• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.

2 proofs that nature was designed

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by xianghua, Oct 18, 2020.

  1. xianghua

    xianghua Well-Known Member

    +548
    Judaism
    Single
    according to evolution if we will find a self replicating robot (or a watch) that made from organic components, we need to conclude that such a robot evolved by a natural process. this is because it has a self replicating system and made from organic components, so its basically like any other walking creature. but we know that even such a robot\ watch is evidence for design. therefore nature need design too.

    we also find these gears in nature, and we know that gears are the product of design:


    https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/...the-first-time

    [​IMG]
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +14,529
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    Wrong. That is not "according to evolution." It is according to some fantasy version of evolution which you have made up.
    Wrong. That is not how a conclusion about design is reached. Just because you have been gone for a while doesn't mean we have forgotten your previous attempts to misrepresent evolution in order to build a straw man.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  3. musicalpilgrim

    musicalpilgrim pilgrim on the sacred music pathway Angels Team Supporter

    +26,709
    United Kingdom
    Pentecostal
    Married
    There are some good videos on YouTube to explain the signature in the Cell, intelligent design, Stephen Meyer on Youtube. Also Darwin's Doubt. I watched the recordings and have bought the books. They are so good in explaining who designed DNA.
     
  4. Rachel20

    Rachel20 Active Member

    436
    +377
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    What I'm curious about is whether you ever find information in nature, not just patterns like fibonacci sequences. I think this was one of the issues that turned Antony Flew to deism, as he said you never find information in nature that doesn't have a mind behind it (and he considered DNA information).
     
  5. Tony B

    Tony B Active Member

    351
    +296
    Australia
    Christian
    Single
    I can't fathom how anyone can believe that intelligent design and engineering can come from unintelligence, which you would have to conclude if you don't believe in a Creator God. Surely that has to be regarded as an illogical conclusion.

    Adaptation, yes, as a mechanism of intelligent design, but just by evolution or chance...that's just illogical in my opinion, and beggars belief!
     
  6. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +14,529
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    It's not a question of a creator God. The existence of God is really not an issue in this forum (except when it is is raised dishonestly by creationists) and rejecting ID is not the same as rejecting a creator God, as many Traditional Christian denominations which have rejected ID will be happy to explain to you. As far as design and engineering coming from intelligence is concerned, the interacting stochastic processes which make up the evolving biosphere represent enough information processing capacity to account for the functional complexity which we observe without invoking "intelligence."
     
  7. Warden_of_the_Storm

    Warden_of_the_Storm Well-Known Member

    +3,911
    United Kingdom
    Deist
    Single
    You're still on this? After every single time that this whole thing has been disproven?
    Commitment, I'll definitely call it that.
     
  8. Tony B

    Tony B Active Member

    351
    +296
    Australia
    Christian
    Single
    I'm wondering what Jesus would say, would think of your post. I don't mean to malign you or anyone else that holds to your philosophy, but I think He would be shaking His head in disbelief that anyone could come to such a conclusion. Jesus referred to what/who was created, not evolved. Rejecting I.D. is rejecting God's input, nothing in creation happened/happens by chance, surely it must be plainly ludicrous to suggest otherwise.
     
  9. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +14,529
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    Rejecting ID is not "rejecting God's input." ID is a specific proposal by the Discovery Institute of Seattle about the exact nature of "God's input." Painting the rejection of ID as a rejection of God's authorship of our being is nothing but a slimy propaganda move.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  10. essentialsaltes

    essentialsaltes Stranger in a Strange Land

    +15,629
    Atheist
    Legal Union (Other)
    The watch thing was put to bed by Darwin 150 years ago. You may want to cast about for arguments that are a little fresher.
     
  11. jacks

    jacks Er Victus Supporter

    +1,641
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    O.K. I'll bite. I wasn't aware that Darwin talked about "the watch thing". I really don't know much about it, do you have a link I could read?
     
  12. inquiring mind

    inquiring mind associate with those you can learn from Supporter

    +2,878
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    Speedwell, suppose you tell us where you do see God's input...
     
  13. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +14,529
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    That's rather an odd question and I'm not sure I understand it. I suppose the short answer is no, I don't expect to find God's greasy fingerprints on the machinery to prove that He made it.
     
  14. inquiring mind

    inquiring mind associate with those you can learn from Supporter

    +2,878
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    That’s not a surprise. No Genesis, no higher intelligence acknowledged as far as I can understand from your comments, so I was just curious, that’s all.
     
  15. essentialsaltes

    essentialsaltes Stranger in a Strange Land

    +15,629
    Atheist
    Legal Union (Other)
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  16. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +14,529
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    It's not hard. I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible...plus there is about two thousand years worth of Christian theology about why God has no need to involve Himself in mundane, day-to-day natural processes to the extent of physically manipulating them Himself. His causal involvement is of a different order altogether which is entirely invisible and of no concern to science.
     
  17. inquiring mind

    inquiring mind associate with those you can learn from Supporter

    +2,878
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    That’s great Speedwell, sounds like you lean toward Deism, and I was never one to condemn that philosophy. I wasn’t trying to classify you, that’s none of my business, like I said, just curious where God was in your comments. You answered that.

    Doesn't science itself fall under that ‘all things visible and invisible’ part?
     
  18. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +14,529
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    Your opinion of Traditional Christians is noted.


    Science is an intellectual tool for understanding the natural universe. that's all.
     
  19. FrumiousBandersnatch

    FrumiousBandersnatch Well-Known Member

    +5,353
    Atheist
    Repetition. I refer you to the previous threads in which you failed with exactly the same argument.
     
  20. Tony B

    Tony B Active Member

    351
    +296
    Australia
    Christian
    Single
    Well I don't know of that institute or of its particular philosophy, and I'm not interested in looking into it either. I've only had One teacher on my Christian walk, and His name is Jesus.

    I wouldn't be game enough to suggest He didn't apply intelligent design and engineering into all creation, I have more self respect for my goodly welfare than that.

    We need to consider some of the nasties in creation, and be careful not to insult or offend The Creator of those. Scripture says the reverential and worshipful fear of God is the source of wisdom.
     
Loading...