Why did god create more evidence for the big bang and evolution than himself?

[MrSands420]

Just don't get it?

 

[Strathos]

I believe those phenomenon are evidence of God.

 

[Resha Caner]

Just don't get it?

Are you requesting a formal debate on this topic? If so, you need to post in the "proposals" forum? Or are you asking an open question? If so, you need to post in the science forum.

 

[Stabao]

That's a very good question, you might need hours to answer it completly

well... first of all, choose your group:

- Atheist that think Bible is wrong, science is right (unicellular organism evolved into humans)

- Creationists that think Bible is the truth, science is wrong (Earth in 7 day, human the 6th)

- Other believers that think they are both [Bible and science] right, Bible used an image for the duration, and of course "God created everything, step by step, there's your evolution"


About your question, to answer properly, it depends which evidence you are talking about! Tell us



Anyway, some would say than watching earth and sky, you realise it is obviously not random.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Admin Hat...

Thread moved here from Formal Debate.

Mark
CF Admin

 

[miamited]

Just don't get it?

Hi mrsands,

When Jesus was dying on the cross he cried out to his Father, "Father forgive them for they know not what they are doing." He often said that we are ever hearing but never understanding. God has said that He will make foolish the wisdom of the wise.

You believe that God has 'manufactured' evidence of an old creation. I believe my Father and my Lord. We just don't understand. We are the ones who have 'manufactured' the evidence against God's word. God has plainly told us how and when He created this realm. We have manufactured evidence, that we have taken from what He has created, and used that to deny what God has fairly clearly and plainly told us. Paul warns us from this very practice in his letter to the Collosians.

God didn't provide us with any evidence other than His word. He merely created and things came to exist. We, because of our great wisdom, have studied what He has made and determined that there is evidence that what God has told us is not true. I will make foolish the wisdom of the wise.

Consider please that on the day that God scooped up dirt from the earth and formed Adam, that Adam was created on his first day of life as a fully grown and mature man. Any forensic scientist who would have studied Adam on day one would, based on all known evidentiary wisdom of man, denied that Adam had existed for less than 24 hours. He would likely have been dated, based on all the scientific and medical evidence that man has at his disposal as probably 20 or more years old. We do the same thing with the creation account. We take what God has created - apply man's wisdom - and voila' we calculate a date for the creation. We're just as wrong about the age of the creation as the forensic scientist would have been about the age of Adam.

Why? Because we think of ourselves to be wise. The truth is that Jesus was right, we just don't understand.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[BobRyan]

Just don't get it?

Man cannot even create a single living cell - far beyond our "technology" and yet some are so determined not to admit the obvious that they think "rocks, dust and gas can do that by themselves" rather than "evidence for God in every living cell".

Even the atheists in their video "what we still don't know" were forced to a conclusion for God - and had to then "imagine" an almost infinite number of entire universes to "escape God" - how 'instructive'.

Romans 1 says this is exceedingly obvious even to pagans who have no true God at all "the invisible attributes of God being clearly seen through the things that have been MADE".

It is difficult to imagine that even one christian could ever be more in the dark on that subject than the pagans who have no access to any text of God's Word at all.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[dysert]

Just don't get it?

I think it's a matter of perspective. Atheists likely see the evidence and conclude it's a result of "natural processes" (where *they* came from I don't think is addressed). Most Christians see the evidence and conclude it's because God created it all. I think it comes down to how one interprets the evidence.

Personally, I don't accept the ToE as a fact for at least three big reasons.

1. Assuming we're defining ToE as including common descent, this is contrary to Scripture which says that things were individually created and procreated after their own kind. There was not one created thing and then a bunch of procreated things spawned from it. Each animal was created; each plant was created; each human was created; etc. After the initial creation, subsequent generations followed after their own kind.
2. It doesn't make sense from a continual, ongoing processes. If, as evolutionists claim, fruit flies come from fruit flies, then what was the predecessor to the first fruit fly? They weren't around forever.
3. It is internally inconsistent. If fruit flies always come from fruit flies, and if there is a common ancestor for all living things, what was the ancestor for all the non-fruit flies?

We didn't evolve from rocks.

 

[SkyWriting]

Just don't get it?

The "Big Bang" violates all known laws of science which tell us
that every result must have a larger and more organized cause.

Which leads one to ask where all that energy came from?

(An atomic bomb converts the energy of one dime)

 

[Gottservant]

Wait a minute, who says there is more evidence?

The big bang is inconclusive, evolution is indeterminate.

You need to work out what you believe before you start asking ballooning questions about contexts outside the here and now.

 

[SkyWriting]

We didn't evolve from rocks.

If we DID evolve from rocks.....what scientific principle offers
clues as to WHY life occured rather than just warm rocks?

What advantage does life offer a rock?

Most rocks just sit and evaporate over time till they are gone.

What benefit is life to non-living matter?

What chemical properties create life.......when trillions of rock
samples refuse to evolve into life?

 

[dysert]

If we DID evolve from rocks.....what scientific principle offers
clues as to WHY life occured rather than just warm rocks?

What advantage does life offer a rock?

Most rocks just sit and evaporate over time till they are gone.

What benefit is life to non-living matter?

What chemical properties create life.......when trillions of rock
samples refuse to evolve into life?

I don't know why you're asking all these questions. Since we didn't evolve from rocks we would just have to guess at answering them. Your last question is intriguing, though. We could just as easily ask, what processes produce humans... when trillions of samples refuse to evolve into humans?

 

[Kristin E]

He didn't, please YouTube Kent Hovind.

 

[Smidlee]

Even so more evidence doesn't mean more true. For example you can have a ton of evidence pointing to you being guilty of a crime but it only takes a small amount of evidence to show you were framed.

Big Bang and Evolution is something that has to be taught while God is not. You are automatically "wired" to believe in the creator which is why the Bible doesn't waste any time debating God existence.

 

[Open Heart]

The answer is a No BUT....

No, but the KIND of evidence for i.e. the Big Bang and Evolution is scientific and factual and the evidence for God is subjective and experiential.

 

[Skala]

Just don't get it?

There's no evidence for evolution. So what is your question?

A mosquito becoming more tolerant of bug spray is not evidence that every living thing has a common single celled ancestor.

There's not a shred of proof for the latter.

 

[SkyWriting]

I don't know why you're asking all these questions. Since we didn't evolve from rocks we would just have to guess at answering them. Your last question is intriguing, though. We could just as easily ask, what processes produce humans... when trillions of samples refuse to evolve into humans?

Let's assume perfect conditions for the formation of life.......say......our planet.

Why is new life not forming every day then?

 

[lesliedellow]

Just don't get it?

The difference is that the physical world is available for us to put underneath our microscope, whereas God isn't. Therefore the evidence for God has to be indirect, rather than direct.