JesusIsAlive
Posts only no replies. Post your most cogent arguments (i.e. posts) that support your view and what you believe is true for others reading pleasure. Let others pick your brain (from your posts of course) and appreciate your intelligence. But only posts that are related to the Religion Forum. Hey, I will read what you have posted if it is cogent/plausible/logical enough.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
First (and with all due respect) I really don't care what Einstein believed. I believe all lot things but what does my belief have to do with the price of tea in China? It does not matter what you believe but what you can substantiate with logic, reason, and strong support, which is why I believe that God is.
Second, you are wrong that I don't have proof that God created everything. I can see proof of God's creative ability all around me, regardless of whether the Bible tells me that God created the Heavens and the earth or not. It does not take a phd in biology or astrophysics to understand that there is way to much evidence for design and order in the universe, so much so that many things can be mathematically determined with utmost precision based on natural laws, probability, and other statistics. I have no assumptions, I base my belief on clear, overwhelming evidence for the Creator. God's knowledge, infinite wisdom, intelligence, and understanding is conspicuously evident in the things that exist. Everything in this universe appears to function with purpose, design, and according to predictable, empirically testable laws. If your loved one created a building with Lego blocks would you conclude that random, chance process caused by an explosion produced that structure? Only a fool would reason that something like that came about on its own. That mode of thinking is highly contradictory and shamefully illogical. Yet this is how many people think with regard to the origin of the universe and life (which is exceedingly more complex).
I don't recall saying that God could have created anything with a single thought. If I did say those exact words then I will eat crow. Until such time please, don't put words in my mouth. Thank you.
All the examples that I provided are not self-sustaining and self-replicating? This is precisely my point (follow closely ThePittman): if those non, self-sustaining, non, self-replicating examples at the very minimum required a designer, what makes you believe that the universe and life which are exceedingly more complicated just came about randomly, without a Designer? Your logic is faulty, flawed, erroneous, and fallacious.
Oh, protobionts are not living organisms, they simply exhibit life properties. But that is not life. Besides, producing something in a controlled environment under predertermined circumstnaces with the aid of highly educated scientists does not remotely mimic or simulate the early earth condionts (sorry, but these are the facts).
So, in conclusion, life (all life) required an intelligent Creator (I just supported this in the paragraph directly above this one with regard to protobionts requiring the help of intelligent scientists).
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Protobionts are not living organisms, they simply exhibit some life properties. But that is not life. Besides, producing something in a controlled environment under predetermined circumstances with the aid of highly educated scientists does not remotely mimic or simulate the early earth conditions (sorry, but these are the facts). So if the supposed precursors of prokaryotic cells (i.e. protobionts) required at the very minimum and intelligent scientist who is trained and educated in scientific practice and principles, and is versed in how to perform scientific research in accordance with the scientific method and other scientific process was necessary to orchestrate the formation of protobionts by guiding, overseeing, and orchestrating the process, what makes you believe that life (complicated life) could have come about from a random, undirected, unmanaged, unguided, unintelligent, chance occurrence? (I don't understand why you cannot see the illogic in this line of thinking). The simplest protobionts could not emerge without the aid of an intelligent, highly educated scientist yet you believe that complicated life, with all of its complexity and variety, intelligence, order, design, apparent purpose, and ingenuity just fortuitously came about with just the right circumstances to support and perpetuate all of them? There isn't this amount of luck and fortuity in the universe. Scientists have done calculations that determine likelihood of an event occurring. Based on those findings they have determined that life could not have emerged by chance. (Sorry, but these are the facts).
If you doubt anything that I have written AngryManatee then do a search on the internet for yourself to find out what scientists have to say about the possibility of life emerging by chance. You will be astonished.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
What argument still stands? Your argument that protobionts can self-assemble? They cannot do this without the aid of highly educated scientists overseeing the process. If they could do it independently then why don't they? They need a guided hand in the process.
Your argument fell a long time ago.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The answer to this question should end all debate. Question: have any of those protobionts ever self-assembled without the aid of an intellegent human?
I rest my case.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
There is no time where God is. Time is linked to space and matter (here in this physical world).
You don't think there is something strange about the fact that some scientists believe that this universe is the product of a random, chance explosion or expansion?
How can something putatively constructed randomly and by chance result in complex, intelligent life, and laws that function logically and with mathematical precision? Scientists are still trying to discover and figure out the many mysteries that this universe presents to them? The notion that the universe and everything in it is a product of chance is so incredible that it should not even been considered for debate. It makes no logical, rational sense.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
First (and with all due respect) I really don't care what Einstein believed. I believe all lot things but what does my belief have to do with the price of tea in China? It does not matter what you believe but what you can substantiate with logic, reason, and strong support, which is why I believe that God is.
Second, you are wrong that I don't have proof that God created everything. I can see proof of God's creative ability all around me, regardless of whether the Bible tells me that God created the Heavens and the earth or not. It does not take a phd in biology or astrophysics to understand that there is way to much evidence for design and order in the universe, so much so that many things can be mathematically determined with utmost precision based on natural laws, probability, and other statistics. I have no assumptions, I base my belief on clear, overwhelming evidence for the Creator. God's knowledge, infinite wisdom, intelligence, and understanding is conspicuously evident in the things that exist. Everything in this universe appears to function with purpose, design, and according to predictable, empirically testable laws. If your loved one created a building with Lego blocks would you conclude that random, chance process caused by an explosion produced that structure? Only a fool would reason that something like that came about on its own. That mode of thinking is highly contradictory and shamefully illogical. Yet this is how many people think with regard to the origin of the universe and life (which is exceedingly more complex).
I don't recall saying that God could have created anything with a single thought. If I did say those exact words then I will eat crow. Until such time please, don't put words in my mouth. Thank you.
All the examples that I provided are not self-sustaining and self-replicating? This is precisely my point (follow closely ThePittman): if those non, self-sustaining, non, self-replicating examples at the very minimum required a designer, what makes you believe that the universe and life which are exceedingly more complicated just came about randomly, without a Designer? Your logic is faulty, flawed, erroneous, and fallacious.
Oh, protobionts are not living organisms, they simply exhibit life properties. But that is not life. Besides, producing something in a controlled environment under predertermined circumstnaces with the aid of highly educated scientists does not remotely mimic or simulate the early earth condionts (sorry, but these are the facts).
So, in conclusion, life (all life) required an intelligent Creator (I just supported this in the paragraph directly above this one with regard to protobionts requiring the help of intelligent scientists).
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Protobionts are not living organisms, they simply exhibit some life properties. But that is not life. Besides, producing something in a controlled environment under predetermined circumstances with the aid of highly educated scientists does not remotely mimic or simulate the early earth conditions (sorry, but these are the facts). So if the supposed precursors of prokaryotic cells (i.e. protobionts) required at the very minimum and intelligent scientist who is trained and educated in scientific practice and principles, and is versed in how to perform scientific research in accordance with the scientific method and other scientific process was necessary to orchestrate the formation of protobionts by guiding, overseeing, and orchestrating the process, what makes you believe that life (complicated life) could have come about from a random, undirected, unmanaged, unguided, unintelligent, chance occurrence? (I don't understand why you cannot see the illogic in this line of thinking). The simplest protobionts could not emerge without the aid of an intelligent, highly educated scientist yet you believe that complicated life, with all of its complexity and variety, intelligence, order, design, apparent purpose, and ingenuity just fortuitously came about with just the right circumstances to support and perpetuate all of them? There isn't this amount of luck and fortuity in the universe. Scientists have done calculations that determine likelihood of an event occurring. Based on those findings they have determined that life could not have emerged by chance. (Sorry, but these are the facts).
If you doubt anything that I have written AngryManatee then do a search on the internet for yourself to find out what scientists have to say about the possibility of life emerging by chance. You will be astonished.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
What argument still stands? Your argument that protobionts can self-assemble? They cannot do this without the aid of highly educated scientists overseeing the process. If they could do it independently then why don't they? They need a guided hand in the process.
Your argument fell a long time ago.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
The answer to this question should end all debate. Question: have any of those protobionts ever self-assembled without the aid of an intellegent human?
I rest my case.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
There is no time where God is. Time is linked to space and matter (here in this physical world).
You don't think there is something strange about the fact that some scientists believe that this universe is the product of a random, chance explosion or expansion?
How can something putatively constructed randomly and by chance result in complex, intelligent life, and laws that function logically and with mathematical precision? Scientists are still trying to discover and figure out the many mysteries that this universe presents to them? The notion that the universe and everything in it is a product of chance is so incredible that it should not even been considered for debate. It makes no logical, rational sense.
