U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-11-2008, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,038 posts, read 30,680,506 times
Reputation: 12213

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by little elmer View Post
Seriously - anytime you ask "Who created..." just fill in God.

Woe unto him that strives with his Maker! Let the pots strive with the pots of the earth. Shall the clay say to Him that fashions it, "What do You make?" or His work, "He has no hands?" (Isa 45:9)
That make no sense at all to me.....What are you trying to tell me? Try using your own words.

 
Old 10-11-2008, 11:36 AM
 
Location: RV Park
7,543 posts, read 11,554,397 times
Reputation: 4461
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
That make no sense at all to me.....What are you trying to tell me? Try using your own words.
fancofu asked "Who created the dimension that God is in?", and I tried to point out that 1) God is the Creator (and therefore cannot be created) and 2) It's not good policy to question the ability to create of the One who brought you into existence...
 
Old 10-11-2008, 09:39 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
789 posts, read 1,169,854 times
Reputation: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by little elmer View Post
fancofu asked "Who created the dimension that God is in?", and I tried to point out that 1) God is the Creator (and therefore cannot be created) and 2) It's not good policy to question the ability to create of the One who brought you into existence...
The Universe is the creator therefor it cannot/does not need to be created. See what I did there?
 
Old 10-11-2008, 09:42 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
789 posts, read 1,169,854 times
Reputation: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by little elmer View Post
Seriously - anytime you ask "Who created..." just fill in God.

Woe unto him that strives with his Maker! Let the pots strive with the pots of the earth. Shall the clay say to Him that fashions it, "What do You make?" or His work, "He has no hands?" (Isa 45:9)
Seriously, that makes no sense at all. If you make the claim that everything needs a creator then God needs a creator. If the rule doesn't apply to God then it could very well be the same for the universe.

1 Samuel 15:3
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
 
Old 10-11-2008, 11:13 PM
 
3,576 posts, read 453,717 times
Reputation: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by 17271 View Post
I think a single-celled organism gradually turning into a fish, then into a frog, then into birds with wings, etc, is not likely. It's not likely because their parts are too intricate. Take, for instance, a bat (among others). It has echolocation (look it up). Even if people think evolution could explain this, it's still pretty incredible. More intricate parts are snakes with venom from their teeth and plain old apples and bananas.
I agree with you - it is implausible that the universe evolved itself into being and everything randomly designed itself.
 
Old 10-11-2008, 11:20 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
789 posts, read 1,169,854 times
Reputation: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by meerkat2 View Post
I agree with you - it is implausible that the universe evolved itself into being and everything randomly designed itself.
I agree as well. Luckily, what you are describing isn't the theory of evolution.
 
Old 10-11-2008, 11:34 PM
 
3,576 posts, read 453,717 times
Reputation: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Do you really think that it's more likely that everything was magically poofed into existence in 6 days, when there is tons of evidence that that is just not so? Sorry, I do not believe in magic.
I agree with 17271 that it is implausible that the universe which is bound by time and space randomly evolved itself into the profusion and variety of life that exists and I also agree with you that the creation of the world was not in 6 literal days 6000 years ago.
 
Old 10-11-2008, 11:48 PM
 
3,576 posts, read 453,717 times
Reputation: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by fancofu View Post
I agree as well. Luckily, what you are describing isn't the theory of evolution.
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Natural Selection
While Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a relatively young archetype, the evolutionary worldview itself is as old as antiquity. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man from animal. Charles Darwin simply brought something new to the old philosophy -- a plausible mechanism called "natural selection." Natural selection acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Suppose a member of a species developed a functional advantage (it grew wings and learned to fly). Its offspring would inherit that advantage and pass it on to their offspring. The inferior (disadvantaged) members of the same species would gradually die out, leaving only the superior (advantaged) members of the species. Natural selection is the preservation of a functional advantage that enables a species to compete better in the wild. Natural selection is the naturalistic equivalent to domestic breeding. Over the centuries, human breeders have produced dramatic changes in domestic animal populations by selecting individuals to breed. Breeders eliminate undesirable traits gradually over time. Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time.

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Slowly But Surely...
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process. Darwin wrote, "…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." [1] Thus, Darwin conceded that, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." [2] Such a complex organ would be known as an "irreducibly complex system". An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If even one part is missing, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. [3] Thus, such a system could not have evolved slowly, piece by piece. The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: a catch (to hold the bait), a powerful spring, a thin rod called "the hammer," a holding bar to secure the hammer in place, and a platform to mount the trap. If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not work. Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex. [4]

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - A Theory In Crisis
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." [5]

And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." [6]
 
Old 10-12-2008, 12:08 AM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,038 posts, read 30,680,506 times
Reputation: 12213
Quote:
Originally Posted by meerkat2 View Post
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Natural Selection
While Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a relatively young archetype, the evolutionary worldview itself is as old as antiquity. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man from animal. Charles Darwin simply brought something new to the old philosophy -- a plausible mechanism called "natural selection." Natural selection acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Suppose a member of a species developed a functional advantage (it grew wings and learned to fly). Its offspring would inherit that advantage and pass it on to their offspring. The inferior (disadvantaged) members of the same species would gradually die out, leaving only the superior (advantaged) members of the species. Natural selection is the preservation of a functional advantage that enables a species to compete better in the wild. Natural selection is the naturalistic equivalent to domestic breeding. Over the centuries, human breeders have produced dramatic changes in domestic animal populations by selecting individuals to breed. Breeders eliminate undesirable traits gradually over time. Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time.

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - Slowly But Surely...
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process. Darwin wrote, "…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." [1] Thus, Darwin conceded that, "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." [2] Such a complex organ would be known as an "irreducibly complex system". An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If even one part is missing, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. [3] Thus, such a system could not have evolved slowly, piece by piece. The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: a catch (to hold the bait), a powerful spring, a thin rod called "the hammer," a holding bar to secure the hammer in place, and a platform to mount the trap. If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not work. Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex. [4]

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - A Theory In Crisis
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." [5]

And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." [6]
Source please. Never mind I found it..Click "about us" and you get this......AllAboutGOD.com. Not exactly independent is it? You believe BS sites like this?

 
Old 10-12-2008, 12:28 AM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,038 posts, read 30,680,506 times
Reputation: 12213
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. (Charles Darwin, Introduction to The Descent of Man, 1871)

Charles Darwin: The Theory of Evolution
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top