No -- I'm claiming God created the elements, chemical compounds, etc., ex deo, and then took these things and made living organisms out of them ex materia
What evidence other than your interpretation of the Bible do you have that “God created the elements, chemical compounds, etc., ex deo”?
We know quite well how elements and chemical compounds form. The Big Bang occurred and the Universe expanded extremely rapidly; this is called inflation. Soon quarks combined to form baryons (protons and neutrons). When the Universe cooled down enough – only a few minutes old – protons and neutrons began to combine into nuclei. This is called nucleosynthesis. Hydrogen, helium, lithium and beryllium were produced.
After 300k+ years the Universe cooled down even more, which permitted nuclei to capture elections and form real atoms. After a few hundred million years the first stars and galaxies were born.
Within the furnaces of stars, through the process of stellar necleosynthesis, many of the higher elements are formed. When stars supernova a process called supernova nucleosynthesis creates the heaviest of elements.
Compounds form through natural processes too, which are well documented and understood.
In conclusion, all evidence suggests elements and compounds form through natural processes, not through divine intervention as you assert.
God created a few species during the six day creation period which then evolved into the many species we see today.
Like I said before, a pair of snakes would be enough to evolve into the many species of snakes we see today/
What you and your ilk fail to realize is that your version of reality actually undermines god. You acknowledge speciation, which is to say that god put in place natural mechanisms to achieve a desired result, in your case numerous species of snakes deriving from a single species. I am certain you all acknowledge god created the laws of physics which govern matter to permit gas and dust in the form of molecular clouds to transform into stars, planets, moons and so forth. Not to mention many, many other natural processes at work all throughout nature. Yet you feel god needs to step in at times, e.g., to create life.
This suggests that god is incapable of setting up the initial conditions in a way that will take care of life just as it takes care of everything else.
I disagree. You can have real faith in someone who has proven himself to be faithful. Like Father God.
The key word in your sentence is “proven”. The fact of the matter is, there is no proof for Yahweh. There isn’t even good evidence for him. If there was proof that Yahweh existed then faith would vanish. What you’re proposing is nonsensical. We don’t and can’t have faith in things we know exist, such as water, the Sun, our parents, etc.
The Christian faith is not a mere claim; it is placing one’s confidence in someone who has demonstrated his faithfulness. Like Father God. Father God raises the dead.
Christians living today have faith in the historical evidence for god and all other claims in the Bible. All you have is a book comprised of a collection of ancient writings, which you wrongfully place too much stock in. Some of you may also experience emotional feelings that lead you to believe your religion and god is real, but your judgment is unsound. People who believe in entirely different theologies also share these emotional feelings. This suggests our various religions cannot be correct and that there is a deeper principle at work.
Your faith that life emerged form a natural process is blind faith since this has never been demonstrated by Mother Nature.
I said I 'don’t know' how life got started. I hypothesize that it probably occurred through natural processes because everything else in nature does. It is more reasonable to conclude a natural cause for life, which itself is natural, than a supernatural cause. There are better 'reasons' to assume a natural processes over a supernatural process, however, until we can gather more evidence we must reserve judgment. We should not place confidence in any conclusion we might arrive at; we should remain skeptical.
The forming of stars, planets, elements, etc. is similar to a child being formed in its mother’s womb and then being born. This is not what we are discussing. We are discussing how it all first began. How did life first emerge in the universe? How did the universe itself first emerge?
You rely on blind faith in Mother Nature for the answers instead of real faith in Father God.
Good luck with that.
We are not discussing how it all first began, but how life became so diversified.
You have no evidence of this, so statements like this is somewhat hypocritical coming from someone who is always asking for evidence to support a claim.
I certainly do have evidence to support my claims. We know very well that the authors of biblical scriptures were scientifically ignorant due to the time and place in history they lived. We know that they were borderline barbaric by practices they would engage in, e.g., stoning people to death. They lived in northeast Africa/southwest Asia, which certainly qualifies them as desert dweller and their superstition is apparent from understanding their customs, traditions, and beliefs about the nature of reality.
Speak for yourself. You are the one relying on blind faith, not me.
I have drawn a conclusion that is by no means firm, based off of sound reasoning and experience of the cause and effect structure of the world.
You on the other hand claim to possess knowledge about the nature of reality based on your interpretation of an ancient writings, which are riddled with all sorts of problems.
No one here is denying evolution, only those who are denying God.
By not accepting the notion that all living organisms belong from one tree of life, which I you and many of your ilk do, you are denying a fundamental principle of the scientific theory of evolution.
There are eight major taxonomic ranks that make up the hierarchy of biological classification. Many creationists don't accept all the ranks. It seems the rank 'family' is the furthest you will go.
Once again, this thread has nothing to do with the existence or non-existence of god.
The universe is alive. It does not grow and evolve on its own. It grows and evolves because of the life God gave it and the life God sustains:
"For by Him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible...He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." (Col 1:16-17).
I am not convinced of the validity of your scripture. Do you have any evidence or good reasons to support your claim "the universe is alive"?
Nope. Computer simulations are not alive. They are programs. The universe is not a simulated program. The universe is alive.
I never said the Universe IS a computer simulation. I was only providing an analogy. Do you have any evidence at all that supports your claim the Universe is alive outside of some ancient scripture?
I reject the validity of Christian scripture for the same reason why you reject those that belong to other religions. Then there is the fact that there are many interpretations of the same scripture, hence the various denominations of Christianity. Why are you so confident that you interpretation of a particular set of scriptures, the Bible, is true?
I thought that by DAY they meant 1,000 years in the Bible... And Jazer said the day was April 13, 2029.
