Jump to content

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


blackbird

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The evidence of God is everywhere;  you just don't believe it.  Every effect has to have a cause.  Hence a complex universe had to have a cause who we can call an intelligent designer or God.

Every statement you made there requires evidence or reasoning. You keep making these statements, but every time I show you how your "evidence" or logic is flawed or actually just assumptions/guessing you run away for a few days and come back with the same claim to "evidence".

I was even willing to go down the road of spiritual evidence, but you can't even provide how this is verified, meaning it can be "made up". 

I asked this question before, how does an individual verify that a God exists outside of pure assumptions or guessing? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Do you think communism tolerates Buddhism?

Are there other ideologies that are similarly based?  Maybe secular humanism?  Is that satanic as well?

As I said Communism in general opposes any religion that contradicts Communist ideology and worship of the Communist system.  I think there have been serious conflicts between Tibet and Communist China.  I don't think they approve of Buddhism.

Yes, there are many ideologies including religious systems that claim to have the answers to life.  Anything that is contrary to the Almighty God who created us and the universe would of course fall into that category.  Satan is largely in control of this world and everything that works with that is working in rebellion to the one true Almighty God. 

But a little more about Marxism. 

quote

Today one third of the world is Marxist. Marxism in one form or another is embraced by many in Capitalist countries, too. There are even Christians, yes, and clergymen, some of high standing, who are sure that while Jesus might have had the right answers about how to get to heaven, Marx had the right answers about how to help the hungry, destitute, and oppressed on earth.

“Marx, it is said, was deeply humane. He was dominated by one idea: how to help the exploited masses. What impoverishes them, he maintained, is capitalism. Once this rotten system is overthrown, after a transitional period of dictatorship of the proletariat, a society will emerge in which everyone will work according to his abilities in factories and farms belonging to the collective, and will be rewarded according to his needs. There will be… no wars, no revolutions, only an everlasting, universal brotherhood…. [p.5]

“Marx writes: “The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of man is a requisite for their real happiness. The call to abandon their illusions about their conditions is a call to abandon a condition which requires illusion….”[p.6]

“Marx was anti-religious because religion obstructs the fulfillment of the Communist ideal which he considers the only answer to the world’s problems.”[p 6]   unquote   For more on this go to:

Was Karl Marx a SATANIST? – Absolute Truth from the Word of God (grandmageri422.me)

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, blackbird said:

But we could also say the complexity of the universe and the fact it exists also is strong evidence of the fact of an intelligent designer we call God.

Can I assert this same thing as evidence for no god(s) with the same confidence and with the same level of evidence?

The complex universe is strong evidence for no creator of the universe as it makes absolutely no sense for a god to create all this dead space that we humans can’t survive in.  Why would a creator create 99.9999999% of the universe hostile to his special creation (humans)? 

I contend that my argument for no creator, using the same evidence as you use, is every bit as logical as your argument for a creator’s existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TreeBeard said:

Can I assert this same thing as evidence for no god(s) with the same confidence and with the same level of evidence?

The complex universe is strong evidence for no creator of the universe as it makes absolutely no sense for a god to create all this dead space that we humans can’t survive in.  Why would a creator create 99.9999999% of the universe hostile to his special creation (humans)? 

I contend that my argument for no creator, using the same evidence as you use, is every bit as logical as your argument for a creator’s existence.

Ok, I have stated what I believe and I don't see any point in further debate at this point as you are obviously just trying to be contrary now.  Been there and done that.  It's a waste of time.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Ok, I have stated what I believe and I don't see any point in further debate at this point as you are obviously just trying to be contrary now.  Been there and done that.  It's a waste of time.

Fair enough.  Thanks for the (brief) discussion on evidence for a creator, and evidence for not a creator (which can be identical).  

Hopefully, we can continue our discussion on Satan?

Edited by TreeBeard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Fair enough.  Thanks for the (brief) discussion on evidence for a creator, and evidence for not a creator (which can be identical).  

Hopefully, we can continue our discussion on Satan?

This tells a bit more about how Karl Marx was a Satanist and what it's ramifications are for the world today.

quote

Marx had loved the words of Mephistopheles in Faust, “Everything in existence is worth being destroyed.” Everything — including the proletariat and the comrades. Marx quoted these words…. Stalin acted on them and destroyed even his own family. [p.13]

The Satanist sect is not materialistic. It believes in eternal life. Oulanem, the person for whom Marx speaks, does not contest eternal life. He asserts it, but as a life of hate magnified to its extreme. It is worth noting that eternity for the devils means ‘torment.” Thus Jesus was reproached by the demons: “Art you come hither to torment us before our time?” (Matthew 8:29)….

[Marx’] correspondence with his father testifies to his squandering great sums of money on pleasures and his constant quarreling with parental authority about this and other matters. Then he might have fallen in with the tenets of the highly secret Satanist church and received the rites of initiation. Satan, whom his worshippers see in their hallucinatory orgies, speaks through them. Thus Marx is only Satan’s mouthpiece when he utters in his poem Invocation of One in Despair the words, “I wish to avenge myself against the One who rules above.”

Listen to the end of Oulanem:

If there is a Something which devours,
I’ll leap within it, though I bring the world to ruins— The world which bulks between me and the abyss
I will smash to pieces with my enduring curses….

In Oulanem Marx does what the devil does: he consigns the entire human race to damnation. Oulanem is probably the only drama in the world in which all the characters are aware of their own corruption, which they flaunt and celebrate with conviction. In this drama there is no black and white… All are satanic, corrupt, and doomed.[p.15]

When he wrote these things, Marx… was eighteen. His life’s program had already been established. There was no word about serving mankind, the proletariat, or socialism. He wished to bring the world to ruin. He wished to build for himself a throne whose bulwark should be human shudder.[p.16].  source 

And he did.

Unquote   Was Karl Marx a SATANIST? – Absolute Truth from the Word of God (grandmageri422.me)

This explains a bit more of what it means for those living under Communist systems today.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

This tells a bit more about how Karl Marx was a Satanist

I can grant, for sake of argument, that Marx was a Satanist.  But I would like to determine who else, with more relevance to today’s society, is also in league with Satan.  Hopefully that will move the discussion along?

Are secular humanists in league with Satan too?  Cuz they seem nice.

Is Satan sneaky enough to get secular humanists on his side without them even knowing?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

Are secular humanists in league with Satan too?  Cuz they seem nice.

Is Satan sneaky enough to get secular humanists on his side without them even knowing?

While this will not answer your question directly in a yes or no manner, it will shed some light on the subject.

quote

Theologically, Secular Humanists are atheists. Humanist Paul Kurtz, publisher of Prometheus Books and editor of Free Inquiry magazine, says that,

“Humanism cannot in any fair sense of the word apply to one who still believes in God as the source and creator of the universe.”[5]

Corliss Lamont agrees, saying,

“Humanism contends that instead of the gods creating the cosmos, the cosmos, in the individualized form of human beings giving rein to their imagination, created the gods.”[6]

Philosophically, Secular Humanists are naturalists. That is, they believe that nature is all that exists—the material world is all that exists. There is no God, no spiritual dimension, no afterlife. Carl Sagan said it best in the introduction to his Cosmos series: “The universe is all that is or ever was or ever will be.”[7] Roy Wood Sellars concurs.

“Humanism is naturalistic,” he says, “and rejects the supernaturalistic stance with its postulated Creator-God and cosmic Ruler.”[8]

Secular Humanist beliefs in the area of biology are closely tied to both their atheistic theology and their naturalist philosophy. If there is no supernatural, then life, including human life, must be the result of a purely natural phenomenon. Hence, Secular Humanists must believe in evolution. Julian Huxley, for example, insists that “man … his body, his mind and his soul were not supernaturally created but are all products of evolution.”[9] Sagan, Lamont, Sellars, Kurtz—all Secular Humanists are in agreement on this.

Atheism leads most Secular Humanists to adopt ethical relativism—the belief that no absolute moral code exists, and therefore man must adjust his ethical standards in each situation according to his own judgment.[10] If God does not exist, then He cannot establish an absolute moral code. Humanist Max Hocutt says that human beings “may, and do, make up their own rules… Morality is not discovered; it is made.”[11]

A religious worldview based on atheism, naturalism, evolution, and ethical relativism

Secular Humanism, then, can be defined as a religious worldview based on atheism, naturalism, evolution, and ethical relativism. But this definition is merely the tip of the iceberg. A more complete discussion of the Secular Humanist worldview can be found in David Noebel’s Understanding the Times, which discusses (in detail) humanism’s approach to each of ten disciplines: theology, philosophy, ethics, biology, psychology, sociology, law, politics, economics and history.

unquote      SECULAR HUMANISM - What is it? - ChristianAnswers.Net

This information will shed more light on the subject of Satan and this world's ideologies and systems:

How Satan Controls The World (jesus-is-savior.com)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, blackbird said:

While this will not answer your question directly in a yes or no manner, it will shed some light on the subject.

You’re right….  It didn’t answer the question.  I didn’t ask what some Christian apologist says about secular humanism.  Nor am I interested in what this random person thinks, otherwise, I would seek him out and ask them directly.

What do you think?

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

Are secular humanists in league with Satan too?  Cuz they seem nice.

Is Satan sneaky enough to get secular humanists on his side without them even knowing?

Also, why couldn’t a humanist also believe in a god?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

You’re right….  It didn’t answer the question.  I didn’t ask what some Christian apologist says about secular humanism.  Nor am I interested in what this random person thinks, otherwise, I would seek him out and ask them directly.

What do you think?

Also, why couldn’t a humanist also believe in a god?

Obviously if you can answer so quickly, you didn't bother reading anything I posted.  So I will post this from the link I gave above:    The real question is who are you following,  God or Satan?

quote

The Bible teaches in our text verse that Satan is the god of this world, but the true and living God owns the earth and the fullness thereof (1st Corinthians 10:26). The Devil is only the god of the world's evil political, religious and control system. As such, Satan needs a way to communicate his evil desires with those evil men and women who are willing servants. Satan controls his willing servants through spiritual mediums such as Aleister Crowley, Helen Blavatsky and other occultists. Alex Jones snuck into Bohemian Grove in the year 2000 and recorded the dark highpriest summonsing Satan to “grant us thy counsel.” Evil men seek Satan's counsel, and they receive it through witchcraft and satanism.

And then Satan deceives many people by imitating Christ's ministers. Most of the people who are following the Devil think they are doing the right thing. Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists and Roman Catholics are all satanic religious cults, but sincerely think that they are doing the right thing. This is true of nearly all their adherents, but don't be fooled, the top leaders of these evil organizations are sold out to Freemasonry and Satan. They are fully aware of Satan's control over these organizations, which is why they are all top level Freemasons, Luciferian worshippers.

Charles Taze Russell (founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses) and Joseph Smith (founder of the Mormons) were both 33rd degree Freemasons. So also was Oral Roberts, Ron Hubbard and many others. By taking control over a small handful of top positions of power in every field of industry, education, entertainment, government, corporate and religious influence, occult members are able to control the world for Satan. SIGNS OF SATAN!

The sinister global elite have all the money and own all the television networks, Hollywood studios, mainstream news outlets, and the music and video game industries. Remember, Satan is the god of this world (2nd Corinthians 4:4), and as such he needs a way to control the world. This is accomplished by a pyramid of power, a chain of command flowing from the tiny elite top level down to the widespread pawns on the bottom. Please read, The Great Pyramid.  unquote

How Satan Controls The World (jesus-is-savior.com)

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

You’re right….  It didn’t answer the question.  I didn’t ask what some Christian apologist says about secular humanism.  Nor am I interested in what this random person thinks, otherwise, I would seek him out and ask them directly.

What do you think?

Also, why couldn’t a humanist also believe in a god?

"What do I think?"  Well, I think the definition of secular humanism mean the followers of it do not believe in the Almighty God of the Bible.   But there may be exceptions. The Bible says the devils believe in God and tremble.  So belief in a god in an of itself does not make a person a Christian or does not mean he is not a servant of Satan.  If the devils can believe in God and still be opposed to God, then humans could do the same thing.  There may be humanists who believe in some sort of god, but the correct definition of secular humanism means one who is an atheistic and believes human reasoning is the highest form of morality.  So while it is possible a humanist could believe in god, it does not make him on the right side of god.

If should be pointed out that all men are born with an evil, corrupt heart according to the Bible.  Therefore everyone could be under the influence of Satan or following him, unless he is born again.  See gospel of John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

So belief in a god in an of itself does not make a person a Christian or does not mean he is not a servant of Satan.  If the devils can believe in God and still be opposed to God, then humans could do the same thing. 

.

Could it be possible that Satan is using you?  How did you rule this out?

 

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

There may be humanists who believe in some sort of god, but the correct definition of secular humanism means one who is an atheistic and believes human reasoning is the highest form of morality.  So while it is possible a humanist could believe in god, it does not make him on the right side of god.

Why is your definition the “correct” definition?  If it’s “possible” that a god believer could be a secular humanist, then how could that narrow definition you gave be the correct one? 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Could it be possible that Satan is using you?  How did you rule this out?

 

Why is your definition the “correct” definition?  If it’s “possible” that a god believer could be a secular humanist, then how could that narrow definition you gave be the correct one? 

 

 

 

That is actually a very important question you ask.  I'm glad you asked it.

1.  I don't believe Satan is using me because I believe in Jesus Christ and his word, the Bible. .Jesus is God and is infinitely more powerful than Satan.  Satan is a created being. This website says: 

"A Father’s Care
God is not only our Creator; He is also our Father. As such, it is inconceivable that He would leave His children unprotected. In Matthew 6:8, Jesus says that our Father knows our needs before we ask Him. If we, even in our fallen condition, seek to provide for our children, how much more does God in His perfection seek to shelter and care for His offspring!

Scripture testifies that He has “granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence” (2 Peter 1:3). The more we possess a true knowledge of the Almighty, the more accessible His provisions for us become. What has He given us? He has prepared an abiding place for us where all that we need concerning life and godliness is ours. It is a place where every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places belongs to us in Christ (Eph. 1:3)."

The following verses pretty well sum it up:

"10  Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. 11  Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12  For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. {flesh…: Gr. blood and flesh} {spiritual…: or, wicked spirits} {high: or, heavenly} 13  Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. {having…: or, having overcome all} 14  Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; 15  And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; 16  Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. 17  And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God: 18  Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints; " Ephesians 6:10-17 KJV

If you want to watch some video messages on this go to Pastor Stephane Chauvette's website called A Word for Today. He is speaking on this subject weekly now and has his messages on his website.  You can find them there and watch them.  You too can be protected from Satan if you become a child of God in Jesus Christ.

2.  As for the definition of secular humanist, I am only going by what I read on websites on the subject.  I also looked it up on dictionaries on the internet.  You can verify that yourself via a search engine.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, blackbird said:

1.  I don't believe Satan is using me because I believe in Jesus Christ and his word, the Bible. .Jesus is God and is infinitely more powerful than Satan.  Satan is a created being.

So, Satan can fool other people who believe in God (Jesus), just not you?

What if you don’t even know it…?  If others can’t tell, how can you?  

3 hours ago, blackbird said:

2.  As for the definition of secular humanist, I am only going by what I read on websites on the subject.  I also looked it up on dictionaries on the internet.  You can verify that yourself via a search engine.

Should I define what a Christian is?  Or should I ask a Christian?

Why not just ask secular humanists what makes a secular humanist, rather than having someone who clearly does not like them be the one to define them?

Nowhere does it say that someone must be an atheist to apply the principles of secular humanism.

 

https://www.humanistcanada.ca/about/humanism/

Humanists believe that the solutions to the world’s problems lie in human thought and action rather than divine intervention. Humanism advocates the application of the methods of science and free inquiry to the problems of human welfare. But Humanists also believe that the application of science and technology must be tempered by human values. Science gives us the means but human values must propose the ends.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
On 2/1/2022 at 5:19 PM, Winston said:

1. That is fine, we don't need to use scientific evidence.  But then how does an individual verify that a God exists outside of pure assumptions or guessing

2. The dishonesty comes from expecting scientific evidence for science but not expecting scientific evidence for a God, reread what I wrote.  I never accused you of holding dishonest beliefs, I accused you of making a dishonest discussion, very different things. You can not have a discussion if your expectations of evidence for one position is different than the other position. 

3. "The reality is there is no rational explanation for the creation of the universe"- This is 100% correct, we do not know exactly. That is it, you can not say anything after this statement, unless you have strong verifiable evidence. You don't just get to assume a creator, because we may not have an answer.

4. " life apart from an intelligent designer or Creator, who we call God." - This is a claim of knowledge, meaning it requires evidence to support that claim, where is this verifiable evidence? Again they can not just assuming a creator out of convenience. 

Those are not difficult questions to answer.  But I think you have disappeared from the forum.

 No need to make assumptions or guesses about God.  The scientific evidence is vast.  The book "Darwin's Universe: From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing....Survival for Nothing" by Yan T. Wee explains it in great detail.

There is so much information in this book I barely know where to start.  Consequently, I don't see any point in trying to quote vast amounts of information.  I doubt you are seriously interested in information that clearly points to God as the Creator of this universe.

Just the one subject of DNA alone will point out the need for an intelligent designer Creator.  

quote

In the nineteenth century we thought that there were two fundamental entities in science; matter and energy.  At the beginning of the twenty first century, we now recognize that there's a third fundamental entity; and it's 'information'.  It's not reducible to matter.  It's not reducible to energy.  But it's still a very important thing that is real; we buy, we sell it, we send it down wires.

Now, what do we make of the fact, that information is present at the very root of all biological function?  In biology, we have matter, we have energy, but we also have this third, very important entity; information.  I think the biology of the information age, possesses a fundamental challenge to any materialistic approach to the origin of the life."  (Dr. Stephen C. Meyer)

Without specified information, buildings cannot be built; aircraft cannot be crafted; and living things cannot be constructed.  There is neither luck nor chance for dead molecules to blossom into the amazing world of complex biological machines we called 'living things'.  In a word, no information means no biological machines, and no biological machines means no life, period.  The problem of biological evolution is the exact problem of the origin of software - how can computer software be written on its own without any external help?  The origin of life is about the origin of specified information, not the origin of chemical accidents.  There is no word to describe this incredibly complex information in a single DNA strand.  Let us hear from the many eminent scientists on this informational conundrum in living things:

I will just quote one here:

"Instead, the living cell is best thought of as a supercomputer - an information processing and replicating system of astonishing complexity.  DNA is not a special life-giving molecule, but a genetic databank that transmits its information using a mathematical code.  Most of the workings of the cell are best described, not in terms of material stuff - hardware - but as information, or software.  Trying to make life by mixing chemicals in a test tube is like soldering switches and wires in an attempt to produce Windows 98.  It won't work because it addresses the problem at the wrong conceptual level." (Paul Davies)      Unquote

This is just a small sample of the vast amount of information that points us to the need for an intelligent designer-Creator.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/27/2022 at 7:15 PM, blackbird said:

Now, what do we make of the fact, that information is present at the very root of all biological function? 

There is no “information” contained within the DNA molecule.  There are chemical reactions.  
 

Saying there’s information is an analogy, which is a way to describe something that isn’t literally true. 
 

“His hair was a bird’s nest” is an analogy.  It’s not literally true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

There is no “information” contained within the DNA molecule.  There are chemical reactions.  
 

Saying there’s information is an analogy, which is a way to describe something that isn’t literally true. 
 

“His hair was a bird’s nest” is an analogy.  It’s not literally true. 

quote

The double helix DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), first identified and isolated in the 1860s by Swiss chemist Friedrich Miescher, and was later 'discovered' by James Watson and Francis Crick in 1953.  It is the 'language of life', the biological software, that determines the construct of every living thing - from the bacterium to man.  For a human being, it is approximately six-foot long when unwound, consisting of about 3.1 billions of base pairs or nucleotides of 4 chemical letters (A,T,C,G).  Every living thing has its unique, signature DNA, and it is a volume of exact digital information to construct the creature from birth to death.  This two-dimensional code will generate all the three dimensional proteins that will, in turn, create all the molecular machinery in the critter.  Above all, this genetic information is transferable and can be stored in a computer hard disk, paper or in any encrypting medium.   It can be sent via an email attachment and be stored in iCloud or Dropbox.

The amazing thing is that this information is independent of the medium it is being housed - just as in Shakespeare's book Macbeth - the information is independent of the paper and ink.  The storyline, the information, is in Shakespeare's head, but the paper and ink are the materials he uses to pen it down.  Not only is information independent from matter but there is a real distinction between tangible matter and intangible information.  The DNA language or code is not the same as the DNA molecules.  And unless this distinction is acknowledged, the Darwinist will be forever hopelessly clinging on to his 'lucky chance' and 'chemical accident' for life to emerge.  The emergence of life is not about the chemicals only, just as the construction of a building is not about the raw materials per se - it is more about information.

"One of the things I do in my classes, to get this idea across to students, is I hold up two computer disks.  One is loaded with software, and the other one is blank.  And I ask them, 'what is the difference in mass between these two computer disks, as a result of the difference in the information content that they possess'?  And of course the answer is 'Zero!  None!'  There is no difference as a result of the information.  And that's because information is a mass-less quantity.  Now, if information is not a material entity, then how can any materialistic explanation account for its origin?  How can any material cause explain its origin?

And this is the real and fundamental problem that the presence of information in biology has posed.  It creates a fundamental challenge to the materialistic, evolutionary scenarios because information is a different kind of entity that matter and energy cannot produce.

In the nineteenth century we thought that there were two fundamental entities in science; matter, and energy.  At the beginning of the twenty first century, we now recognize that there's a third fundamental entity; and it's 'information'.  It's not reducible to energy.  But it's still a very important thing that is real; we buy it, we sell it, we send it down wires.

Now, what do we make of the fact, that information is present at the very root of all biological function?  In biology, we have matter, we have energy, but we also have this third, very important entity; information.  I think the biology of the information age, poses a fundamental challenge to any materialistic approach to the origin of the life.  (Dr. Stephen C. Meyer)      unquote

-from the book Darwin's Universe, From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing,  Survival for Nothing by Yan T. Wee;  section "In the Beginning was Information", Pages 127, 128.

The bottom line is random chance processes as in Darwinian evolution cannot produce information.  The first living cells required a vast amount of DNA information with billions of bits of data.  This could not be produced simply by accidental non-living chemicals randomly coming together.  Life required someone to design and create this complex information within living cells at the beginning or life could not exist.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2021 at 4:58 PM, blackbird said:

That is something that could never have come about by evolution or random chance processes. 

Why was God so crappy at designing humans?  

Eyes that often don’t see properly…. A breathing tube the same as where you swallow food, where the simple act of eating kills people all the time….  a ticking time bomb called an appendix that just ruptures and, before modern (scientific) medicine, would kill people at an early age.  
 

A 10 year old could design a better human body than God (supposedly) did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Chemical reactions are not “information “.  
 

Less bible nonsense, more books about actual biology.  

My posting was talking about science and biology, specifically the 20th and 21st century discovery that information is the fundamental cornerstone of all living things starting with a cell.  The vast amount of information stored in a cell proves beyond a doubt that it required an intelligent designer.  But if you want to remain in the dark ages and not acknowledge the fact that it required God to design and create the most basic living organism such as a cell with immensely complex DNA that is your choice.  I prefer to accept what advanced science has found which points to an intelligent designer to create it.  The old school of chemicals accidentally coming together has been shown to be not a credible explanation for the complexity of the information in DNA and cells.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Why was God so crappy at designing humans?  

Eyes that often don’t see properly…. A breathing tube the same as where you swallow food, where the simple act of eating kills people all the time….  a ticking time bomb called an appendix that just ruptures and, before modern (scientific) medicine, would kill people at an early age.  
 

A 10 year old could design a better human body than God (supposedly) did. 

No.  The human body made up of countless systems and information storage in cells is beyond comprehension.  The fact that man rebelled from God in the garden of Eden explains why there are many illnesses, imperfections in the world and death.  That was man's fault when he rebelled against God.  So we live in an imperfect world with fallen mankind.  The future for those who turn to God in repentance and faith in Jesus Christ will be wonderful as they will enter into eternal life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, blackbird said:

No.  The human body made up of countless systems and information storage in cells is beyond comprehension.  The fact that man rebelled from God in the garden of Eden explains why there are many illnesses, imperfections in the world and death.  That was man's fault when he rebelled against God.  So we live in an imperfect world with fallen mankind.  The future for those who turn to God in repentance and faith in Jesus Christ will be wonderful as they will enter into eternal life.

Will I still eat and breathe from the same tube when I’m basking in heaven?  Crap design by a crappy designer.  He sucked at His job!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/30/2022 at 12:58 PM, TreeBeard said:

Chemical reactions are not “information “.  
 

Less bible nonsense, more books about actual biology.  

These people make me laugh,  you use science, he comes back with a book written by a pastor with no degrees 

Best part though, think of how many reasonable people hear crackpots like this and it actually bring them out of religion.  I sometimes wonder if they're just atheist troll using reverse psychology.  Hahahaha 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, SkyHigh said:

These people make me laugh,  you use science, he comes back with a book written by a pastor with no degrees 

Best part though, think of how many reasonable people hear crackpots like this and it actually bring them out of religion.  I sometimes wonder if they're just atheist troll using reverse psychology.  Hahahaha 

Unfortunately Treebeard did not use science.  If he had, we might have something to get a grip on.  But he really has nothing to say.  

This book may have been written by a Pastor, but when one reads it, he begins to realize this guy is no ordinary Pastor.  He has an incredibly deep knowledge of the subject and has collected a vast amount of information from scientists of various types.  Each chapter has a detailed reference listing the sources of information from various scholars, and scientists.  He obviously had a huge amount of help putting this book together.  This definitely does not have the quality of coming from a lay person, but rather a large number of scholars and people with scientific knowledge of the subject.

Speaking on the subject of the theory of evolution:  As an example, I will quote part of a section in the book under "Bones of Contention" just to give you an idea of the quality of this book.

"Why is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links?  Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory." (Charles Darwin)    

This quote from the father of the Theory of Evolution, Charles Darwin, is a stunning admission that the inventor or author of the Theory of Evolution had great doubts himself about the theory.  Yet it has been embraced by much of the world's experts or biologists, etc. as absolute truth.   I will continue with quoting:

"Evolutionary biologists postulate that evolution did take place but paleontologists are hard pressed to find the evidence in the fossil record.  In theory, there would have been millions of transitional forms between the major taxa in the fossil record to make evolution 'as good as cash'.  But the truth is that there are massively more gaps than alleged transitions in this fossil record even up to this present time.  This is despite 120 years later after Darwin and tons of fossils were unearthed.  Word-renowned Stephen J. Gould, paleontologist and evolutionary biologist, was candid in his assessment of the rarity of transitional critters in the fossil record.  He writes:

"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record-persists as the trade secret of paleontology.  The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils...We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study." "

- Darwin's Universe, From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing... Survival for Nothing by Yan T. Wee  (available on Amazon)

    This is just a tiny sampling of the book, which shows the input by paleontologist and evolutionary biologists like the renowned Stephen J. Gould makes the book an extremely credible work that should be taken seriously.  I continue to read and study it.   When we have some of the greatest experts in the field casting serious doubt from a scientific point of view on Darwinism and other speculations on the origin of the universe and mankind then we ought to take it seriously and not just accept something because it has become entrenched by herd mentality in the public school system and much of the academic world and elsewhere.  Acceptance of something when the evidence is against it is the same as acceptance of false religion.  Too many people take evolution and the existence of the universe as some cosmic accident as the truth when the evidence points in a different direction.

And just to reiterate, the fact that the theory of evolution or Darwinism has failed to authenticate it's claims with the fossil record is one major failing of it.  The other point which I expanded on in detail in an earlier posting which we should remember  is:

The bottom line is random chance processes as in Darwinian evolution cannot produce information.  Information is the third pillar of the basic building block of life and information does not come about by random chance processes or produce itself out of thin air.  The first living cells required a vast amount of DNA information with billions of bits of data.  This could not be produced simply by accidental non-living chemicals randomly coming together.  Life required someone to design and create this complex information package within living cells at the beginning or life could not exist.

Edited by blackbird
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
      10,753
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Matthew
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Venandi earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • DUI_Offender went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

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