Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
so if we had a self replicating molecule it can evolve stepwise into a car?
I'm incredibly capable of producing it. In the 2000+ year history of the Orthodox Church there has definitely been no lack of miraculous events and incidents. They are occurring even as I type in this moment. But, if I told you of any of it, you would only deny it, just like the other poster I presented evidence to.
So, in your view God gave us an intellect, curiosity and natural skepticism, but never intended us to use any of them? If these characteristics are the product of a creator and not evolution, then either he intended their use, or he was being maliciously deceitful. Your third option is excluded by logic.Why don't you examine the evidence for yourself? It's all around. In fact, there's no need to look beyond one's own psyche to become fully aware of the presence and sovereignty of the Creator. If you had enough grace you would already know this yourself. But, because you don't possess enough of it within yourself, it's as I've already told you: you're incapable of being aware of any miracles of God. If a person died and then came back to life a couple days later, you'd deny it really happened even if it did. There's simply nothing that is going to be believed by you, because everything can either be denied, or else ignored because it's not something that one desires to acknowledge as real.
Get grace, then you'll have eyes to see and ears to hear Truth. Then, having been sufficiently gifted with Godly humility, you'll be guided toward the multitudinous miracles we have become aware of.
Natural skepticism? I'd say no. Not when such skepticism serves to deny the presence of God. Such a characteristic is actually one of many products and byproducts of the passions, which are not "natural" to humankind, but rather, a perversion of natural emotions which causes people to lean towards unbelief. Intellect and curiosity are fine, I'd say. A skepticism that's healthy (also called discernment) is valuable too. But not every characteristic of man, as natural as these may seem, is natural. They exist because of sin, death, and the loss of Communion with God, which is by a very real power that we call "grace" (also called the Holy Spirit). Evolution, as generally taught and understood, exists in this form only because of the passions.So, in your view God gave us an intellect, curiosity and natural skepticism, but never intended us to use any of them? If these characteristics are the product of a creator and not evolution, then either he intended their use, or he was being maliciously deceitful. Your third option is excluded by logic.
I don't thing that there's really anything weird about referring to the evidence of salvation in the lives of those saved by the work of God in Christ. Scripture itself records such evidence, especially in the Book of the Acts of the Apostles, and instructs us to make record of the lives of those saved and to give them consideration as examples.Why are you making that an issue!? To continue like you are.. you should be ashamed of yourself!
The issue in salvation is what do you think of Jesus Christ. PERIOD!
You are getting into weird stuff. Stop, please. Not everyone lives on that level of superstitious tendencies. It may amuse and amaze the superstitious... But salvation is found in the Cross and resurrection of Jesus only!
I appreciate your concern, but please be mindful that you're evidently not of the Orthodox Tradition: the Apostolic Tradition which hasn't been altered since the beginning. This being the case, you're perception of what Christianity should look like has been shaped by heterodox traditions far removed from the ancient faith.
If I'm ashamed of myself, it's because of how the sin I often commit offends the unfathomable Love and goodness of God.
I don't know why you would think I should be ashamed of mentioning the fact that God's children have, can, and do exercise certain supernatural powers by the Holy Spirit. It's not "superstition" to us, nor is it weird. It's just everyday life in the world of the everyday saints.
Why don't you examine the evidence for yourself? It's all around. In fact, there's no need to look beyond one's own psyche to become fully aware of the presence and sovereignty of the Creator. If you had enough grace you would already know this yourself. But, because you don't possess enough of it within yourself, it's as I've already told you: you're incapable of being aware of any miracles of God. If a person died and then came back to life a couple days later, you'd deny it really happened even if it did. There's simply nothing that is going to be believed by you, because everything can either be denied, or else ignored because it's not something that one desires to acknowledge as real.
Get grace, then you'll have eyes to see and ears to hear Truth. Then, having been sufficiently gifted with Godly humility, you'll be guided toward the multitudinous miracles we have become aware of.
so if we had a self replicating molecule it can evolve stepwise into a car?
Pretty sunsets aren't the sort of evidence I'm alluding to. Christ is risen from the dead. He's been seen after having risen, and is known to be risen forever, glorified, and all powerful. He Who rose from the dead has foretold the resurrection of all at the end of the ages. By the Holy Spirit we know it to be True. Examine this.I will be happy to examine it. Please produce it so I may do so.
Or are you now falling back on the tired "everyday miracle" argument from God. "Pretty sunset, therefore God."
And once again, the arrogance that I see so often - if I think about the things you have thought about, I must reach the same conclusions that you did.
I have examined it. The evidence for Christ's resurrection is based upon supposed eye witness testimony reported many years after the event. It may "ring true" to you, but it lacks the substance on which to base a worldview.Pretty sunsets aren't the sort of evidence I'm alluding to. Christ is risen from the dead. He's been seen after having risen, and is known to be risen forever, glorified, and all powerful. He Who rose from the dead has foretold the resurrection of all at the end of the ages. By the Holy Spirit we know it to be True. Examine this.
See Could cars reproduce?.If there were survival pressures on it such that being a car provided greater survivability, why would it not?
Why do we need to explain over and over that cars could not have babies?
because there is no stepwise from a self replicating molecule into a car. for instance: a minimal car need at least several parts like wheels, engine etc.If there were survival pressures on it such that being a car provided greater survivability, why would it not?
so if we do have a self replicating molecule with mutations+ natural selection+ generations we will get a car in the end?Did you even bother to read anything I said.
The self replicating molecules change over generations. That means the molecule found one particular generation are different from the molecule found in the previous generation. It does not mean it is the same individual molecule! It is a duplicate that has not been duplicated exactly. This happens when a new generation is made. The gene for nose shape in my body is made of different molecules than the gene for nose shape in my mother. It is not actually the same molecules from my mother that came into my cells to specify the shape of my nose.
So, this requires reproduction and several generations. Since cars do not reproduce, there are no generations. Car is not a self replicating ANYTHING. If something is a self replicating ANYTHING it is not a car because cars do not replicate by themselves!
Why is this such a hard concept for you to understand? Are you deliberately deciding not to learn this stuff so you can continue with you strawman arguments?
The short answer is that my convictions are based in reality which is evidenced through incidents, occurrences, and events which I've personally experienced, and am able to recognize them as unmistakably real on account of the grace that has been in me. There's no other way to see what's real, because if we did not have the capacity to deny reality in favor of something else, then the ability of human beings to either accept or reject grace (to choose between good and evil) could not be.I have examined it. The evidence for Christ's resurrection is based upon supposed eye witness testimony reported many years after the event. It may "ring true" to you, but it lacks the substance on which to base a worldview.
I can accept, with some reluctance, that one may believe that Christ "is known to be risen forever, glorified, and all powerful" through personal revelation or faith, but one cannot know this through evidence. The writer of the Gospel According to John seeks to address this by offering up the example of Thomas as a proxy for the skeptics. (I find it significant this was the last, and arguably the most elegant, of the Gospels.) Unfortunately, since I do not accept my own eye witness testimony I am hardly likely to accept that of another whose pedigree is largely unknown and who may even be a rhetorical construct.
You are convinced that your knowledge comes through a state of Grace, from the Holy Spirit, etc. and I do not doubt that the feelings of conviction are powerful within you. But I am also aware that many others have felt equally powerful convictions, attributed to all manner of things and entities that have no relation to the beliefs that are so important to you. I am not seeking to move you from your faith, merely pointing out what I perceive as the questionable quality of its foundation.
-_- the parts needed to form a basic protocell, however, have formed in abiogenesis experiments, so whether or not it is feasible for anything resembling a car to develop by the same process by which life on this planet did is irrelevant. Cars don't utilize ATP for performing activities; that in and of itself could make cars from cells impossible while not making it impossible for the cell we are familiar with to exist.because there is no stepwise from a self replicating molecule into a car. for instance: a minimal car need at least several parts like wheels, engine etc.
Thank you for a lengthy, sincere, well-meaning reply. I regret we will not have a meeting of minds. I will feel sad for you, for what I perceive as your self-delusions. You, perhaps, will feel sad for me. The greatest difference between us is that you think you have seen "the answer", whereas I am certain I haven't. Though disappointed by this, I am not troubled by it. I prefer an honest uncertainty, to a contrived certainty.The short answer is that my convictions are based in reality which is evidenced through incidents, occurrences, and events which I've personally experienced, and am able to recognize them as unmistakably real on account of the grace that has been in me. There's no other way to see what's real, because if we did not have the capacity to deny reality in favor of something else, then the ability of human beings to either accept or reject grace (to choose between good and evil) could not be.
You know what's at stake if you subject yourself to the will of God - you do. It's your life in this world that is at stake, and you aren't willing to give this up: you won't throw it away like that. So, you devise a worldview more suitable to your devotions: devotions to the passions and worldly attachments. Beneath all the sophistication and clever, abstract rationalizations offered up primarily by your left hemisphere it's as simple as that. Receiving grace is a simple as humbling oneself in repentance and asking Christ for help in prayer, while striving to Live by His sayings. If you aren't afflicted with sinful self-love and the other passions, then there would be nothing standing in the way of your doing this. Your convictions would stand in the way, but from whence are the convictions? The convictions are not disconnected in any way from the passions which walked hand-in-hand with your thought processes as these were developing into your "worldview". Malevolent spirits, which you're not even aware of nor acknowledge, injecting various impressions and suggestions at key moments, have also been highly instrumental in the formation of your worldview. This is true whether you're willing to believe it or not.
We love grace, or we love the passions and are sympathetic towards them. When we embrace the passions they shape how we see (our worldview). When we embrace grace, God leads us into all Truth, and the other worldviews are seen for what they are: falsehood and emptiness, the darkness of spiritual depravity and death.
Thank you for a lengthy, sincere, well-meaning reply. I regret we will not have a meeting of minds. I will feel sad for you, for what I perceive as your self-delusions. You, perhaps, will feel sad for me. The greatest difference between us is that you think you have seen "the answer", whereas I am certain I haven't. Though disappointed by this, I am not troubled by it. I prefer an honest uncertainty, to a contrived certainty.
I view certainty, for the most part, as a form of arrogance. I work hard at not being arrogant, though probably not hard enough. It would be nice to be certain, but there are - typically - too many variables for this to be possible.Both of you can be certain.
I don't feel rejected. I have no idea why you think I might feel rejected. Perhaps you can elaborate.It should bother you to feel rejected if that is true. You must not allow in your thinking that understanding to reign.
A significant proportion of exchanges I have on this and other forums are of that nature. Intellectual combat is a good thing. If conducted properly it can educate both parties and on-lookers. However, this particular exchange with truefiction1 was not such an example.Its really what these kinds of debates boil down to. They are combative with an aura of intellectual reasonableness.
That's your belief. I don't have a problem with that.God is not known by those who have rejected what can be known. It begins there.
19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God hasRom 1:19-20
made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible
qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?