Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
False statements are being made here. Even though Christ’s disciples did not have the science we have today, they did look for evidence. Thomas: "So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.” (John 20:25)
“And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.” You see? If Christ was not literally raised from the dead, you’ve got nothing.

So here, life from non-life. An unintelligent force upgraded life until human beings like us appeared. This cannot be proven by science. Experiments to verify this cannot be performed in the lab. Pope Benedict said as much but he has been denounced. He’s not a scientist. Pope John Paul II said something positive about evolution and has been praised. Was he a scientist? No.

So don’t believe it when a few tell you science does not exclude God. Of course it does. No miracles are required to do science. Does the soul exist? Of course not. According to science.

And the Bible is attacked. Nothing in Genesis is literal, it’s poetry or something else. How is God in any way God if He did not make the universe out of nothing? Or raised the dead?
 
Bradskii said:
Glad we have that sorted out.
Click to expand...
What is evident is that you have closed your mind to to the matter.

The idea of an intelligent design to all of reality is consistent with not only the philosophical bent of many naturalists, as I mentioned above, but also eastern religions that speak of the transmigration of the soul, elevated and regressing through karmic influences, governed by a universal Dharma.
 
Last edited:
Bradskii said:
For everyone Al. Not just for you. For everyone who believes, promotes or even started the ID movement. Even to all those who know that ID is abject nonsense. The designer is and always will be…God.
Click to expand...
The ultimate designer would be God. Perhaps we will find an intermedate.that seeded the earth. It is a possibility.
 
Whatever is possible, may turn out to be possible. To date, we have no knowledge of anyone seeding the earth. The question is then: Who made them?
 
I create science-fiction worlds. And I also follow the latest developments in the search for extraterrestrial life. So far, no aliens.
 
buffalo said:
40.png
edwest211:
The question is then: Who made them?
Click to expand...
Possible other aliens. Ultimately there is an uncaused cause we all call God.
Click to expand...
Oh good grief. And this is the man that was bagging Dawkins for effectively making the same point. Are we down to this now? Surely no. Please tell me it ain’t so.

The intelligent designer could be little green men.

As I live and breathe…who would have thought a comment could be made such as that. Despite it being directlyi n opposition to the very founder of the Design Institute himself. I don’t think my flabber could be more gasted.
 
Aloysium said:
40.png
Bradskii:
Glad we have that sorted out.
Click to expand...
What is evident is that you have closed your mind to to the matter.
Click to expand...
Utterly and catastrophically wrong. I would like to you to concede that I have NOT closed my mind to the matter. God may well turn out to be the cause of all there is. Do you follow that statement. Is it understandable? I will repeat it:

God may well turn out to be the cause of all there is.

Any time you would like to correct the unfounded claim you just made, I will be quite prepared to accept your admittance to having been wrong.

And just clarify the matter, because you seem incapable of following anything I say with any degree of comprehension, what I reject is the nonsensical proposal (put forward by the ID movement) is that God brought creaures into this world fully formed.
 
buffalo said:
40.png
Bradskii:
Oh good grief. And this is the man that was bagging Dawkins for effectively making the same point.
Click to expand...
I was actually using Dawkins point.

It is a possibility or not?
Click to expand...
No. you weren’t. You were suggesting that the intelligent designer could be little green men. Simply because it’s not very bright to admit that it’s God. Otherwise, Dover revisited.

Al has only a reluctance to admit it, but he eventually did:

‘I thought it would be clear that, for me, it is God’.

Try it. Honesty is good for the soul.
 
Bradskii said:
No. you weren’t. You were suggesting that the intelligent designer could be little green men. Simply because it’s not very bright to admit that it’s God. Otherwise, Dover revisited.

Al has only a reluctance to admit it, but he eventually did:

‘I thought it would be clear that, for me, it is God’.

Try it. Honesty is good for the soul.
Click to expand...
Duh. I firmly believe it is the Abrahamic God. It is possible there is an intermediate. Who knows, they might be green and little. The multiverse idea allows it.
 
Last edited:
edwest211 said:
don’t believe it when a few tell you science does not exclude God. Of course it does. No miracles are required to do science. Does the soul exist? Of course not. According to science.
Click to expand...
What we do is try to make sense of the relationships we find in nature. In physics and chemistry these are best expressed mathematically and geometrically. To bring it into human terms, it becomes ultimately relevant and understandable, only in the Light that is Jesus Christ. Contemplating the billion upon billions of Galaxies, the seemingly infinite expanses and eons, one can find the Logos in that order, revealing the power and wonder, the glory that is God’s. It all exists as an infinite ocean of compassion, in which everything and everywhere exists and is therefore known in His Love, the Source of it all.

I will agree that science, and not just scientism, is being misappropriated by atheists who appear to, of necessity, by their belief system, or personal intent to deny the existence of God, to disavow the clear reality of intelligence in the natural order. Any scientific effort designed to identify that there exists an ordering principle beyond those rooted in the fundamental laws of nature, must be labelled as pseudoscience. Evolution is their story that explains our origins, and atheism cannot accept even an intelligent universe, since reason leads us to consider that the intelligence must transcend what it produces, and as we open our minds and hearts to that possibility, we will come to know God.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
40.png
Bradskii:
No. you weren’t. You were suggesting that the intelligent designer could be little green men. Simply because it’s not very bright to admit that it’s God. Otherwise, Dover revisited.

Al has only a reluctance to admit it, but he eventually did:

‘I thought it would be clear that, for me, it is God’.

Try it. Honesty is good for the soul.
Click to expand...
Duh. I firmly believe it is the Abrahamic God.
Click to expand...
At last…the Intelligent Designer, despite what the DI says, according to Buffalo, is God.

See why you lost at Dover? The DI wouldn’t admit it. But if you had been a witness, you would have been pressed and questioned until you actually came up with that statement. Which would have immediately een followed by:

No more questions, your honour.
 
Aloysium said:
I will agree that science, and not just scientism, is being misappropriated by atheists who appear to, of necessity, by their belief system, or personal intent to deny the existence of God…
Click to expand...
Paaarp. Straw man. Science and evolution do not deny God.
 
Bradskii said:
what I reject is the nonsensical proposal (put forward by the ID movement) is that God brought creaures into this world fully formed.
Click to expand...
It’s a claim I have made, explaining why I choose to believe, invoking basic scientific facts, that the first of any kind of being, such as humankind, would have appeared fully formed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top