The "design argument" simply isn't biblical

[mythbuster]

" ... but the basic idea is that because of the nature of our relationship with God as spelled out in the Bible, creation can testify to God's glory, but cannot provide direct evidence of God himself."

In my experience I have two objective tangible facts with which I must come to terms. One is creation and the other is the Bible.

We are told that we are moving around our galaxy core, out on a spiral arm of the Milky Way, in a local group of galaxies, in a universe so vast. Contemplating all of this with something called human consciousness, I look at my very own bio-machine, operating automatically, maintaining hundreds (thousands?) of chemical levels, sophisticated pumps, using pulsed modulation controls, broadband optical RF sensors, information processing, gas exchange. Our ears (used to have for me) have 130dB of dynamic range. Fabulous.

Then there is the Bible, 66 books. Without boring everybody here, I would just say that over a 1 to 1.5 K year span this amazing book is produced. And amazingly the beginning mirrors the end. For example, at the beginning there is the tree of life and a river, and at the end there is the same tree of life and a river. At the beginning there is a man and a women, Adam and Eve, with Eve a product out of Adam's side. And at the end there is the same, but a universal couple now. Out of the Lord's side flowed blood and water, blood for redemption and water for regeneration, producing the church, His bride.

All this is to say, that for me, creation and the Bible provide direct evidence of God.

 

[KokoTheGorilla2]

And amazingly the beginning mirrors the end. For example, at the beginning there is the tree of life and a river, and at the end there is the same tree of life and a river. At the beginning there is a man and a women, Adam and Eve, with Eve a product out of Adam's side. And at the end there is the same, but a universal couple now. Out of the Lord's side flowed blood and water, blood for redemption and water for regeneration, producing the church, His bride.

All this is to say, that for me, creation and the Bible provide direct evidence of God.

I haven't read Revelations, but if the end does mirror the beginning, why is that amazing?

Sorry, I just don't see anything "amazing" about that at all.

 

[ExpatChristian]

myth buster. The first part of your post seemed fine to me, but can't make head or tail of what that stuff is about the Bible and 66 books etc.

For example, at the beginning there is the tree of life and a river, and at the end there is the same tree of life and a river.

What is so profound about this?

 

[shernren]

And amazingly the beginning mirrors the end. For example, at the beginning there is the tree of life and a river, and at the end there is the same tree of life and a river. At the beginning there is a man and a women, Adam and Eve, with Eve a product out of Adam's side. And at the end there is the same, but a universal couple now. Out of the Lord's side flowed blood and water, blood for redemption and water for regeneration, producing the church, His bride.

All this is to say, that for me, creation and the Bible provide direct evidence of God.

I'm pretty sure John read Genesis at least once in his life.

 

[mythbuster]

We have this book that takes over a thousand years to complete, I don't know how long, with forty or so authors. And somehow in the very beginning of Genesis there are are all these tiny seeds that get developed, and at the end of the Bible there they are again. But now fully developed and consummated with sort of a reaping of what began in Genesis.

For example: at the beginning of the Bible there is the serpent, but at the end there is the great dragon; at the beginning there is gold, precious stones, a river, and the tree of life but at the end there is the river of water of life flowing out of the throne of God and of the Lamb with the tree of life growing on either side in the city of gold adorned with precious stones. For me, this points to something deep and profound, and the wonder of creation, sitting out on the spiral arm of the Milky Way, this is just the setting, the backdrop.

If you don't think it is profound the fault is mine, I'm just not conveying the reality behind the Bible.

Sorry I didn't mean to hijack this thread.

 

[KokoTheGorilla2]

If you don't think it is profound the fault is mine,

No it isn't your fault, I am just not as impressed by what you described as you are.

It's OK!

 

[shernren]

We have this book that takes over a thousand years to complete, I don't know how long, with forty or so authors. And somehow in the very beginning of Genesis there are are all these tiny seeds that get developed, and at the end of the Bible there they are again. But now fully developed and consummated with sort of a reaping of what began in Genesis.

For example: at the beginning of the Bible there is the serpent, but at the end there is the great dragon; at the beginning there is gold, precious stones, a river, and the tree of life but at the end there is the river of water of life flowing out of the throne of God and of the Lamb with the tree of life growing on either side in the city of gold adorned with precious stones. For me, this points to something deep and profound, and the wonder of creation, sitting out on the spiral arm of the Milky Way, this is just the setting, the backdrop.

If you don't think it is profound the fault is mine, I'm just not conveying the reality behind the Bible.

Sorry I didn't mean to hijack this thread.

No, really, I think it's profound too.

Imagine John sitting in silence on the Island of Patmos. He's had vision after vision, but the problem is that he just can't write them down. Why? He simply has no words left for them! His brain can't quite wrap around it all. Now what does a good godly man do when he's at a dead end? Why, he opens the Bible! Of course, they didn't have the full Bible back then. But they were pretty darn sure Genesis was inspired, whoever wrote it and then John sees this deal with the Tree of Life and the Garden of Eden and all that being locked away.

At this point, John thinks - "Hey! It all comes back after sin goes away!"

OR

At this point, God tells John - "Hey! It all comes back after sin goes away!"

What difference would there be between the two? And what difference would there be if John really hadn't read Genesis and made the connections all on his own on that lonely island of Patmos? Oh, I do believe that the Bible makes sense as an organic whole. But I'm not too choosy about how that organic whole came about. Perhaps God inspired every single jot and tittle; perhaps the authors plagiarized and paraphrased each other (which is explicitly noted at many points). In any case, the how of the Bible's inspiration is really not as important as what it has given the world.

 

[MarkEvan]

Jeremiah 31,

35Thus says the LORD,who gives the sun for light by day
and the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night,
who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar—
the LORD of hosts is his name:
36 "If this fixed order departs
from before me, declares the LORD,
then shall the offspring of Israel cease
from being a nation before me forever."
37Thus says the LORD:"If the heavens above can be measured,
and the foundations of the earth below can be explored,
then I will cast off all the offspring of Israel
for all that they have done,

declares the LORD."



i don`t know whether you would consider this scripture as being proof that the bible at least supports the idea of ID............ but I myself take it to mean that. God it would seem from this passage has set routs, orbits etc for all planetary bodies, meteors and comets etc.....as I said this would seem to me to mean He designed it this way.

Mark