Evidence for God from Science

eagle25c wrote:Hello Again,

I am not an angry atheist, Iill not claim to be overly intelligeny either. Just drawing my own conclusions from study and life experiences. But I want to answer some of the replies that I got from my first post.

First to Gman, thank you for a rational response. No six day creation, local flood, etc. I can buy that. I notice how you refer to 900 year olds, giants or living in a fish as a "figure of speech", do you know how many Christians would claim you cannot be a Christian if you do not read the old testament literally?

Some do others don't. The eastern religions don't have a problem with it whereas the westerns do.. Some things in the Bible are either symbolic, figures of speech, allegories, orientalisms, idioms, and what not.. As an example if I say that I toasted someone today, does that mean that I actually changed them into a piece of toast? It's the same thing in the Bible..

About the 900 year olds, that isn't a figure of speech.. More here.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/longlife.html

About the giants.. It's not only the Bible that talks about them. Actually you will find out more about them outside of the Bible.. All the cultures talk about them..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_%28mythology%29

It's interesting that you are attacking the Bible and not really addressing the problems with Darwinism. Many do that... They know that their science is flawed, so what they do is attack the Bible.. Old news..

eagle25c wrote:Just like this site has asked for concrete evidence of evolution, I would like to get concrete theology that would be agreed by all Christians.

Sure read away..

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/creation.html

eagle25c wrote:I will not insist that you include the mormons since they believe that God and Jesus are flesh and live on the planet Kolbus. Pretty crazy huh?

Well.. Mormonism is certainly not Christianity.. No argument there..

eagle25c wrote:I have not rejected one God in order to worship something else. That defies the very definition of worship. I will make up my own mind based on evidence presented and move on. I am open to changing my mind if I am wrong. When you say that not knowing isn't science? Well Gman you are wrong. Did Edison know the exact filament to make light bulb work on the first attempt? Humans always knew that lightning was powerful, but it took Franklin to first capture it and Faraday to understand it. Were all the experimnents and study in the mean time not science? We know that life began and are looking for how. That is science.

I have no idea what you are talking about.. My claim is that certain aspects of evolution are not scientific but are assumptions based on philosophy.

eagle25c wrote:Micro doesn't equal macro. I cannot begin to address that. If I separate micro from macro then I will be playing on a field I chose not to. The entire macro vs micro is a Christian invention to maintain the discussion.

That is a lie... Micro and marco evolution are MOST certainly taught in college biology books... My 2010 biology book "Biology: Concepts and Connections" has enitire sections devoted to it..

eagle25c wrote:If I mentioned the pelvis bone of a whale I would expect you to give the standard Christian answer.Historical human has only been around for 7,000 years. If you buy that the earth is billions of years old, what percentage of time is that? The scientific human has only been around for several hundred years and you want them to provide all the answers already? Also, I'll suggest your reading material is tilted towards your point of view. By the way, you may find reading about retro viruses fascinating.

What? The concept that man evolved is nothing new.. It goes way back to the time of the Greeks..

eagle25c wrote:It sounds like my theology was similar to that on this site. I began my search when at aback yard church barbecue some one was talking about the earth being 6,000 years old and I responded saying that if that were true the sky would be dark at night because the light of the stars would not have reached us yet. At that point a friend of mine put his arms around my shoulders and walked me to a different part of the yard. This same friend started to provide me Kent Hovind tapes which I initially found fascinating but opened the flood gates to my studying big bang, evolution, etc. The first thing I rejected was bible literalism. And if the Bible isn't literal than what is fact and what isn't. The same friend that believed the earth is 6,000 years old believes that the story of Adam and Eve is allegorical.HUH! You cannot have it both ways. How can Christians tolerate idiots like Ken Hamm, Todd Freil, Ray Comfort, Kirk Cameron and the list goes on. I love listening to Joyce Meier and Joel Osteen, but there is absolutely nothing biblical in what they present. Is the Catholic Church or Luther right. Logically it is easy to write off the other religions of the world. I still find the basic theology of Christians the easiest to digest in that man has turned from God and requires redemption. I think a fourth grader could have written a story better than Adam and Eve to explain this. If the omnipotent, omniscient God cannot lay down a clear road map, than I will continue to beleive that Christianity is the invention of man rather than the redemptive plan of an all powerful God. If my eternal damnation is the price for this opinion than at least I hope I get to roast next to samuel Clemens and we can talk in between writhing in pain.

If you want 100% proof of anything, God, evolution, etc.. you won't find it. But that doesn't mean that you can't have 100% convictions either. We do that every time we step on jet plane, knowing that in most cases you are safe it won't go down in a flaming ball of fire..

eagle25c wrote:By the way, modern Christian morality is great .It is the mental health of Christians worrynig about whatGod wants I find toublesom. Finally, I am currently in trouble withthe IRS. If I pray the prayer of redemption and ask Christ to re enter my heart and then I sow my last $500.00 and pray real hard, will the bank send me a check for $10,000 out of no where? I think I'm getting back on the bus.

Nice, turn God into a cosmic vending machine.. That is what the Bible is all about.. Getting money and hurting the poor. Sounds like you have read the Bible..

eagle25c wrote:
Basic logic dictates that you need to prove God and not for me to disprove. I am open. Yes, I am saying that macro evolution is a Christian invention. Source me to a secular site not replying to a Christian question that uses the term macro evolution and I will admit I'm wrong and change my mind.

Well you are going to have to eat your words on that one.. Get this book "Biology: Concepts and Connections", and it will explain macro and micro evolution for you.

Gman wrote:

eagle25c wrote:
Basic logic dictates that you need to prove God and not for me to disprove. I am open. Yes, I am saying that macro evolution is a Christian invention. Source me to a secular site not replying to a Christian question that uses the term macro evolution and I will admit I'm wrong and change my mind.

Well you are going to have to eat your words on that one.. Get this book "Biology: Concepts and Connections", and it will explain macro and micro evolution for you.

Want me to scan some sections for you?

You'd be wrong on that one eagle...Up until 3 years ago, the previous edition of the AP biology textbook I use used those terms. For a long while biology used these terms freely and it wasn't until Christians started using them that they started dissolving the boundaries.

eagle25c wrote:I found this site just yesterday and posted a response after only reading the first page of the thread. I will go back and read other postings and if I have anything half intelligent to add I will. I will also read the Deem's articles and we can discuss at a later time. As for the long life question, please do not ever use the Bible to prove the Bible or I will go away. That's a Forrest Gump stupid is as stupid does move. Just as you are requesting proof for evolution, I would ask for proof for long lived humans and as far as I know there is none. If that makes me incredulous so be it.

Good luck with your search.

Please can you quote where I have used the bible to prove 900 year life...? If you are looking for proof for something other than is asked in this thread please feel free to start a topic. So far you have not addressed the OP...

eagle25c wrote: Basic logic dictates that you need to prove God and not for me to disprove. I am open. Yes, I am saying that macro evolution is a Christian invention. Source me to a secular site not replying to a Christian question that uses the term macro evolution and I will admit I'm wrong and change my mind.

You are so far off with this. Logic actually dictates that the universe must have had a cause; since 'nothing', 'in and of itself' cannot be said to be a cause, then logic dictates that there must be a causer. Please don't go down the road of burden of proof, as you will fall short.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/macroevolution.html

"Evolution proponents often say that creationists invented the terms. This is false. Both macroevolution and microevolution are legitimate scientific terms, which have a history of changing meanings that, in any case, fail to underpin creationism."

Let's see that again... "Evolution proponents often say that creationists invented the terms. This is false. Both macroevolution and microevolution are legitimate scientific terms, which have a history of changing meanings that, in any case, fail to underpin creationism

This is from an Evolutionist, and under no prompting from a Christian ...

Gman, take a look at that link and see all sorts of nonsense being tossed about as fact.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/e ... tion.shtml

"Macroevolution is evolution on a grand scale—what we see when we look at the over-arching history of life: stability, change, lineages arising, and extinction."

There you go eagle.

eagle25c wrote:Pardon me August,

Retro viruses like DNA leave a trail that be be traced through multiple generations. For instance humans and orangutans share a retro virus that would be impossible if we did not share a common ancestor at some point. I am not a scientist , but I find that compelling evidence.

Sorry to tell you, but that has been debunked since 2007 already. It is only compelling if you assume what you want to prove, i.e. use circular reasoning. The actual data shows that the initial assumptions about ERV's were wrong.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4094119/r ... nberg_phd/

OK I'm wrong on marcro/micro evolution. There is both, but I'm sticking with my guns on the actions and results being the same. A species would have to change 1% every 20,000 years or for humans every 1,000 generations, or 4,000 generations or more for most other animals to have species differnetiation within 200,000 years. That's not scientific by the way just my speculation. DannyM I think we're about done. I said you used the Bible because you brought nothing else to the table. I know there is a big (supposedly) human finger, so the evidence for a giant exist. Actually Andre the giant was a pretty big fella, but not a race. Long lived humans, I come up with nothing. Finally, the the universe started from nothing therefore logic dictates a causer? I come up blank on this Danny. There was a cause. Evidence points towards a big bang. but what caused (or who) is not known. We also don't know what happenned before the big bang. I try to read current physics on the theory of multiverse and multi dimensions, but I really do not understand any of the math and concepts , so I'll leave that alone. Saying logic dictates a causer is a huge leap of faith, but I guess this is the right site for that. Finally, I'll fall short if I put the burden on you to prove there's a God. Go right ahead Danny, fall me short


August, ERV's are remnants of viruses attached to DNA within a cell and can only be passed on generationally. But I'm sure you already knew that. Debunked in 2007. I'm coming up blank. Please site a secular source. Evidence that a small percentage of retro viruses are used within a living host does not debunk any other portion of the ERV. By the way saying that a shared ERV in the same exact DNA location in a human as an orangutan therefore there must be a common ancestor is not circular logic. Saying there is a God because the Bible says so. There's your circular logic.

eagle25c wrote:DannyM I think we're about done. I said you used the Bible because you brought nothing else to the table.

No. I asked you to explain why you were so incredulous at the 900 year life. I asked you what you base your incredulity on. It's as straightforward as that. Still waiting for an answer

eagle25c wrote:There was a cause. Evidence points towards a big bang. but what caused (or who) is not known. We also don't know what happenned before the big bang. I try to read current physics on the theory of multiverse and multi dimensions, but I really do not understand any of the math and concepts , so I'll leave that alone. Saying logic dictates a causer is a huge leap of faith, but I guess this is the right site for that.

So what do you put your faith in? Chance? If not Chance then what? Is my faith any greater than yours? If so, how?

eagle25c wrote:Finally, I'll fall short if I put the burden on you to prove there's a God. Go right ahead Danny, fall me short

Indeed. I cannot prove God. You cannot prove Chance (or whatever.) But we can look at the evidence. Science tells us that the universe, all matter, space and time, came into existence some 14 billion years ago. So there was a cause. What was this cause? Was it 'nothing'? Is it really very rational to posit nothing? If you reject nothing then I take it you accept something as being the cause? If this something is not a causer then how do you account for the incredible order of the universe? How do you account for the purpose implied in the exactness of the order of the universe? We on this site suggest this purpose is the result of a purposer Do you know of anything that doesn't have a cause?

Or what about DNA? Is the incredibly complex coded information in DNA merely accidental, or lucky? See this link:

http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/iidb.htm

1) DNA is not merely a molecule with a pattern; it is a code, a language, and an information storage mechanism.
2) All codes are created by a conscious mind; there is no natural process known to science that creates coded information.
3) Therefore DNA was designed by a mind.

Read on through the link. Do you really believe that chance mutations+natural selection can account for this phenomenon? When you merely put all this down to a 'wonderful accident' then I'm afraid that logic goes out the window.

DannyM wrote:Gman, take a look at that link and see all sorts of nonsense being tossed about as fact.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/e ... tion.shtml

"Macroevolution is evolution on a grand scale—what we see when we look at the over-arching history of life: stability, change, lineages arising, and extinction."

There you go eagle.

Great point Danny,

Hey, did you also read what it said about macroevolution?

"It is not necessarily easy to "see" macroevolutionary history; there are no firsthand accounts to be read. Instead, we reconstruct the history of life using multiple lines of evidence, including geology, fossils, and living organisms."

Source: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... oscales_05

There are no firsthand accounts to be read.. Instead they have to reconstruct it... In other words they have to use their philosophy to interpret their multiple lines of evidence...

And this resource is from Berkeley.. A very expensive top notch school here in California..

eagle25c wrote: The only anger I have is towards Furstentum. That was an arrogant and supercilious statement claiming that once converted by the Holy Spirit there is no going back. There are many more than myself and after all only myself and God knows for sure.

Sorry to have angered you. Accept my apologies.

My statement was neither angry nor haughty; once you've accepted Christ as Lord of your life, there really is no going back. I don't affirm this, the Bible does. A born-again Christian may backslide in his commitment to practically living out his faith. That is, he may from time-to-time fail to live out his saved state in his daily life. He may drink too much, ogle women, cheat on his taxes, etc. but he will always feel a sense of shame when diverting from Christ's example and will want to draw himself back to that example. Such is the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Christian: using trials and weaknesses to bring one closer to God.

You seem to have been an apostate Christian. Apostacy is different from backsliding in that it denies what it originally pretended to adhere to. In this sense, apostacy is closer in definition to words such as renegade and traitor. Apostates, renegades and traitors never had a Lord other than themselves. Their apostacy is the very evidence that they were fake Christians to begin with.

Don't get angry. Think this over.

Again, welcome to the Forum.

FL

Gman wrote:

DannyM wrote:Gman, take a look at that link and see all sorts of nonsense being tossed about as fact.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/e ... tion.shtml

"Macroevolution is evolution on a grand scale—what we see when we look at the over-arching history of life: stability, change, lineages arising, and extinction."

There you go eagle.

Great point Danny,

Hey, did you also read what it said about macroevolution?

"It is not necessarily easy to "see" macroevolutionary history; there are no firsthand accounts to be read. Instead, we reconstruct the history of life using multiple lines of evidence, including geology, fossils, and living organisms."

Source: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... oscales_05

There are no firsthand accounts to be read.. Instead they have to reconstruct it... In other words they have to use their philosophy to interpret their multiple lines of evidence...

Gman it's astonishing that this claptrap is still given so much credence. There are eager disciples to please, fanatic followers whose thirst needs to be quenched. And it all boils down to, as you say, a philosophy... Will we ever tire of seeing this nonsense?

Gman wrote:

DannyM wrote:Gman, take a look at that link and see all sorts of nonsense being tossed about as fact.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/e ... tion.shtml

"Macroevolution is evolution on a grand scale—what we see when we look at the over-arching history of life: stability, change, lineages arising, and extinction."

There you go eagle.

Great point Danny,

Hey, did you also read what it said about macroevolution?

"It is not necessarily easy to "see" macroevolutionary history; there are no firsthand accounts to be read. Instead, we reconstruct the history of life using multiple lines of evidence, including geology, fossils, and living organisms."

Source: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... oscales_05

There are no firsthand accounts to be read.. Instead they have to reconstruct it... In other words they have to use their philosophy to interpret their multiple lines of evidence...

And this resource is from Berkeley.. A very expensive top notch school here in California..

"Your one-stop source for information on evolution"...Really?

DannyM wrote:"Your one-stop source for information on evolution"...Really?

I think they mean one-stop source for indoctrination..

Evolution.. It splices, it dices.. It's Evolution Wow

Gman wrote:

DannyM wrote:"Your one-stop source for information on evolution"...Really?

I think they mean one-stop source for indoctrination..

Evolution.. It splices, it dices.. It's Evolution Wow

That was funny! I missed that thread!!

eagle25c wrote:OK I'm wrong on marcro/micro evolution. There is both, but I'm sticking with my guns on the actions and results being the same. A species would have to change 1% every 20,000 years or for humans every 1,000 generations, or 4,000 generations or more for most other animals to have species differnetiation within 200,000 years. That's not scientific by the way just my speculation. DannyM I think we're about done. I said you used the Bible because you brought nothing else to the table. I know there is a big (supposedly) human finger, so the evidence for a giant exist. Actually Andre the giant was a pretty big fella, but not a race. Long lived humans, I come up with nothing. Finally, the the universe started from nothing therefore logic dictates a causer? I come up blank on this Danny. There was a cause. Evidence points towards a big bang. but what caused (or who) is not known. We also don't know what happenned before the big bang. I try to read current physics on the theory of multiverse and multi dimensions, but I really do not understand any of the math and concepts , so I'll leave that alone. Saying logic dictates a causer is a huge leap of faith, but I guess this is the right site for that. Finally, I'll fall short if I put the burden on you to prove there's a God. Go right ahead Danny, fall me short


August, ERV's are remnants of viruses attached to DNA within a cell and can only be passed on generationally. But I'm sure you already knew that. Debunked in 2007. I'm coming up blank. Please site a secular source. Evidence that a small percentage of retro viruses are used within a living host does not debunk any other portion of the ERV. By the way saying that a shared ERV in the same exact DNA location in a human as an orangutan therefore there must be a common ancestor is not circular logic. Saying there is a God because the Bible says so. There's your circular logic.

It is very evident your mind is made up and that you're not open to discussing alternatives contrary to what you state. You've been presented with logic, reason, as well as science to counter what you claim and yet you keep regurgitating other sources and insist you're not a scientist and yet you firmly believe your sources. If this is not faith I don't know what is. Believe what you want; I'm just not entirely certain why you're here. Did you really expect to come here, toss around a few buzz words like ERVs and expect no challenge? You're in over your head buddy and I think you know it. So welcome to the site.