Defending the Christian Worldview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Defending the Christian Worldview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design

This is my personal virtual library, where i collect information, which leads in my view to the Christian faith, creationism, and Intelligent Design as the best explanation of the origin of the physical Universe, life, and biodiversity


You are not connected. Please login or register

Defending the Christian Worldview, Creationism, and Intelligent Design » Philosophy and God » My dictums

My dictums

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Go down  Message [Page 10 of 10]

226My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Sun Jan 24, 2021 3:52 pm

Otangelo


Admin
1. The Christian faith promotes wellbeing. Independently of if its true or not. Christs golden rule has historically proven & demonstrated to promote a better society, the build hospitals and health care, care of the needy. Abolishing slavery, promoting education, equality of women and humans in general, social justice, engagement & charity, development of music & art etc. The Christian faith also promoted the exploration of the natural world, and Christians invented the scientific method,
2. Materialism & atheism on the other hand does not promote anything positively. It results in a lack of binding objective moral values, meaning of life, a lack of recognition of the real intrinsic value of human beings, it provides no inner peace & security.
3. The Christian worldview, therefore, independently of if its true or not, is a superior worldview, and should be preferred over materialism & atheism.

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

227My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Sun Jan 31, 2021 2:08 am

Otangelo


Admin
Molecules have nothing to gain by becoming the building blocks of life. They are "happy" to lay on the ground or float in the prebiotic ocean and thats it. Being incredule that they would concentrate at one building site in the right mixture, and in the right complex form, that would permit them to complexify in an orderly manner and assembly into complex highly efficient molecular machines and self replicating cell factories, is not only justified, but warranted and sound reasoning. That fact alone destroys materialism & naturalism. Being credule towards such a scenario means to stick to blind belief. And claiming that "we don't know (yet), but science is working on it, but the expectation is that the explanation will be a naturalistc one ( No God required) is a materialism of the gaps argument.

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

228My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:45 am

Otangelo


Admin
Consensus is only a claim when the facts are not on the table. And claimed as truth because of popularity. Ad populum much?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

229My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Thu Feb 11, 2021 10:27 am

Otangelo


Admin
Complex artifacts made by man for specific purposes almost always require a manufacturing and assembly process which is more complex than the device to be made itself. I don't know of ANY factory, that makes products, that are equally complex, or more complex, than the factory, and the efforts to produce it. If we quantify the information, energy, and physical parts (machines, etc), and compare it to the product made, the former is always more complex than the latter. But remarkably, in life, in a VERY dramatic way, the opposite is the case. One single fertilized human egg stores the information, to make an organism, which, when grown up, is made of 37 trillion cells!! Think about that ??!! Science is not even close to unraveling how this is possible. And while human factories require a lot of human intervention, cell factories operate 100% autonomously. Self-replication is the epitome of manufacturing sophistication. The machine in the core of the process in biology is the Ribosome. it requires several hundreds of assembly machines, which make the machines, which make the subunits of the Ribosome. Once each subunit is made, it goes through a very delicate, precise, and orchestrated test drive process. Even long-range communication between the assembly machines monitor if the newly synthesized ribosome subunit was produced properly, and only if the test drive is successful, the subunit is incorporated in the maturation of the ribosome. If not, there are proteasome grinders waiting to recycle the misfolded product, which, otherwise, would accumulate, and toxic the cell. Once the assembly factors have done their job, they are re-used in the next round to make the next ribosome. All this had to emerge prior when life started, and so evolution was not the hero on the block. So one has either to believe, that all this enormously complex machine-building emerged spontaneously for no reason at all, or there was a super-intellect, that conceptualized life, and instantiated it, through his far superior intellectual capacity, then we humans have. Either chance or design. What is the superior, more rational explanation?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

230My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Fri Feb 12, 2021 5:26 pm

Otangelo


Admin
Natural selection is the greatest enemy of evolution. If a fish has fully operational Finns why would natural selection select mutations giving rise to nonfunctional legs until they would become functional ?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

231My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Fri Feb 12, 2021 5:43 pm

Otangelo


Admin
Evolution is an argument for atheists to deny God. There is not one real piece of evidence for common ancestry and the tree of life

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

232My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Wed Feb 17, 2021 4:46 am

Otangelo


Admin
There are some circles of atheists, where I have been providing scientific evidence that points overwhelmingly to God - for month. But no matter, how explicit and obvious, they are in good sport denying the evidence. When I see their answers, it feels insulting, and I ask myself, how they can shamelessly hold to such irrational conclusions. Its sloppy superficial thinking. Pseudo-science at its worst. And it's not just one or the other. In groups, they agree with each other, and support one another.- no matter, how irrational their views are. Maybe it's already Gods judgement. He permits that what the apostle points out:

2 Corinthians 4:4
The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
But i entertain as well this thought: The fall of Adam and Eve had not only moral consequences, which the Apostle Paul describes:

Romans 7:15-20
New International Version
15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[a] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

When I read these versicles, I think more about the physical human condition. But I am thinking if the fall is not affecting as well the clear thinking of the mind which should easily, by observing the natural world, lead to God ? Many are just so blind that, no matter how powerful the evidence is, they deny God, and claim that chance is a more powerful, more capable, more logically justifiable mechanism of the complexity that we see in nature. Some cannot recognize that ultimately, stochastic events are the only alternative to design. So they erect chance to the most powerful. The almighty mechanism, greater than the physical universe and life.
According to Descartes, the effect is never greater than the cause. How can chance be greater than the universe? How can it be greater than intelligence? How can chance top intelligence in causal power? That is just silly to the extreme. But atheists have erected chance to the all encompassing causal principle of everything. Go figure.....

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

233My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Thu Feb 18, 2021 6:05 am

Otangelo


Admin
With the discovery that DNA stores information, the biblical claim: In the beginning was the logos, becomes amazingly real.

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

234My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Thu Mar 04, 2021 4:24 pm

Otangelo


Admin
Being able to evaluate evidence presupposes a theistic worldview. The world is basically cognizable for rational beings. One has to presuppose the existence of objective truth, induction, logic, mathematics, probability, and uniformity in nature. An orderly universe sits with the notion that the laws of nature governing the universe were ordained by a rational lawgiver with will: God. An atheist has no answers to why the initial conditions, and why physical laws exist at all. Atheists have to assume these things a priori without having them grounded in their worldview without God. Atheistic principles do not give rise to that. Most atheists are not aware of it, and so, by asking for evidence, have to put unconsciously their foot into the theistic worldview and presuppose intelligibility of the created order without having a justification of that state of affairs. Why should atoms, elements, chemicals, and molecules enter into the order of chemical and biological evolution to create consciousness and intelligibility at all?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

235My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Thu Mar 11, 2021 9:53 pm

Otangelo


Admin
It is remarkable that the Bible tells us very little about judgment day. Christ said that we would have to give account for each word said. I was thinking about that. Will Christ go through all we said personally, or will Angels do that, and Christ will speak only the final verdict in regards of the eternal destiny of each of us? I don't know. According to the below website, each person speaks in average 860,341,500 words in lifetime.

https://proedit.com/how-many-words-do-we-speak-in-a-lifetime/#:~:text=860%2C341%2C500%20words%20spoken%20in%20a%20lifetime&text=Here%20goes%3A,OED)%20more%20than%2014.5%20times.

Let's suppose that the earth is 6500 years old. About 130 generations lived since Adam and Eve. In 1800 the world population was 1 billion. So 126 generations lived until 1800. If we put an average population of 500 Mio until 1800, that means, that until 1800, about 63 billion people lived. From 1800 until today, the growth was 7 billion, which means an average of 3,5 billion in four generations, or another 14 billion people. So a gross total of 77 billion people during the entire human history. Each spoke an average of 850 million words. That means the total number of words spoken in all human history until now is 6,5^19 words. There are 10^22 stars in the universe.

Now, the interesting thing is, that the Bible says that God knows the name of each star in the universe. So it must be no problem to know and judge each of the words spoken by all humankind. He knows each of our words.

Now let us suppose that God will say 500 words for each of our words to judge what we said. That means, he would say 3,2^22 words, still less than the number of stars in the universe.
But how much time would he have to spend to judge humankind? If he would spend 500 words for each word spoken by us, and each word takes one second, 3,22^22 seconds. 10^16 seconds are about 13,7billion years.

So God would be busy for quite some time judging us..... But since eternity is forever, that would still be a speck of time if there is no end of time.

It is also interesting that the Bible says that we will judge angels. 1 Corinthians 6:3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How will that be? No idea, but I know that certainly, we will not be bored up there.

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

236My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Sun Mar 14, 2021 7:42 am

Otangelo


Admin
Christs coming, becoming man, and dying on the Cross for the sins of all humanity, was a reflection of his love for the created world, and humankind. God was willing to go to the extreme. Rather than losing a weekend, it was Gods biggest effort and required from Christ a will stronger than steel.

It was the greatest enterprise ever performed in human history. While Adam and Eve doubted God's word and gave up God's command, and sinned, Christ was tempted in the desert. It was a real temptation. He was hungry and thirsty after 40 days but did resist, contrary to Adam and Eve. Satan offered to Christ to be Lord and King of all the earth and showed him all the wealth. While the first man succumbed to temptation fortuitously ( there was no pressure on them, it was just pure curiosity), the second did resist and remained to obey God's word. While we, as a team ( humanity), failed in Adam and Eve, we won in Christ. Adam and Eve, and Christ, both represent humanity. One the fallen world, the other the one that overcame sin and death.

The revelation of God in nature, and through Christ, is a gift to all humanity. All people recognize God's power ( Romans 1.19-23). Some enter into the relationship Creator/Creature and surrender to Christ's Lordship, which was the meaning why God created the world ( Gods creation is an expression of love, and God seeks to benefit us by knowing his goodness), and others prefer to remain in the team of rebellious, pride, and disobedience. That was basically why Satan was expelled from heaven. He wanted to be independent of God. And that is what the unregenerated humankind seeks as well.

Christ did not renounce the pressure in the garden of Gethsemane because he prayed to the father. I think we cannot imagine the pressure that laid on HIM at this moment. The sins of the entire world were put on him. Only if we stop and give a deeper reflection, we can grasp superficially what that meant for Christ. There is no bigger stupidity by atheists than ridicule HIS sacrifice and claiming that he lost just a weekend. But to us, who are saved:
1 Corinthians 1:18: "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

Sometimes, one single decision unfolds and defines our lives in an unimagined and unprecedented manner. So it was when I received Christ as my Lord and savior, 36 years ago. It has led me to a journey not imagined of personal growth and acquiring knowledge of the created world, and God's awesome power, goodness, love, justice, holiness, and character. Always pushed further to know more, in order to answer in an adequate manner to unbelievers. But I think what God has prepared for those who follow him here on earth, in as much as it is truly an adventure of the intellect and knowledge ( for those that seek), it is nothing compared to what will follow after we transition to the higher sphere:

Corinthians 2:9 “No eye has seen, no ear has heard, and no mind has imagined the things that God has prepared for those who love him.”
Blessed those that surrender to God's grace, love, and Lordship, and follow HIM, and obey HIS commands.

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

237My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Wed Mar 17, 2021 12:29 pm

Otangelo


Admin
Selfishness, unbelief, rebellion, pride, and the love of sins, not the lack of evidence for God's existence are the true reasons for people rejecting God and preferring an autonomous life.

My dictums - Page 10 Cs_lew10

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

238My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Sun Mar 28, 2021 6:26 am

Otangelo


Admin
For many atheists, their atheism is like an idol, a mammon. They protect their godless worldview at all costs. They have sacrificed rational thinking, honesty, and logic a long time ago. They think their happiness depends on their independence, autonomy, freethought, and godlessness. God is an unwelcome intruder which has to be kept on the outside of their lives at all costs and is worth being denied. They fight for their worldview, and do what it takes to drag others to their pit. They confess their unbelief with the enthusiasm of a believer. Their gospel is: There is no evidence for God's existence. We create our own meaning, moral values, and standards. We don't need any ought-to-be's from above. Many miso-theists are so because of their wish to live free of God, which ordains and commands what we should do and to escape the guilt of their sinful behavior.

Everything goes. No matter, how irrational, nonsensical, and foolish any claim to deny God might be. As long as it serves to refute God, it's welcome. They change their answers about how they self-identify themselves like a Chamaeleon.

Sometimes, they say they are agnostics. When hard-pressed, they confess to being atheists, and not to believe in God. Plenty confess being agnostics, and atheists at the same time. I have never seen someone saying: I don't believe that naturalism is true, but I am unsure if God exists. Commonly, however, you hear the claim: I disbelieve in the God of the Bible, I can't believe that the Christian God exists, but I don't know what alternative replaces God. When it comes to rationalizing the non-existence of God, evolution is the chief argument and main evidence. From there, everything else goes. Multiverses explain away the fine-tuning of the universe and the origin of life. The odds are astronomical that life could emerge by random chance? No problem. Shuffle enough time, and one day, inevitably, life will emerge from slime.

And even IF the God of the Bible would be proven true, that hardly solves the issue. Since, so they claim, the God of the Old Testament is a genocide which condones slavery, he is not worthy of praise, fellowship, and worship. Since they cannot criticize Christ in the same manner, there, the strategy is to claim that there is no evidence that he even existed. And if that claim does not withstand scrutiny, then, so they go, he was just a normal man, and the resurrection story was borrowed from Osiris and other religions. It's just a myth.

Whenever a theist comes up with some kind of evidence,  all intellectual efforts are being made to dismiss the argument. On the fly. On the get-go.  We don't have to wait. Tongue in cheek. Snip your finger, and there you have your refutation.  And even if their objections are refuted entirely, in their roots, and even if they are proven wrong, the next day, they keep going with the same old debunked assertions, and lines of reasoning, as the day before.
As if never anyone talked to them and educated them.  As if they never ever heard a counterargument to their views.

An apologist is too incisive and bothers too much? Ignore him. Do not permit him to call it at an atheist show. Mute him in the side chats of YouTube live streams. Avoid having debates with that fellow. Start with personal attacks. Ridicule him. Make him look like a clown or troll.  Discredit his approach of apologetics. Attack him as a person.

The Bible is clear in regards to these people.  Psalm 14:1 The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."

Atheism is not an issue of intelligence. It is a moral issue.

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them . . . so that people are without excuse…Their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Romans 1:18–25).

To those that believe, however, their faith, and their Lord is precious. And we are precious to the Lord.

“Fear not: for I have redeemed you, I have called you by your name; you are mine. When you pass through the waters, I will be with you: and through the rivers, they shall not overflow you: when you walk through the fire, you shall not be burned. (Isaiah 43:1-2).

And even if we go through a pandemic, HE can save us.

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

239My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Sat Apr 03, 2021 7:32 pm

Otangelo


Admin
The intelligent design hypothesis provides an obvious and commonsense explanation for the  fine-tuning of the universe and the origin of the information stored in the genome to kick-start life. Attempts to explain the evidence by invoking chance alone or multiple other universes  seems to be metaphysical special pleading, even desperation. The fine-tuning of the universe of such an order, in as much as the extraordinary odds to have a minimal genome and proteome to start life and logically following the design inference, should be regarded as settled. To insist otherwise is like insisting that Shakespeare was not written by Shakespeare because it might have been written by a trillion multiplied a trillion of monkeys sitting at a trillion keyboards typing for a trillion years. 

My dictums - Page 10 8pptiRsxWjj2NXW8zAy65Jx4HjgVi0PdF0Kq9EbEkOaB53JTQkIAbMGvNuRwEg__FlQvvnxBvZvf2n6gZptDs5JJ6cTQk_K6Yp8BRC6o-oS8pdtmgnl07jqHDObeZ-mcOvf4x3knhg

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

240My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Sat Apr 24, 2021 6:53 am

Otangelo


Admin
Faith in God is not solely the result of logic and reason. In order to believe, one must be willing to seek, trust, and love God

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

241My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Fri Apr 30, 2021 7:23 am

Otangelo


Admin
I don't know of another subject that is more polarizing than the quest of origins, and of God's existence. The evidence is the same, but the explanations and conclusions can be, and often are in direct opposition. How can that be? I think the reason is that the conclusion depends on the lens upon which we analyze the evidence. If someone starts from the presupposition that naturalism is true, then the evidence will be evaluated in light of that wish, and the inference drawn is based on the attempt to explain the evidence in order to come to that wished conclusion. That goes for both sides. So as well for theists. The bias is in direct relation to how much someone wishes one view to be true. How can that be eliminated, in order to come to the most case-adequate conclusion? I think the way to go would be to attempt to permit as much as possible the evidence to lead wherever it is, even if the outcome is not the one desired. Sadly, that is not what I see in the overwhelming majority of cases. I strongly believe that all evidence seen in the natural world points strongly to God. But most atheists try to refute that inference, and in face of no alternative, resort to the " I don't know" escape when it comes to providing an alternative to God. Anything goes, as long as God is excluded. Why do so many desire there to be no God? I think, one big reason is the fact that many do not understand or know the true nature of God. Most often I see people portraying God as a moral monster. Sadly, even theists contribute to this, by claiming that we are all predestined, so many cannot escape the terrifying outcome, that they will have to spend eternity in hell. Even aborted babies, that had the unfortunate to have unbelieving parents. I don't believe in such a horrendous God. I think, once someone understands the true nature of the God of the Bible, there is nothing that we can desire more than to know this wonderful God more and more and make Him known and the marvels of his creation. Sadly, the opposing winds come not only from one but two directions. One is from outspoken atheists, and the other, from theists, which propagate bad theology, and bad personal behavior. And, not to forget, those that stick and propagate false religions, and false Gods. No wonder did Christ foresee, that the gate that leads to heaven is small, and only a few find it.

I wish, that you are one of them, and contribute that others can find that small gate as well, permitting to be used as a tool by God as a light that leads others from darkness, to the light that brings life in abundance.

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

242My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Wed May 19, 2021 10:26 am

Otangelo


Admin
Christ transformed water into wine. With the appearance of age.
God made Adam and Eve. Fully grown. With the appearance of age.
What hinders him from making a universe 6500 years ago, as stated in Genesis, mature and fully able to operate with precision like a clock?

Atheists would accuse us immediately, and claiming: That's magic.
But there is no alternative.

Physics has come to a limit in its explanatory power by positing naturalistic explanations like the Big Bang theory.

As Sherlock Holmes's famous dictum says: when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however not fully comprehensible, but logically possible, must be the truth. Eliminative inductions, in fact, become deductions.

Problems of the Big Bang Theory
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1963-problems-of-the-big-bang-theory

”The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed—inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory.’
‘But the big bang theory can’t survive without these fudge factors. Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, because there would be no way for parts of the universe that are now more than a few degrees away in the sky to come to the same temperature and thus emit the same amount of microwave radiation. … Inflation requires a density 20 times larger than that implied by big bang nucleosynthesis, the theory’s explanation of the origin of the light elements.’ [This refers to the horizon problem, and supports what we say in Light-travel time: a problem for the big bang.]
‘In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory [emphasis in original].’
‘What is more, the big bang theory can boast of no quantitative predictions that have subsequently been validated by observation. The successes claimed by the theory’s supporters consist of its ability to retrospectively fit observations with a steadily increasing array of adjustable parameters, just as the old Earth-centred cosmology of Ptolemy needed layer upon layer of epicycles.’" The above quote is from 33 secular scientists and can be found in New Scientist publication in case anyone was wondering

https://www.proquest.com/docview/1241012350
http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2304-85572012000100007

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

243My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Thu May 20, 2021 6:17 am

Otangelo


Admin
You have maybe heard atheists saying: Evolution is a fact. Why do believers struggle so much with this? Many Christians do believe in evolution, there is nothing that refutes the Christian faith if evolution is true. Of course, those that say so can do it only, if a Christian holds to the view, that Genesis is an ancient near eastern myth.
On the other hand, if evolution is not true, ( and with that, I mean common ancestry, the tree of life, and biodiversity through evolution) THEN atheists and naturalists have a BIG problem. Evolution is probably THE main crutch that they rely on, otherwise, their entire worldview is ripped off and falls apart, and they have nothing left to justify naturalism. That, of course, is a BIG problem for them.

We ought to make no compromise and attempting to harmonize Genesis with claims made by promoters of naturalism and trying to join evolutionary claims, and the biblical narrative Genesis, under the same umbrella. The consequence is disastrous.

Romans 3:4: Let God be true, and every human being a liar.

If God said that he made the world, and biodiversity in six literal normal days, that is is what we, believers, and Christians, ought to believe.
Who do you trust more? God, or man ?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

244My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Thu May 27, 2021 6:17 am

Otangelo


Admin
God is the one upon which everything external depends. Creation was founded and made by HIM, and for HIM. The position/decision that we take in HIS regard, is the greatest and most important decision, with eternal consequences. Either our lives mirror HIS glory, and we glorify HIM with our lips, life, conduct, actions, and behavior, looking up to HIM, and permit the holy spirit to dwell and to direct us in all we do, having always HIM in mind, or we miss the target, and go astray, and walk the walk on our own, with our own goals and motivations which ultimately are meaningless, because a life that is not guided and grounded in God is in its essence meaningless. It's grasping at a straw. We will seek the fulfillment, joy, and happiness, mental, and emotional, which only God can give us, in idols. Everything we replace God within our hearts are idols. Those can be all sorts of things. Sex, Power, job, false Gods/religions/idolatry, family. Christ mentioned in special the deceitfulness of wealth, and as consequences, chokes of the world. Carnal behavior replaces spiritual conduct and is expressed in pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony, and sloth. That's why the worldview we hold is of utmost importance. It directs our entire lives and the most important decisions. One is on the crossroad. Either to pursue wealth, job, and career, focussing on one's own "success" and being admired in the world, earning respect and love or upon conversion to God, eventually gets the call from God to be a missionary. With totally different outcomes in one's life. One can die rich, and go to hell. The other dies poor, persecuted, but upon serving the Kingdom, maybe in a distant tribe far away, unnoticed from the world, will find a great treasure in heaven. What are you looking for? What do you aim for? What are your goals? Pleasing and serving yourself, or humbly seeking to go the way God has chosen for you? Rebellion, or obeyance? Christ did not want to go to the cross. In fact, he struggled that much, that he asked the father to permit that he would not have to drink the chalice. Nonetheless, he remained to obey until the end. For all that seek and belong to HIM, HIS humbleness and obeyance must be a model to follow. No servant can be greater than his lord. None of us can beat Christ in righteousness, and all virtues that someone can have. He is the Lamb, the righteous, the virtuous one. But we can express our love to HIM by seeking HIM daily in prayers, and employ all our forces, our will, and our strength, to obey HIM. And HE will listen, and give us upon what we ask for in accordance to his will. God's plan for us is masterful. Trust HIM, and you will succeed in your life.
Hebrews 13.4: Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said,
“Never will I leave you;
never will I forsake you.”[a]
6 So we say with confidence,
“The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid.
What can mere mortals do to me?”[b]

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

245My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Sun Jun 06, 2021 9:13 am

Otangelo


Admin
It is remarkable when I asked Graham Oppy about the initial entropy state of the universe, and why it was extremely ordered, he answered: It is simply the way it is.
So why do atheist philosophers ridicule us, when we say: God just simply is?
Traditionally, atheists have ridiculed the notion of an afterlife, and other realms of realities beyond/above our physical universe. A realm that the Bible calls heaven.
So why do the same atheists propose undetectable multiverses to explain away the incomprehensible fine-tuning of the universe, and think that proposition is perfectly rational?
Do we have some double standard here?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

246My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Sat Jul 03, 2021 1:54 pm

Otangelo


Admin
When making probabilistic arguments to illustrate how unlikely it is for a life-supporting universe, and life itself to emerge randomly, its just to make a point. To illustrate why naturalism fails. To quote William Dembski: The problem is that nature has too many options and without design couldn’t sort through all those options. The problem is that natural mechanisms are too unspecific to determine any particular outcome. Natural processes could theoretically form a protein, but also compatible with the formation of a plethora of other molecular assemblages, most of which have no biological significance. Nature allows them full freedom of arrangement. Yet it’s precisely that freedom that makes nature unable to account for specified outcomes of small probability. Nature, in this case, rather than being intent on doing only one thing, is open to doing any number of things. Yet when one of those things is a highly improbable specified event, design becomes the more compelling, better inference. Atheists often resort to the escape, claiming, no matter, how improbable, we are here, therefore the odds that it happened, are one. Even if that assertion would be granted, it is not the only problem. Not only has there to be a causal mechanism/agency to instantiate and cause the universe into existence, but the forces must also be secured, in order to be constant and stable, and there not to be chaos. We know that the fundamental forces do not change across all the universe. That permits the coupling constants to be just right, which hold atoms together.  There has to be a mechanism that holds the interaction of charged particles like electrons with electromagnetic fields constant. Physicists have no explanation why they remain stable over long periods of time when they could change anytime.  In as much as one tries, no matter how many trials, 2+2 will never be 5, so, no matter how much time, or how many trials, even in parallel, as long as the second law of thermodynamics is in place, rather than complexity, molecules will always randomize and devolve into asphalt and never produce life. And furthermore: Undirected physical processes never produce meaningful information. To suggest that a physical process can create semiotic code is like suggesting that a rainbow can write poetry... it is never going to happen! Life is no accident, the vast quantity of semiotic information in life provides powerful positive evidence that we have been designed. To quote one scientist working at the cutting edge of our understanding of the programming information in biology, he described what he saw as an “alien technology written by an engineer a million times smarter than us”

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

247My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Thu Jul 08, 2021 9:37 am

Otangelo


Admin
You can beat consensus in science with one fact. But you can't convince an idiot about Gods existence with thousand facts

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

248My dictums - Page 10 Empty Re: My dictums Sat Jul 10, 2021 6:37 am

Otangelo


Admin
Is the Genetic Code a) an information-bearing sequence of DNA nucleotides or b) a translation program? ( Don't google)

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 10 of 10]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum