Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
I know that. But you didn't read what I said. I said that orthodox Christian theology states that God is separatefrom the universe. If the universe is in God as you assert, that means that God and the universe are not separate. Rather, the universe is part of God.
I realize that you said "seperate" and that is why I said "outside". He is seperate only in that He is infinite, whereas, His creation is not. And I am still wondering about the universe being "a part of God". The perfect is supposed to be One in nature. But we can't think of it, like you said, as systems being bubbles.
Then your asssertion that the universe is in God contradicts this, because part of God can indeed be defined by what exists -- the universe.
However, your statement "God is completely undefinable by what exists" also contradicts Christianity on another point: God made flesh in Jesus. We do indeed define God by the existence of Jesus. God is also defined to some extent by the Exodus and the creation of Israel.
God is the system in which things exist, so, because God is we exist. My statement was to show I disagree with the pantheistic view of God, and I worded it wrong. God is definable by humanity, and especially Jesus. I mentioned the "love" thing earlier. My statement should have been- God is greater than what exists, so He is not what exists.
I'm not sure where you are trying to go, Micheli. You seem to be trying a new route to "prove" the existence of God. You aren't doing that. Instead, you are destroying Christianity. I suggest giving up the route and simply acknowledging that God cannot be "proved" by logic.
in what way is infinite proportions perfect? is root2 a perfect number?
Not to be mean, but have you read all of the previous posts? The root of 2 is infact perfectly infinite "in the small". But, in the real world, in order for the universe to not be infinite, there has to be indivisble units of spacetime.
You are special. According to evolutionary theory, there is nothing special about you according to that theory about 15 to 16 billion years ago there was a big bang. Only debris and trash according to that theory from that big bang settled in the arm of Orion of the Milky Way Galaxy and produced our solar system.
From that and natural processes bacteria evolved and ultimately from that we have living systems like trilobytes. Then we have a progression of this trash from an explosion to divide and now to produce the plants. So now we have 2 basic kinds of living systems but all of this a product from a big bang and trash from that big bang.
So according to this theory here we have progression from the dinosaurs and mammals ultimately to the mind of man. Now, according to evolutionary theory there is nothing special about you, me or anyone that is of human origin. Charles Darwin wrote that:
when he realized that man was actually had much incommon with the squid and no more unique then a squid, he felt like he committed murder. Murder of GOD in his own mind and in his mind he did. But you cant kill GOD. In fact at calvary it was attempted and JESUS had said before no man takes my life from me, I lay it down. JESUS died on that cross, but He also rose, so he is no more dead. Back to the concept, according to evolutionary theory there is nothing special about you or anyone who had ever lived.
We are cousins to all the living systems one way or another. Also indentified by evolutionary progress. But there is no evidence to support this. None whatsoever. The closer we look into microbiology studies into the cell and structure of living systems the more complicated these systems appear to be and they where complicated all along.
When Charles Darwin first came up with the modern concept of evolution and by the way he didnt really have a lot of original thoughts. The ancient Babylonians and Greeks (2000 B.C.-500 B.C.) contributed to the same naturalistic ideas, But when he came up with the modern idea he said the cell was a blob of protoplasm, just a blob of rything material. Instead we know that it is extremly complicated. For instance inside the cell of a human being or a living system there are over 60,000 proteins of a 100 different configurations. Now those proteins are not just scattered, they're actually produced through the Endoplasimic Reticulum, actually have zip codes added to them there where they go to the specific placement within that cell, each one is absolutly unique.
Now scientifically, mathmatically the chance that those 60,000 proteins of 100 different configurations each fitting in its own niche with a predetermined zip code the odds of those could evolve in thier placement is 1 chance in 10 to the exponent 4,478,296. That number is beyond any comprehension. Anything said to be over 1 chance in 10 to the 50th power is said to be literall impossible. Even math professors universally say: we can calculate how big that number is but it is completely impossible to even imagine how big that number is. it is so large, thats 10 to that number. 1 chance in that number is so small it is beyond the potenital of happening naturally even if given an eternity of time.
That means evolution has no basis, in fact, on the other hand we have the concept of creation. And creation invisions all of the living systems supporting each other. There from the plankton through the plants through the reptiles through the birds through the the mammals and all structured appropriatly in the universe to premitt life to be possible.
But man is unique, it has been learned years ago that all of this system is a supporting background cast. Not a one of these systems depend upon man. Man is dependent on all of the backgrounds (this is what you would expect since GOD created every living system before man. Since the Bible says man was created last we would expect to be dependent upon all other structures, but animals being created before man we would also expect that they dont depend on man. this is what we see to back it up.) including the background refrences to heaven which we will learn. None of these systems upon man upon their operator man stands alone and unique. In the book of Genesis chapter 1 the Bible begins with this statement: in the begining GOD. The Bible does not begin with an explaination of GOD, you cant explain GOD. The Bible does not begin with a defense for GOD, GOD needs no defense. He gives us the privilege of standing up for Him for our own benefit and for the ears of the hearers beacuse He has representitives, we are his embassadors. But GOD could run the universe and eternity without us just as well as with us. We are actually a little bit of baggage but I'm glad He is willing to carry us.
Gen 1:1IN THE beginning God (prepared, formed, fashioned, and) created the heavens and the earth. [Heb. 11:3.]
Gen 1:2The earth was without form and an empty waste, and darkness was upon the face of the very great deep. The Spirit of God was moving (hovering, brooding) over the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3And God said, Let there be light; and there was light.
Gen 1:4And God saw that the light was good (suitable, pleasant) and He approved it; and God separated the light from the darkness. [II Cor. 4:6.]
Gen 1:5And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
Astronomers and astrophysists recgonize from the energy of that light from the raditation of that light can be transmuted by all the elements making the universe and making life possible on planen: Earth. Yet just a transmoving of there elements does not place them uniquely in star bodies and in galaxoes. Does not place them uniquely as the base elements of the earth orchestrated perfectly and then the energy of the excitation to the point where GOD then breathed into the nostrils of man the Breath of Life and man beacame a living soul and requires the orchestration of a divine Creator. So thats the verse 1-5 in Genesis chapter 1.
After all things (except man was made) where set in place and perfect. In Gensis chapter 1 verse 26 it begins: "Let Us", thats a plural singular. One yet in trioleticate expration. That is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit but resident within one person. JESUS CHRIST whom dwelleth the fullness of the GOD-Head bodily. So He said Let Us make man in Our image as We are 3, man will be tri-party, 3, body, spirit, and soul. in the universe there is past, present, and future. So now man is given a present and a future. And the past is in the hand of GOD. Here we have man made in the image of GOD after Our likeness, very unique, not like the animals, not like the apes even though they have 98.4% identical gentic instruction within us. The apes have four appendages, so do we, they have nostrils, hair, cranium, a spinal column, lung, kidneys; that is genetic information but its the 1.6% variation that makes all the difference. That 1.6% difference expresses over 30 million nucleotides, any 3 of those lined together beomes lethal to the host orgainism and its cell aborts. What i am saying is you cant produce an ape or an ape-like creature, man is special. You are special in you potential:
There are approximately 125 billion miles of DNA in a human. How!? Human stature is on average less than 6 feet tall and 3 feet wide. Its like this: inside that nucleus of that tiny cell that is so samll it takes a very special modern microscope to see it, inside the nucleus of that cell is the DNA.That DNA is wrapped up into a ball. It vibrates at 256 cycles per scond , which is equivalent o the C note on the diatonic scale. Did you get that? That is the same scale and frequency that people like betoven and other masters wrote thier masterpieces on. And middle C is the vibratory cycle equivalent to that DNA. Unless that DNA is is diseased or derlect it is designed at 256 cycles per second. That is very important and it is coiled upon itslef and its only very tiny, a few atoms wide. So if you were to stretch it out, scholars tells is it would be almost 2 meters in length. When you multiply that by 100 trillion cells in encompassed in your body that will give you 125 billion miles of DNA. This data is supported by Nobel-Lorietsn who are studying in this area. There are approximately 125 billion miles of DNA in your body-corresponding to 70 round trips betweeen Saturn and the sun. You could travel your entire life in a boeing 747 flying at top speed and you would not even cover one tenth of this distance. YOur DNA is vibrating, its giving off radio signals, and its giving off photons of light. It self generates light from the DNA, so it is both a reciever and transmitter. Your recieving information and giving information. We are wonderfully made, courisouly wrought (as David the psalmist says). Wrought is the equivalent in the hebrew verbage is emboidery where everything is intertwined with everythiung else. You are awesome. You have 100 trillion ceells on average. Total length of your veings, artiers, and capillaries would wrap arounf the earth 3 times. Your blood flows 168 million miles a day. That is if the blood was stretched out; hemoglobin molecule which is the most complicated molecular structure known to man. You stretch those out and that is the equivalent of your blood flowing 168 million miles a day. Your heart pumps enough blood to fill the fuel tanks of 10 boeing 747 jumbo jets.You are an entity able to contimplate the work of GOD. Able to inquire about the mind of GOD, you uniquely, man alone can sit in your office, observitory, or laboritory and measure the distance to the furtherest star, weigh the mass of the universe, and interpet the universal course of violens being played. Animals cannot do this, the crickets cannot do this. 1 molecule of hemoglobin (said to be the most complex substance known to man) contains 2378 atoms. The body makes 140 million of these every minute. No scientist, no anthropoligst, no palentoloigst have found anything comparable to man that has ever existed. The total surface area on average of an adults capillaries is enough to cover 19 tennis courts.
We are, in our solar system, on the arm of orion. Our galaxy's diameter is 100,000 light years. If we were one arm closer to the center of our galaxy (that is to say, if we were on the arm of Persious) we would be so close to the radiation from the center of the Milky Way galaxy that life would not be possible on the planent earth. If instead we were one arm beyond we would see nothing but a gloob of material and not know we were in that galaxy.
Physicists Rees and Carr. in the Nature "The Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physicl World", calculated human and cosmos atom to the entire universe and found:
The size of the earth is a geometric mean/average of the size of the universe. Thats odd, what is the possibility of that occuring by "Natural Selection"?
Take the electron, the smallest unit of measurable material, the mean/average of the universe and electron is the earth. To go further one human body is the geometric mean/average of the mass is the proton, the most important subatomic element in the universe, the mass of the proton and the earth, you are directly in the middle, the mean/average of those two. A pattern seems to be happening that makes "Natural Selection" very difficult to belief.
[quote=gnarly love]Physicists Rees and Carr. in the Nature "The Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physicl World", calculated human and cosmos atom to the entire universe and found:
The size of the earth is a geometric mean/average of the size of the universe. Thats odd, what is the possibility of that occuring by "Natural Selection"? [/QUOTE]How do they know the size of the universe? How could Earth possibly the average size? Do you mean the average size of bodies of planets and stars?
__________________
Last edited by Michali; 5th November 2003 at 04:39 PM.
You are special. According to evolutionary theory, there is nothing special about you according to that theory
On the contrary. You are I are the product of an unbroken line of winners going back 3.8 billion years. Pretty special.
However, I understand what you are saying. But you are barking up the wrong tree and asking science to do something it can't do and shouldn't do. Science describes how the universe works. Putting value on life and purpose and meaning to life are not part of science. You have to get that somewhere else.
about 15 to 16 billion years ago there was a big bang. Only debris and trash according to that theory from that big bang settled in the arm of Orion of the Milky Way Galaxy and produced our solar system.
Calling the matter "trash" is your value judgement and is not part of the theory. If you are going to state the theory, then state it and stop injecting your value judgements as tho they are part of the theory.
From that and natural processes bacteria evolved and ultimately from that we have living systems like trilobytes. Then we have a progression of this trash from an explosion to divide and now to produce the plants.
Actually, your sequence is wrong. Plants diverged from animals before the multicellular stage. There are single celled plants. Algae is one.
Charles Darwin wrote that:
when he realized that man was actually had much incommon with the squid and no more unique then a squid, he felt like he committed murder. Murder of GOD in his own mind and in his mind he did.
This isn't a quote. Where did you get it? What Darwin "killed" was the theory of special creation. But special creation is not God. If Darwin really thought he "murdered" God, how did he write those two passages in Origin? You haven't answered that yet, Gnarly. Please do so.
We are cousins to all the living systems one way or another. Also indentified by evolutionary progress. But there is no evidence to support this. None whatsoever.
Gnarly, please stop bearing false witness. You are giving Christians a bad name. Of course there is evidence. Darwin could never have convinced people without evidence. Origin of the Species is full of evidence. Have you read it? If not, then you have no business commenting on it this way.
Also, there is no such thing as "evolutionary progress". Progress towards what? What is there in evolutionary theory to set the goal of "progress". Evolution is a bush, not a ladder.
When Charles Darwin first came up with the modern concept of evolution and by the way he didnt really have a lot of original thoughts. The ancient Babylonians and Greeks (2000 B.C.-500 B.C.) contributed to the same naturalistic ideas,
Your source has fibbed to you again. It is the Greeks that came up with the idea of special creation. Aristotles' "eternal forms" are the same as "unchangeable kinds". Look up Plato and Aristotle and see for yourself.
But when he came up with the modern idea he said the cell was a blob of protoplasm, just a blob of rything material. Instead we know that it is extremly complicated. For instance inside the cell of a human being or a living system there are over 60,000 proteins of a 100 different configurations. Now those proteins are not just scattered, they're actually produced through the Endoplasimic Reticulum, actually have zip codes added to them there where they go to the specific placement within that cell, each one is absolutly unique.
Now scientifically, mathmatically the chance that those 60,000 proteins of 100 different configurations each fitting in its own niche with a predetermined zip code the odds of those could evolve in thier placement is
1 chance in 10 to the exponent 4,478,296.
I already refuted this. You can't simply post it again as tho that refutation doesn't exist. Evolution is NOT chance. Selection is the exact opposite of chance. It's pure determinism.
That means evolution has no basis, in fact, on the other hand we have the concept of creation.
I hate to tell you, but you are arguing against the formation of life. That isn't part of evolution. Darwin recognized this.
"There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved." C. Darwin, On the Origin of Species, pg 450.
See? Once you have that cell, then evolution starts and creates the diversity of life on the planet.
What you are arguing, Gnarly, is theism vs atheism. You think creationism is "creation" and thus theism and evolution is atheism. NO! NO! NO! Evolution is not atheism and creationism is not theism.
But man is unique, it has been learned years ago that all of this system is a supporting background cast. Not a one of these systems depend upon man. Man is dependent on all of the backgrounds (this is what you would expect since GOD created every living system before man. Since the Bible says man was created last we would expect to be dependent upon all other structures, but animals being created before man we would also expect that they dont depend on man. this is what we see to back it up.)
Then why are plants dependent on animals to fertilize them and spread their seeds? Plants were created first and therefore not be dependent on animals. But they are. That falsifies your argument.
Also, in the past many predators were dependent on humans as a major food source. In Africa, for instance, early humans were a major food source for the big cats. Nearly all the fossils we have of that location show tooth marks from being chewed on by them.
In the book of Genesis chapter 1 the Bible begins with this statement: in the begining GOD.
So what in Origin of the Species denies this? What do you think in modern science refutes this?
He has representitives, we are his embassadors.
Well, it's nice to see someone who finally got the meaning of "in his image" correct.
Astronomers and astrophysists recgonize from the energy of that light from the raditation of that light can be transmuted by all the elements making the universe and making life possible on planen: Earth.
This is so garbled I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Please try again. However, it looks like you are ramping up to the Anthropic Principle.
Yet just a transmoving of there elements does not place them uniquely in star bodies and in galaxoes. Does not place them uniquely as the base elements of the earth orchestrated perfectly and then the energy of the excitation to the point where GOD then breathed into the nostrils of man the Breath of Life and man beacame a living soul and requires the orchestration of a divine Creator.
Or maybe not. But the question is how did God orchestrate this. The evidence in His Creation says that the elements were made by nucleosynthesis in stars (fusion), earth was made by gravity, and life by chemistry.
So thats the verse 1-5 in Genesis chapter 1.
After all things (except man was made) where set in place and perfect.
Actually, the Bible never uses the word "perfect" in Genesis 1. Where are you getting this. It's not from God's Word. Where are you pulling it from?
In Gensis chapter 1 verse 26 it begins: "Let Us", thats a plural singular.
Are you sure? After all, the name of God in Genesis 1 is "elohim" which is the PLURAL of "god" in Hebrew.
One yet in trioleticate expration. That is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit but resident within one person.
I'm sure you didn't get this from Genesis 1 or God's Word. Trinity is a man-made theory conceived in the period 100- 400 AD.
That 1.6% difference expresses over 30 million nucleotides, any 3 of those lined together beomes lethal to the host orgainism and its cell aborts.
I think you have been fibbed to again. But it is hard to tell because what you say doesn't make much sense.
There are approximately 125 billion miles of DNA in a human.
So? How is this relevant?
hemoglobin molecule which is the most complicated molecular structure known to man.
There are far more complicated molecular structures known. Ever hear of aggrecan?
No scientist, no anthropoligst, no palentoloigst have found anything comparable to man that has ever existed.
Sure we have. Look at whales. Even more blood. Any tree has more DNA than the average human. Look at apes.
If we were one arm closer to the center of our galaxy (that is to say, if we were on the arm of Persious) we would be so close to the radiation from the center of the Milky Way galaxy that life would not be possible on the planent earth. If instead we were one arm beyond we would see nothing but a gloob of material and not know we were in that galaxy.
So? then we would not be here to wonder about it.
Physicists Rees and Carr. in the Nature "The Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physicl World",
I knew you were ramping up to the AP. The Strong Anthropic Priniciple is just flawed logic. BTW, natural selection doesn't apply here. However, given the 100 billion suns in our galaxy alone, what are the odds that ONE planet of ONE of those suns would be in this position? ONE. Virtual certainty. We happen to be on that one.
"According to the Anthropic Principle, we are entitled to infer facts about the universe and its laws from the undisputed fact that we (we anthropoi, human beings) are here to do the inferring and observing. The Anthropic Principle comes in several flavors.
In the "weak form" it is a sound, harmless, and on occasion useful application of elementary logic: if x is a necessary condition for the existence of y, and y exists, then x exists. If consciousness depends on complex physical structures, and complex physical structures depend on large molecules composed of elements heavier than hydrogen and helium, then, since we are conscious, the world must contain such elements.
"But notice that there is a loose cannon on the deck in the previous sentence: the wandering "must". I have followed the common practice in English of couching a claim of necessity in a technically incorrect way. As any student in logic class soon learns, what I really should have written is: *It must be the case that*: if consciousness depends ... then, since we are conscious, the world *contains* such elements.
The conclusion that can be validly drawn is only that the world *does* contain such elements, not that it *had* to contain such elements. It *has* to contain such elements *for us to exist*, we may grant, but it might not have contained such elements, and if that had been the case, we wouldn't be here to be dismayed. It's as simple as that.
Take a simpler example. Suppose John is a bachelor. Then he *must* be single, right? (That's a truth of logic.) Poor John -- he can never get married! The fallacy is obvious in this example, and it is worth keeping it in the back of your mind as a template to compare other arguments with."
Daniel Dennett, Darwin's Dangerous Ideas, pp. 165-166.
__________________ "If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
I am saying that because the universe is not infinite (a fact held by many) it is not the "just exist" that we are looking for.
Sure it is. You have not demonstrated the necessity that the sytem you are looking for must be infinite. That is your premise, but you haven't established that premise. You have to go back and do that.
And it must "exist" in what it is expanding in.
Again, no. The universe is expanding. Period. It is getting larger. It is not required to expand into anything. All that is required is that the universe get bigger. You are applying your limited viewpoint of a balloon expanding into the surrounding air. But the universe is not like that.
You are misunderstanding me completely. The "just exist" system is not the universe because of that reason. And "pi" is a mathematical term and is infact omnipotent in the fact that it "explores" every combination of numbers. An omnipotency in math.
Say what? You just attempted to redefine "omnipotent". But omnipotent is defined as the ability to do anything and everything. That is what "omni" means. Pi is not omnipotent because, although it is infinite it 1) doesn't explore every combination of numbers. After all, it does not explore the combination of 0.1666666 ... does it? It can't! Because that seqeunce also goes to infinity. 2) pi cannot make a hamburger, go for a walk, create a universe, etc. So pi is infiniite but not omnipotent.
And some believe that there is an indivisible unit.The theory of multiple universes is a good example.
Indivisible unit of what? That's the second time you have used multiple universes incorrectly. What exactly do you think is the theory of multiple universes? I can think of at least 3 different one.
If space time is infinite (note that I don't believe it is) everything is possible for it.
I gave several examples of entities that are NOT possible. You didn't address any one of them. Therefore you cannot simply assert a falsified claim as tho it is still true.
__________________ "If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
Linear Mode
