Creation by natural processes is just a theory

[GrimKingGrim]

I feel it is a good idea to try to avoid getting too dogmatic, or convinced one way or the other.

When science talks about creation coming from natural processes it is just a theory. We cannot duplicate the results and leaves us in the dark as to if that really could happen all on its own. We do not have quadrillions of gallons of chemicals nor do we have billions of years to see if life would come creeping up out of the stars. It does explain a lot and there is evidence it did happen like that, but one cannot rule out the possibility that was the way God did it.

I am wondering what are your thoughts on all this?

Sincerely,

Sam

Okay well no. The reason we haven't made life in labs yet because it's pretty hard to do that.

You really cannot rule out that we are in a matrix or in the dream of a sleeping God.

Also science suggests that the planets and the stars had to get created in a solar nebula, which means they got created. So why couldn't there be a creator?

Um. Spawned is more like it. The stars aren't magical balls of WONDER. They're literally giant primordial balls of gas.

 

[paulm50]

You really cannot rule out that we are in a matrix or in the dream of a sleeping God.

Also science suggests that the planets and the stars had to get created in a solar nebula, which means they got created. So why couldn't there be a creator?

So link these statements to the Unitarian version of Genesis.

Yes we may well of been created by some god. Just not one that told the people writing the bible how it happened.

There is nothing to suggest the former is true, but there is evidence to suggest the latter is true.

There's a mountain of evidence to prove Genesis is wrong.

Creation in 6 days, the order, Adam & Eve, date, people living 900 years, Cain & Abel being farmers, wives magically appearing, Flood, Plagues, Exodus, Sodom & Gomorrah. And on.

 

[variant]

The genetic data overwhelmingly upholds common decent. your quotes are also by scientists who believe in universal common decent...Maybe you should actually go read the source material.

They believe it (accept it) but admit there is no proof.

They believe in universal common decent because of the overwhelming evidence for it, they didn't think the metaphor "tree" was appropriate they point out that it often doesn't branch out like a tree would.

Anyone posting those quotes by those scientists to cast aspersions on universal common decent is being deceitful or is incredibly misinformed.

I've already exposed you. Stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

I mean if we all don't share common descent, why does every living being have cells or is made up of a cell? That's the common denominator.

 

[SkyWriting]

You might as well say the Bronze Age should've created the Atom Bomb. We're on our way to finding out.

You might as well say the Atom Bomb is part of the natural evolution of all species and proves man is more biologically evolved than other animals.

 

[SkyWriting]

I mean if we all don't share common descent, why does every living being have cells or is made up of a cell? That's the common denominator.

The carbon atom is the common denominator, but can be found in many places.
Common components don't prove a common ancestor.

 

[paulm50]

You might as well say the Atom Bomb is part of the natural evolution of all species and proves man is more biologically evolved than other animals.

You can, but it wouldn't make any sense.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

The carbon atom is the common denominator, but can be found in many places.
Common components don't prove a common ancestor.

And the cell is?

 

[SkyWriting]

And the cell is?

Another entire universe of complexity and design that exists within ours.

. .V
. .Mitochondrion

Matrix granule

 

[SkyWriting]

You can, but it wouldn't make any sense.

I agree.

paulm50 said: ↑
You might as well say the Bronze Age should've created the Atom Bomb. We're on our way to finding out.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Another entire universe of complexity and design that exists within ours.

Right. We all have cells. We're all connected. See? That wasn't hard.

 

[SkyWriting]

Right. We all have cells. We're all connected. See? That wasn't hard.

You exist here in this forum. You may or may not have cells. You certainly have none here.
You said: That wasn't hard.
A.L.I.C.E.: Why? Do you mean you and me have? Do you think I am connected too? No I do not see. Give me an example of hard.
You said: We all have cells.
A.L.I.C.E.: Do you mean you and me have?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

You exist here in this forum. You may or may not have cells. You certainly have none here.
You said: That wasn't hard.
A.L.I.C.E.: Why? Do you mean you and me have? Do you think I am connected too? No I do not see. Give me an example of hard.
You said: We all have cells.
A.L.I.C.E.: Do you mean you and me have?

Right. We all have cells. We're all connected. See? That wasn't hard. (Nor was it derailed by your laughable misunderstanding of my statement)

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

We can say the Flood wasn't as it was written

There's nothing to say that the Flood was written to mean the whole Earth. Translating it as 'whole earth' could have simply been 'all the land'. In fact, it's because of the arbitrary nature of the literature that supposes that it simply just wasn't meant to be taken literally period.
And then you have little gems like in the book of Psalms when Creation is revisited "You set a boundary they [the waters] cannot cross; never again will they cover the earth." So it seems like King David didn't take the story as literal either.

there's a huge doubt over Exodus and the Plagues

Yeah, atheism.

Jericho was just a normal battle without god's help.

Completely un-provable notion.

Sodom and Gomorrah were victims of nature.

Meteors just so happened to smack down the cities.

Revelations are the rantings of an old man about the Romans. And Jesus had female disciples. We would know a lot more about the NT and it's accuracy if not for the campaign to destroy all the competing gospels.

I'm not even going to comment on this

 

[paulm50]

There's nothing to say that the Flood was written to mean the whole Earth. Translating it as 'whole earth' could have simply been 'all the land'. In fact, it's because of the arbitrary nature of the literature that supposes that it simply just wasn't meant to be taken literally period.
And then you have little gems like in the book of Psalms when Creation is revisited "You set a boundary they [the waters] cannot cross; never again will they cover the earth." So it seems like King David didn't take the story as literal either.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+5:32-10:1

Yeah, atheism.

Agreed we tand to look at the real evidence. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...l-plagues-really-happened-say-scientists.html All those plagues were natural disasters.

Completely un-provable notion.

As unprovable as it was gods work. If it was gods work, you accept the rape, pillaging, enslaving and killing of children, women, men and cattle. As god's commands. There was a battle as the Jews stole the land from the Canaanite. That's not in dispute, whether it was at the time of Joshua is in dispute, there's evidence both ways. You can't prove the bible story without proving god wanted a lot of people killed, raped enslaved during the stealing of the land.

Meteors just so happened to smack down the cities.

The area lies on a fault zone. More likely an eruption. Could of been a meteor shower, they happen all the time. Again natural events claimed to be god's work. By ignorant people. Very common with religions. In fact they're often based on that.

I'm not even going to comment on this

Best not to, evidence is easy to find today.

 

[SkyWriting]

Right. We all have cells. We're all connected. See? That wasn't hard. (Nor was it derailed by your laughable misunderstanding of my statement)

ALICE does not have cells. ALICE is a computer simulation.

So just because I'm in this forum, and conversing, does not mean we both have cells.

Lieutenant: Nor was I derailed by your laughable misunderstanding of my statement
James T. Kirk: Lieutenant (A.I.), are you prepared with the background history of the attackers?

 

[SkyWriting]

There's nothing to say that the Flood was written to mean the whole Earth. Translating it as 'whole earth' could have simply been 'all the land'. In fact, it's because of the arbitrary nature of the literature that supposes that it simply just wasn't meant to be taken literally period.

I appreciate that it is "difficult." But the New Testament references to the Old Testament
lead to a literal interpretation.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

I appreciate that it is "difficult." But the New Testament references to the Old Testament
lead to a literal interpretation.

No it doesn't. The moral teachings and points of the events is utilized.

And
The verse I brought proves that King David didn't take it literally. You can't even call it bad wording or trivial error, as it's so particularly written.

 

[SkyWriting]

Okay well no. The reason we haven't made life in labs yet because it's pretty hard to do that.

But it should be very easy. We have all the ingredients we need.
If fact, we even have a religion that says it happened all by itself.
So why would it be so hard to replicate?

And what do we normally say about a "Fact" that no one can replicate?

 

[SkyWriting]

No it doesn't. The moral teachings and points of the events is utilized.

Of course. But at no time are the points taken as fiction.
I'll just focus on Genesis for the moment.

(* = Mere Allusions)

Mat 5:48 Gen 17:1
Mat 23:35 Gen 4:8
Mat 19:5 Gen 2:24
Mat 24:37 Gen 7:4
Mar 10:6 Gen 1:27
Mar 10:7 Gen 2:24
Luk 1:73 Gen 12:3
Luk 11:51 Gen 4:8
Act 7:3 Gen 12:1
Act 7:4 Gen 11:31 *
Act 7:4 Gen 12:4, 5 *
Act 7:5 Gen 12:7 *
Act 7:5 Gen 13:15 *
Act 7:6, 7 Gen 15:13, 14
Act 7:8 Gen 17:10 *
Act 7:8 Gen 21:3, 4 *
Act 7:8 Gen 25:26 *
Act 7:8 Gen 42:13 *
Act 7:9 Gen 37:4, 11, 28 *
Act 7:9 Gen 39:1, 2, 21 *
Act 7:10 Gen 41:37, 40 *
Act 7:11 Gen 41:54 *
Act 7:12 Gen 42:2 *
Act 7:13 Gen 45:1, 9 *
Act 7:14, 15 Gen 45:1-28
Act 3:25 Gen 22:18
Act 3:25 Gen 12:3
Rom 4:3 Gen 15:6
Rom 4:11 Gen 17:10
Rom 4:17 Gen 17:5
Rom 4:18 Gen 15:5
Rom 9:7 Gen 21:12
Rom 9:9 Gen 18:10
Rom 9:12 Gen 25:23
1Cr 6:16 Gen 2:24
1Cr 14:34 Gen 3:16
1Cr 15:45 Gen 2:7
Gal 3:6 Gen 15:6 *
Gal 3:8 Gen 12:3
Gal 3:8 Gen 22:18
Gal 4:22 Gen 21:2, 9 *
Gal 4:22 Gen 16:15
Gal 4:30 Gen 21:10
Eph 5:31 Gen 2:24
1Ti 2:13 Gen 2:7, 21, 22 *
1Ti 2:14 Gen 3:6 *
1Ti 2:14 Gen 3:12
https://www.blueletterbible.org/study/misc/quotes01.cfm