Who cures their lung infections, their tooth decay, their burst appendix? Who gets them to work? Do they pray their way to work, or do they drive there? 
 

God is God and you cannot change God. No science can change God. No science can disprove God. With everything we know about Big Bang Theory and Evolution, does it mean God played no role? No! Science does not disprove God. But does science prove that the world is billions of years old, and that biological evolution and DNA are the tools of our creation? Yes, definitely so.  Of course God could have been behind this; science only explains the mechanisms. 
 

By doubting obvious scientific facts, you doubt God. 
 

 

That is a rather simpleton way of trying to smear Creationism or belief in God.  Some of the comments sound puerile.

"religious leaders have always hated science".  Whether that is factual or not, I have no way of knowing.  However the point is that proves nothing.  I know there are many scientists who believe in God.  Professor Phillip Stott, a mathematician who is extremely knowledgeable on Creation versus the theory of evolution and has made presentations in various countries in the world.  He understands the mathematical laws of probability and explained how the law of probability indicates that there is not enough time in the universe for a living organism to form by random chances.  It simply cannot happen and has never been demonstrated or repeated in a laboratory.

If you look at creation.com and read articles and watch videos you should learn there are many scientists who believe in creation and have shown Darwinism or evolution is NOT science.  You will learn they do not "hate science".  There is a difference between empirical science and false science.  Evolution is not science.  It is actually an ideology or religion pretending to be science.   The Big Bang theory is another dogma which is purely speculation and cannot be claimed as science.  Science is something that has been proven by the scientific method, a well-established procedure that demonstrates the truth of a hypothesis or claim.  If it can't be proven beyond a doubt in a repeated according to the scientific method, it is not science.  Evolution is called a theory for the simple reason it is not proven and is only a theory.  Therefore to claim it is "science" is false.

Of course things occurred in history such as putting Galileo under house arrest because we don't live in a perfect world.  Popes were false religious leaders and not actually leading biblical Christianity.  Again because the world is not perfect;  as the Bible says all men are fallen or corrupt and must be born again to be forgiven and get on the right path.  That is the reason we have wars, crime, evil, sickness, disasters, etc. in the world.  So there are people who often do not think logically and clearly.  There are many cults in the world too.  So what does that prove? 

 I think it is more likely you are saying religious leaders reject science is because some of them reject false teachings like evolution or the big bang.   They are smarter than you think.  The reject those things that have been proven as false science or are unproven.  Things that are unproven and doubtful cannot be claimed to be science.  Many ministers likely believe in medicine and medical procedures.  All ministers I have ever met over 42 years believe in medicine.  There is the odd person who does not believe in vaccination, but that is uncommon.  But the Covid vaccine has had it's deniers in the non bible believing world too.  In fact there are many of them, even on this forum there are people who are non-Christians who doubt Covid vaccine.   So what does it prove.  Nothing really, because it all gets back to what I said that the world is an imperfect place with many different views and ideas about things.  But there is an absolute truth and that is God's revelation, the Bible and a Savior, Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God.  He is the only Savior and is the one you should be learning about.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

That is a rather simpleton way of trying to smear Creationism or belief in God.  Some of the comments sound puerile.

"religious leaders have always hated science".  Whether that is factual or not, I have no way of knowing.  However the point is that proves nothing.  I know there are many scientists who believe in God.  Professor Phillip Stott, a mathematician who is extremely knowledgeable on Creation versus the theory of evolution and has made presentations in various countries in the world.  He understands the mathematical laws of probability and explained how the law of probability indicates that there is not enough time in the universe for a living organism to form by random chances.  It simply cannot happen and has never been demonstrated or repeated in a laboratory.

If you look at creation.com and read articles and watch videos you should learn there are many scientists who believe in creation and have shown Darwinism or evolution is NOT science.  You will learn they do not "hate science".  There is a difference between empirical science and false science.  Evolution is not science.  It is actually an ideology or religion pretending to be science.   The Big Bang theory is another dogma which is purely speculation and cannot be claimed as science.  Science is something that has been proven by the scientific method, a well-established procedure that demonstrates the truth of a hypothesis or claim.  If it can't be proven beyond a doubt in a repeated according to the scientific method, it is not science.  Evolution is called a theory for the simple reason it is not proven and is only a theory.  Therefore to claim it is "science" is false.

Of course things occurred in history such as putting Galileo under house arrest because we don't live in a perfect world.  Popes were false religious leaders and not actually leading biblical Christianity.  Again because the world is not perfect;  as the Bible says all men are fallen or corrupt and must be born again to be forgiven and get on the right path.  That is the reason we have wars, crime, evil, sickness, disasters, etc. in the world.  So there are people who often do not think logically and clearly.  There are many cults in the world too.  So what does that prove? 

 I think it is more likely you are saying religious leaders reject science is because some of them reject false teachings like evolution or the big bang.   They are smarter than you think.  The reject those things that have been proven as false science or are unproven.  Things that are unproven and doubtful cannot be claimed to be science.  Many ministers likely believe in medicine and medical procedures.  All ministers I have ever met over 42 years believe in medicine.  There is the odd person who does not believe in vaccination, but that is uncommon.  But the Covid vaccine has had it's deniers in the non bible believing world too.  In fact there are many of them, even on this forum there are people who are non-Christians who doubt Covid vaccine.   So what does it prove.  Nothing really, because it all gets back to what I said that the world is an imperfect place with many different views and ideas about things.  But there is an absolute truth and that is God's revelation, the Bible and a Savior, Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God.  He is the only Savior and is the one you should be learning about.

 

What a stupid thing to say: Of course evolution from bacteria to human hasn’t been repeated in a laboratory, because we haven’t had four billion years to run the experiment. 
 

On the other hand, even the Pope agrees that the evidence is clear that the world is more than a few thousand years old. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rebound said:

What a stupid thing to say: Of course evolution from bacteria to human hasn’t been repeated in a laboratory, because we haven’t had four billion years to run the experiment. 
 

On the other hand, even the Pope agrees that the evidence is clear that the world is more than a few thousand years old. 

Many scientists would disagree and reject the theory of evolution.  There is no evidence that life came from some accidental chemical mixture.  No evidence life evolved from the scum in the pond.  No evidence man evolved from some animal.

Science which you don't seem to accept has found in the last fifty years that the cell is very complex.  It is not something that can come into existence by accident or random chemical reactions.  That is pure nonsense.  It's complexity proves it required an intelligent designer Creator.  It's just simple logic.

The Pope knows nothing about the history of the world or creation.  The Pope does not even believe the Bible so what would you expect him to say?  He leads a false religion based on inventions of men.  I suggest you try to find out where the Pope gets his ideas.  You might learn something.   Probably from some lying school textbook teaching the fake theory of evolution.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, blackbird said:

Many scientists would disagree and reject the theory of evolution.  There is no evidence that life came from some accidental chemical mixture.  No evidence life evolved from the scum in the pond.  No evidence man evolved from some animal.

Science which you don't seem to accept has found in the last fifty years that the cell is very complex.  It is not something that can come into existence by accident or random chemical reactions.  That is pure nonsense.  It's complexity proves it required an intelligent designer Creator.  It's just simple logic.

The Pope knows nothing about the history of the world or creation.  The Pope does not even believe the Bible so what would you expect him to say?  He leads a false religion based on inventions of men.  I suggest you try to find out where the Pope gets his ideas.  You might learn something.   Probably from some lying school textbook teaching the fake theory of evolution.

Let’s say there’s this 5,000 year-old book, which was written in a language no-one speaks anymore, then translated into another language, then another, then another, and finally English. 
 

And there are scholars who studied this book their whole life, and read it in the ancient languages, and studied the translations. 
 

Then this guy shows up, reads only part of only the English translation of the book, and declares that all of those scholars are completely wrong and only he truly understands the meaning of the book, and the book tells him that all scientific understanding is false and the imaginary understandings that he made up are true. 
 

You know what you call that, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Let’s say there’s this 5,000 year-old book, which was written in a language no-one speaks anymore, then translated into another language, then another, then another, and finally English. 
 

And there are scholars who studied this book their whole life, and read it in the ancient languages, and studied the translations. 
 

Then this guy shows up, reads only part of only the English translation of the book, and declares that all of those scholars are completely wrong and only he truly understands the meaning of the book, and the book tells him that all scientific understanding is false and the imaginary understandings that he made up are true. 
 

You know what you call that, right?

No, I never said all scientific understandings are false.  You make amazing assumptions.

I agree with genuine science and always have.  Some things that were discovered centuries ago were later found to be false and newer science has corrected them.

There are some things that are called science which are not really science, which I have already explained....like evolution for one.

You apparently don't know anything about the history of the Bible.  The Old Testament was written by the Hebrew prophets over a long period, possibly 1,200 years and completed several centuries before Christ.   The Old Testament we have today was translated directly from the Hebrew manuscripts which the Jews carefully copied and carefully stored.  The whole Bible (O.T. and N.T.) was written over a period of 1,500 years and completed by about 100 A.D.

The New Testament was written and completed within the first 100 years after Christ lived on earth and was originally written mainly in Greek.  The New Testament was translated into English in the 1500s and finally into the King James Version in 1611.  The translators used Greek manuscripts dating back to the early centuries and also a compilation of the Greek manuscripts which was produced by Erasmus in the 1500s.  Some of the translators of the KJV knew many of the ancient languages.  What the New Testament says could also be verified by many sermons and writings from the early centuries.  But the O.T. and the N.T. was not translated from one language into other languages before being translated into English.

The Roman Catholic bible, the Latin Vulgate, was not the basis of the KJV.  It would have been examined and compared.  The basis of the King James Version N.T. is called the Textus Receptus or Received Text.  The accuracy of the KJV N.T. is absolute because of the thousands of early Greek manuscripts behind it.  The accuracy of the O.T. is absolute because of the Hebrew manuscripts it was based on.

The fact is biological scientists have found there are many things that are irreducible in complexity and could not have evolved to what they are today.  Things like the eye or even a cell with it's incredible amount of DNA information.

quote

Argument: ‘Irreducible complexity’

Evolutionists say, ‘Examples of supposed “irreducible complexity” (such as the eye, the complex cell and the flagellum) can be explained.’

First published in Refuting Evolution 2, Chapter 10

This chapter will examine how evolutionists respond to the ‘irreducible complexity’ argument in three areas: the eye, the complex cell and the flagellum. Scientific American states the problem this way:

14. Living things have fantastically intricate features—at the anatomical, cellular and molecular level— that could not function if they were any less complex or sophisticated. The only prudent conclusion is that they are the products of intelligent design, not evolution. unquote

Refuting Evolution 2 ch 10: Argument: 'Irreducible complexity' - creation.com

 

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
On 11/18/2021 at 5:06 PM, Winston said:

If you can not quantitatively show or demonstrate the creation "how" of the "finished product" you can not state the finished product is a result of that creation. Quantitative analysis or methodology of design is required to prove design. By your understanding, such an event cannot be shown or demonstrated, thus it is not provable and has no reliable evidence.  

"Strong evidence that everything was created by an intelligent designer: God." - this was your title, no evidence is provided. Complexity does not equate to design. Design is not automatically assumed as the answer.  

The evidence is YOU. 

Now explain to us ALL how the Brain was formed!

Brain_Neurons.jpg

It IS a religion!

DumbestOfAllReligions.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

The answer lies in another plane though: can a rational argument be had with irrational, self-contradictory rules? No. The logic gives a clear answer: a single contradiction in the postulates allows one to prove anything. A system where anything can be right or wrong depending on the time of day, place, individual their looks what they had for breakfast cannot be rational: it's pure chaos.

This argument cannot be decided by reason because the belief is based on abandoning it. Don't waste your time.

In a rational system, a scientist and a theologist would make their predictions for a certain group of events. Who has better ones, wins the argument. Just ask if they would be interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 11/18/2021 at 10:52 AM, blackbird said:

The "how" of a supernatural event cannot be shown or demonstrated.  The finished product or result of it is evident all around us.   

Perhaps at least admit you don't know the answer and are willing to consider God as the answer.  Then you need to open the King James Bible and read the beginning of Genesis that describes how God created everything.  Nobody on earth can show you "how" God created everything because it was supernatural.  The fact that he did create it is all around us.  

"1  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2  And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 

3  And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4  And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. {the light from…: Heb. between the light and between the darkness} 5  And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. {And the evening…: Heb. And the evening was, and the morning was etc.} 

6  And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. {firmament: Heb. expansion} 7  And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8  And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."  Genesis 1:1-3 KJB

"1  Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. {substance: or, ground, or, confidence} 2  For by it the elders obtained a good report. 3  Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."  Hebrews 11:1-3 KJB

"6  But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. "  Hebrews 11:6 KJB

God has chosen the method of faith.  He has given man free will, the evidence of creation, and his written revelation to tell us about himself, what he did, and what he expects of us in return.

Who created God?

 

 

Edited by CrakHoBarbie
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Who created God?

God was not created.  He always existed from eternity past and will always exist. God is a spirit and is eternal.  He created time and the material universe out of nothing by his words.

"3  When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; 4  What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? 5  For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. 6  Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet: 7  All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; 8  The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas. 9  O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! "   Psalm 8:3-8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, blackbird said:

God was not created.  He always existed from eternity past and will always exist. God is a spirit and is eternal.  He created time and the material universe out of nothing by his words.

 

On 12/5/2021 at 4:54 AM, blackbird said:

The principle is well known in the world.  An effect must have a cause.  Everything exists because it was put there or created.  It is the universal principle of cause and effect.  

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, blackbird said:

God was not created.  He always existed from eternity past and will always exist. God is a spirit and is eternal.  He created time and the material universe out of nothing by his words.

"3  When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; 4  What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? 5  For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. 6  Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet: 7  All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; 8  The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas. 9  O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! "   Psalm 8:3-8

Do you have any tangible evidence your God exists, besides scripture and your feelings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Do you have any tangible evidence your God exists, besides scripture and your feelings?

Yes, the whole creation around us is evidence.  It required an intelligent designer we call God.  As already mentioned, every effect has a cause.  The universe is an effect;  God is the cause.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Creation is evidence that we exist. Not evidence that your God created us.

Do you want to try again? This time leave out the assumptions.

 

"19  Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20  For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:  21  Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. "  Romans 1:19-21

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, blackbird said:

"19  Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20  For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:  21  Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. "  Romans 1:19-21

Scripture is words on paper.

Not objective evidence that your God exists.

Try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...