Evidence for God from Science

Byblos wrote:Great lecture, I enjoyed it very much. Thanks.

OT: Byblos are you originally from there?

Hello Murray, here is a good link to start with.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APConte ... ticle=2501

Wish I could post more but I'm on my iPod, but this should help in understanding one of the massive problems with the fairy tale of macroevolution .

Stu wrote:Another fantastic mind.

Yes and also a very humble scientist. I've always enjoyed his past lectures.
I'm sure I'll enjoy going through this one also.

Dayage don't forget that DNA is basically a language and a language only arises from a mind (god).

I'm still confused by this idea of "scientific theory without any models, predictions, explanations, consensus, etc." If you want to wonder why hardly any legitimate scientists pay any attention to ID, it's because it promises to solve a scientific question by bypassing science entirely. ...

Bippy wrote: Rick ID doesnt explain to us who that creator is, all it tells us is that life had a designer, and that designer must have been very powerfull. As far as who the designer is that is left up to philosophers, theologians and logicians to argue, but ID does fit very well with Christianity...

MarcusOfLycia wrote:I didn't think the truth needed a consensus to remain the truth.

Nor that scientific inquiry should be limited by what we fully understand, or by things we can all agree on.

I agree 10000% Marcus, and this is also the only way science ever advanced anyways.
Great statement

RickD: You've just discovered one of my biggest qualms with ID as a scientific theory...there isn't even a consensus on what it means. It's just a vague cover-all idea that fills in all the holes by saying "well, something else (God, aliens, etc.) did everything, so don't ask questions why or ...

Correct on that Ivellious, ID is open to people of many beliefs but its very hostile to atheists and materialists in general and that is why Darwinists are so emotionally against it Rick ID doesnt explain to us who that creator is, all it tells us is that life had a designer, and that designer must ...

Yea Stu, William lane Craig also uses the first cause argument and even though Craig is a powerhouse who has taken on and defeated almost every atheist philosopher in his path, I found kreeft much easier for me to understand as far as this analogy is concerned. There must logically be a first cause...

It takes alot of guts to go against the entrenched Darwinist establishment, I really hope he wins . Darwinists are like a cult but sometimes all it takes is one courageous voice to start that paradigm shift to the truth.

Yea Stu, William lane Craig also uses the first cause argument and even though Craig is a powerhouse who has taken on and defeated almost every atheist philosopher in his path, I found kreeft much easier for me to understand as far as this analogy is concerned. There must logically be a first cause ...

Remember Folks people like this kid could be telling the truth. Jesus also said in the bible that the Father has prepared many different houses for his followers. This coincides perfect with each persons experience of seeing a PART of heaven the way they did. I dont think we should be at heaven bein...

I greatly appreciate the extreme list, as it suits my needs when re-enforcing someone's faith, thank you very much, but my dear friend is unconvinced, perhaps a more scientific way of finding out the answer? If your friend is a touchey feeley kind of person then I would suggest the Shroud of Turin ...

Sandy the key here isn't just that God used materials to form life but a major clue here is INFORMATION. The cell is an incredibly complex informational system. Let's make an analogy with a book. A book contains pages and words made from ink, but are those words just pieces of ink? No they represent...