Origin of life arguments
They are less than 200 letters long. You can use them in YouTube chats
Entropy-second law-dictates that energy is decreasing into unusable states THUS dictating to us the universe had a beginning! And therefore a cause. That cause is God.
The Universe is like a giant watch that was wound up and is now winding down. Unless the 2nd law could be violated, that means, the universe had a beginning, therefore a cause.
For those that deny that the universe had a beginning: How do you go from a high entropy state to a low one? Hmmmmm........ ??!!
Crazy is who thinks that the physical universe can be either eternal or emerged from absolutely nothing. Both propositions are impossible, but atheists have to stick to them nonetheless denying God.
The universe cannot be past eternal. Neither could it be self-caused. Therefore, it must have been caused by God.
The physical universe which operates in an interdependent manner with the laws of physics was with high certainty implemented by an intelligent creator.
God is simple, eternal, and uncaused. The Universe is complex and finite.
Suppressing the truth is evil. Atheists suppress the truth of God's existence. Therefore, atheists do unjustified evil by denying God's existence, and God's wrath is justified.
Atheists apply a double standard. They are hyper skeptical and critical of God claims. But apply blind faith towards anything and any argument, no matter how foolish, that supports their views.
Atheism is a religion of death. Christianity of hope and life. An atheist believes that physical death is the end. Christians believe that the end of this life is a transition to eternal life.
Atheism is a failure in every sense. It gives no hope, no meaning, no moral values, no peace, no security, and the worst of all All evidence points to the fact that there IS a God The one in the Bible
Active atheists have most of their time nothing better to talk about than to argue about faith and religion.
Atheism removes hope, morality, makes your life meaningless, from stardust you came, from stardust you go, and what you did in between will be forgotten in one thousand years. Sad
Materialism a belief as theism. How do you know that natural mechanisms are a better explanation for our existence, than a powerful creator, which uses Intelligence?
The fact that we know that the material world exists, does not automatically mean, that materialism is the default and better explanation than our origins by an intelligent powerful creator.
Strong atheism is a worldview, where God has no place, but everything that exists is the physical universe, nothing beyond. That assertion cannot be proven.
Nobody beats a dead horse. Since God exists, atheists and God deniers try to deny his existence, but without success. The natural world points to God.
Atheists: Ask for evidence of God's existence. And when given, reject the evidence. Ask. Reject. Ask. Reject. Ask. Reject. Ask. Reject. And so on. It's never sufficient evidence.....
How do you know, that we are not an experiment of a kid playing a computer game in a parallel universe? Atheism leads to agnosticism, and in the end, to nihilism, and solipsism.
Atheism: Chance is almost all powerful, , non-life produces life, and chaos codes and information, matter produces consciousness. How does that make sense?
A causeless Bang and the BigBang began, its expansion rate finely tuned in the order of 1 in 10^123 for the universe not to collapse back. By chance, a multiverse, or design?
Matter, for no reason started to obey physical laws. Luck produced the fine-tuning of over 350 ( CODATA) physical constants, and dozens of paramenters to have life on earth. By chance, or design?
I have never seen an atheist providing good reasons for a Christian to deny and renounce Christ, and becoming an atheist. Atheism has nothing to offer, besides uncertainty about eternity.
Why are active atheists so interested in God and talking about God, if they don't believe that God exists, and proclaim that they are unconvinced in his existence?
Many atheists disguise as open minded, but in reality, their only goal is to try to force their religious materialistic beliefs down the throat of those that are skeptics towards their views.
Materialism must stand on its own. What caused the universe? The physical laws? It's fine-tuning? The origin of life? Biodiversity? Consciousness? Moral values?
In the world of atheism, random chance is more powerful than intelligence
Atheists can't ground fundamentally nothing: Existence itself The meaning of life The value of human life Moral values Sound reasoning Logic Intelligibility The mind, Uniformity in nature.
Existence cannot come from non-existence. Aquinas: By definition, a non-contingent effect cannot cause itself. If an effect caused itself, it would need to have existed prior to itself.
There can be no fundamental meaning if there is no God which made us for a specific purpose and if our lives will cease one day to exist. It is just a momentary transition out of oblivion into oblivion
Without God, there can be no intrinsic, sanctity, or inherent value of human life, there can be no measure to distinguish why a cockroach is less valuable than man.
Atheists presuppose objective moral values exist - like it is wrong to torture, rape, and kill babies for fun. But atheists cannot consistently claim that any moral values exist without ought to be's.
If there is no God, there is no reference point for us to know what is ultimately true and real. It can be anything. Our lives are ultimately absurd. That leads to nihilism.
In order to understand our existence, we need to presuppose an orderly universe, governed by physical laws. Atheists have to assume it without having an explanation why it is so.
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.
Check on YouTube on the Intelligent Design Academy channel: The Kalam leads to the God of the Bible
Either you spend your eternity w/ Christ and enjoy unbelievable wonders and paradise or...the fiery hell. And then judgement by Christ...then the lake of fire for all eternity. Choose wisely.
Christianity: Everything to win, nothing to lose. Atheism: Everything to lose. Nothing to win.
The God of the Bible reveals us truth, gives hope, meaning, love, forgives sin, makes us new creatures in Christ, gives eternal life, and a moral standard. Atheism provides nothing.
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
What may be known about God is plain to them because God has made it plain For since the creation of the world Gods invisible qualities his eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen.
Unbelievers are without excuse. God's divine power has been clearly seen in the natural world. The universe is finely tuned. So it requires a fine-tuner. Physical laws require a lawgiver.
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
When you say to an atheist, how AMAZING Christ is, you humiliate his unbelief.
There are over 350 prophecies in the OT pointing to Jesus as the messiah. There are over 40 extrabiblical sources mentioning Jesus. There is also internal consistency in the scriptures
People have a lifetime to think if God exists. Once they die, it's over. No way back. Make the right choice as long as there is time. There will be a time, where you cannot repent anymore.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Daniel 12:2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.
God is Supernatural Uncaused, beginningless, and eternal Changeless Timeless Immaterial Spaceless Personal Enormously Powerful Absolutely independent and self-existent Intelligent Purposeful
Supernatural Acts 17:24-25 uncaused, beginningless, and eternal 1 Timothy 1:17 omnipresent & all-knowing Psalm 139:7-12; Jeremiah 23:24 unchanging Malachi 3:6 immaterial (spirit) John 4:24
Personal John 4:24, Powerful Genesis 17:1 timeless Revelation 1:8 necessary Genesis 1:1 omniscient Psalm 147:4-5 independent and self-existent Isaiah 46:9 intelligent Jeremiah 32:17
John 3:19: " And this is the condemnation, that light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather that light, because their deeds were evil."
Proverbs 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Revelation 21 8 The cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the immoral those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur.
the resurrection has been scientifically confirmed by the shroud of Turin, the image is physically impossible to have occurred naturally and required 34 thousand billion watts
Theology and philosophy. Both lead to an eternal, self-existent, omnipresent transcendent, conscious, intelligent, personal and moral Creator.
The Kalaam Cosmological argument leads to the God of the Bible. The OT is a catalog of fulfilled prophecies of Jesus Christ, and his mission, death, and resurrection foretold with specificity.
Archaeology shows that all events described in the Bible are historical facts. Historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth, and really did physically rise from the dead
The Bible's witnesses. There are many testimonies of Jesus doing miracles still today, and Jesus appearing to people all over the globe, still today.
End times. The signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are occurring in front of our eyes. New world order, Israel as a nation, microchip implant, etc.
After-life experiences. Credible witnesses have seen the afterlife and have come back and reported to us that the afterlife is real.
Life is based on irreducible, and specified complexity. Chance can't produce neither one, nor the other.
Eugene V. Koonin, page 351: The ultimate goal, the origin of life field is a failure—we still do not have even a plausible coherent model, let alone a validated scenario, for the emergence of life on Earth.
We KNOW by experience that intelligence can make blueprints, machines, computers, factories, energy turbines, transistors, production lines etc
A transistor can be considered an artificial Neuron. Every living cell within us is a hybrid analog–digital supercomputer. The brain is like 100 billion computers working together.
Neurons are computers. Only minds make computers. Therefore, neurons are made by an intelligent designer.
In the same sense as a watchmaker is required to make a watch, a factory maker is required to make a factory. Cells are factories more complex than any manmade factory.
Machines made for specific purposes originates as a mental concept in the mind. Cells host molecular machines, each with a specific purpose. Therefore, they had to be made by an intelligent designer.
Molecules on prebiotic earth would have devolved into asphalts, rather than complexify into complex molecules and macromolecules used in life. Life is an enigma without explanation.
There was NO prebiotic selection of the basic building blocks of life amongst myriads of possible configurations. THIS ALONE is a checkmate situation for the unguided abiotic origin of life hypotheses
Is the origin of the following better explained by chance, or design? blueprints, machines, computers, energy turbines, robotic production lines, factories, transistors, energy production plants?
The idea that matter, somehow, by evolutionary processes, can become conscious, is absurd to the extreme. Once the truth is rejected, people believe any nonsense.
Albert Einstein: “How can it be that mathematics, being, after all, a product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality?"
Decision-making based on logic is either a) something performed directly by intelligence, or b) programmed by intelligence to be performed by machines, like computers.
Cells process a multitude of input signals to make decisions and operate based on logic gates. Therefore, cell information processing based on logic gates was implemented by intelligence.
Minds are composed of intentional states. Intentional states are normative states that create the possibilities of failure. Good or bad are not natural states. Therefore, the mind is not natural.
Matter cannot produce logic intelligence language consciousness imagination thinking thoughts feelings emotions because they are in substance different than matter
Minds are categorically different than matter. Matter cannot produce minds.
Minds exist which have and use objective logic. Objective logic depends and can only derive from a pre-existing necessary first mind with objective logic. That mind is God.
Existing fundamentals—space, time, mass, charge can’t explain consciousness, which itself is something fundamental, and essentially different than physical things.
Hard objects are never observed spontaneously to transform themselves into abstract ideas. The mind cannot be an emergent property of the brain.
To ascribe to the electrons in our brain the property to generate consciousness, and not to ascribe the same property to the electrons moving in a bulb, is in contradiction with quantum physics.
All electrons are equal and indistinguishable, that is they have all exactly the same properties. The mind is to the brain what a pianist is to a piano.
If our biological features, and more importantly our cognitive machinery evolved from some random forces of nature can we trust our brain and our thinking?
The mere fact that we can imagine things have memories ( which are not stored in the brain), is evidence of God.
Living in a universe without god reduces the mind to mere electric discharges in the tissue of the brain Molecules in motion so to speak. Molecules act exclusively in a lawful causeandeffect- relation
The claim that electric impulses in our brain generate thoughts is in contradiction with the laws of physics that consider equivalent all-electric impulses inside or outside our brain
According to the laws of physics, electrons are all equal and indistinguishable, and they are always moving in every material or electric circuits.
Paul Davies: From Matter to Life: Our phenomenal experiences are the only aspect of consciousness that cannot, even in principle, be reduced to known physical principles.
Paul Davies: I have come to the point of view that mind-conscious awareness of the world is not a meaningless and accidental quirk of nature, but an absolutely fundamental facet of reality.
This is the “hard problem of consciousness.” Consciousness is an irreducible, fundamental property of mind, with its own laws and principles.
MICHAEL EGNOR, “SCIENCE AND THE SOUL” AT THE PLOUGH The brain can be cut in half, but the intellect and will cannot. The intellect and will are metaphysically simple.
MICHAEL EGNOR It’s sobering to note that neuroscience has utterly failed to explain how the brain and mind relate. It is as if cosmology had failed to tell us anything meaningful about the universe
Consciousness englobes the mind, "qualia", intellectual activity, calculating, thinking, forming abstract ideas, imagination, introspection, cognition, memories,
Awareness, experiencing, intentions, free volition, free creation, invention, generation of information. It classifies, recognizes and judges behavior, good and evil.
Hard objects are never observed spontaneously to transform themselves into abstract ideas.
To ascribe to the electrons in our brain the property to generate consciousness, and not to ascribe the same property to the electrons moving in a bulb, is in contradiction with quantum physics
Quantum physics establishes that all electrons are equal and indistinguishable, that is they have all exactly the same properties. The mind is to the brain what a pianist is to a piano.
The former (the pianist) is not reducible to the latter (the piano).
Those are all fundamental discrete indivisible non-quantifiable qualities of substance, which has a different identity from hard physical objects, matter and space.
Perception, understanding, and evaluation of things adds a quality beyond and absent from natural physical matter and states, and can, therefore, not be reduced to known physical principles.
The mind cannot be an emergent property of the brain. Existing fundamentals—space, time, mass, charge can’t explain consciousness, which itself is something fundamental
They are essentially different than physical things. Therefore, dualism is true, and since the universe had a beginning, the mind precedes and exists beyond the universe. That mind is God.
The DNA replication machinery is not homologous in the 3 domains of life. The bacterial core replisome enzymes do not share a common ancestor with the analogous components in eukaryotes and archaea.
Bacteria and Archaea differ strikingly in the chemistry of their membrane lipids. Cell membrane phospholipids are synthesized by different, unrelated enzymes in bacteria and archaea.
Sequences of glycolytic enzymes differ between Archaea and Bacteria/Eukaryotes. There is no evidence of a common ancestor for the four glycolytic kinases or of the seven enzymes that bind nucleotides
There are at least six distinct autotrophic carbon fixation pathways. If common ancestry were true, an ancestral Wood–Ljungdahl pathway should have become life's only principle for biomass production.
There is a sharp divide in the organizational complexity of the cell between eukaryotes, which have complex intracellular compartmentalization, and even the most sophisticated prokaryotes, which do not.
A typical eukaryotic cell is about 1,000-fold bigger by volume than a typical bacterium or archaeon, and functions under different physical principles
Pervasive horizontal gene transfer (HGT), in large part mediated by viruses and plasmids, that shapes the genomes of archaea and bacteria and call for a radical revision of the Tree of Life concept
RNA Polymerase differences: Prokaryotes only contain three different promoter elements: -10, -35 promoters, and upstream elements. Eukaryotes contain many different promoter elements
Ribosome and ribosome biogenesis differences: The recruitment of individual proteins to this pathway has been largely independent in the bacterial and eukaryotic lineages.
The most extensive genetics study ever completed the Journal of Human Evolution May, 2018, revealed NO genetic evidence for Evolution.
Instructional complex information encoded in 33 genetic, and 41 epigenetic codes, and signaling networks on a structural level in an integrated interlocked fashion explain organismal architecture.
Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution MAY 28, 2018
And yet—another unexpected finding from the study—species have very clear genetic boundaries, and there's nothing much in between. "If individuals are stars, then species are galaxies," said Thaler.
They are compact clusters in the vastness of empty sequence space." The absence of "in-between" species is something that also perplexed Darwin
No currently existing language can tolerate random changes in the symbol sequences which express its sentences. Meaning is almost invariably destroyed. Changes must be syntactically lawful ones
The origin of the vertebrate skeleton 16 August 2010 No coherent causative model of morphogenesis has ever been presented.
September 7, 2010, The vast majority of research in evolutionary biology is focused on adaption. A theory for the population-genetic mechanisms by which complex adaptations are acquired remains to be developed.
Foundational Concepts: Evolution “Scientists are still uncovering the specifics of how, when, and why evolution produced the life we see on Earth today.”
We have a rudimentary understanding of the dynamics of genome rearrangements and evolution over the evolutionary timescales being considered when we compare lineages from across the animal kingdom.
20 December 2016 Irrespective of the content of the individual critiques, the sheer volume and persistence of the discontent must be telling us something important about evolutionary biology.
Broadly speaking, the ( evolutionary ) field is seriously deficient, but it shows a peculiar conservatism and failure to embrace ideas that are new, true, and very important
07 November 2017 "...a great deal of evidence from several sources strongly suggests that the overall effects of mutations are to REDUCE FITNESS."
...THE VAST MAJORITY OF MUTATIONS ARE DELETERIOUS. THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST WELL-ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES OF EVOLUTIONARY GENETICS, SUPPORTED BY BOTH MOLECULAR AND QUANTITATIVE-GENETIC DATA."
Darwinism has become an ideology, while the most significant theories of Darwin were proven unsupportable. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15612191
Arber: The deeper we penetrate in the studies of genetic exchange the more we discover mechanisms" involved in human genetics that falsify the mutation plus natural selection core of macroevolution.
Margulis: Although random mutations influenced the course of evolution, their influence was mainly by loss, alteration, and refinement... Never, however, did that one mutation make a wing, a fruit.
Margulis: No evidence in the vast literature of heredity changes shows unambiguous evidence that random mutation itself, even with geographical isolation of populations, leads to speciation.
Margulis: The accumulation of genetic mutations were touted to be enough to change one species to another….No. It wasn’t dishonesty. I think it was wish fulfillment and social momentum.
Margulis: I was taught over and over again that the accumulation of random mutations led to evolutionary change - led to new species. I believed it until I looked for evidence.
There are a variety of organisms, unrelated to each other, which encounter nearly identical convergent biological systems. This commonness makes little sense in light of evolutionary theory.
Is God's preprogrammed capacity of animals to adapt and speciate not amazing? Without this, life would not be possible. Adaptation is life essential
Phylogenetics is his main argument and yet seems to lack knowledge on orphan genes, ervs, mtDNA and Y chromosome genetic variation
When atheists claim that man and ape had a common ancestor, they claim that their intelligence evolved from non-intelligence. In that case, how can they be certain about any of their claims and thoughts?
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
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 ?
Mutation and natural selection provide one of the explanations of micro-evolution within a species, but it's not a good explanation of the origins of life and of the change in species.
People do not believe in evolution because of science. They believe it because of the religion of naturalism
Fine-tuning of the Laws of physics, the Big Bang, cosmological constants, the fundamental forces of the universe, subatomic particles, the Milky Way Galaxy, the earth, the moon requires a fine-tuner.
The expansion rate of the universe: 1 part in 10^55, Initial entropy: 1 part in 10^ (10^123), Gravitational constant: 1 part in 10^34, Electromagnetic force versus force of gravity: 1 part in 10^37
Cosmological constant: 1 part in 10^123 The mass density of the universe: 1 part in 10^59 The chance to get a universe with stars is 10^229 gravity just right for life to exist is 1 out of 10^21
The initial conditions of the universe, subatomic particles, the Big Bang, the fundamental forces of the universe, the Solar System, the earth and the moon, are finely tuned to permit life.
Without fine-tuning, there would be no BB and no universe AT ALL.
Paul Davies, How bio-friendly is the universe ? “There is now broad agreement among physicists and cosmologists that the universe is in several respects ‘fine-tuned’ for life.
First cause arguments
According to Hawking, Einstein, Rees, Vilenkin, Penzius, Jastrow, Krauss and 100’s of other physicists, finite nature (time/space/matter) had a beginning.
Google: "Death of the eternal cosmos" From the cosmic egg to the infinite multiverse, every model of the universe has a beginning
Being cannot come from non-being. Since we are, being has always been. Since the universe had a beginning, a non-physical being must have existed beyond the universe. That being is God.
There can be no infinite regress. Everything has to start with an uncreated creator which is eternal, without a beginning, and without an end. Something cannot come from nothing.
The chain of sustained beings cannot regress infinitely. Therefore, the chain of sustained beings must terminate in an independent being that is not itself sustained.
If we are starting to count from now. Whenever we stop counting and look back, there is always a finite number that was counted. That's why the universe is not infinite but had a beginning.
The Kalam Cosmological Argument leads logically and deductively to the God of the Bible. Only the Bible amongst all religious books describes a transcendent eternal God correctly.
The Second Law points to 1) a beginning when, for the first time, the Universe was in a state where all energy was available for use; and 2) an end in the future when no more energy will be available
Dawkins The fact that life evolved out of nothing, 10 billion years after the universe evolved out of literally nothing, is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice
Cosmogony accepts finitism in the form of the BB, rather than Steady State th. which allows for a universe that existed an infinite amount of time, but on physical rather than philosophical grounds.
Google: Death of the eternal cosmos From the cosmic egg to the infinite multiverse, every model of the universe has a beginning
Vilenkin and Mithani showed that the egg could not have existed forever after all, as quantum instabilities would force it to collapse after a finite amount of time (arxiv.org/abs/1110.4096).
Planck time is the smallest unit of time, and cannot divide further. Therefore, time is a discrete entity. That means Zeno's paradox does not refute the claim that an infinite regress is impossible.
Time and energy were created at the BB. Therefore, energy cannot be created or destroyed after the BB created it.
Stephen W. Hawking and Roger Penrose proved in the 1960s, is that time cannot extend back indefinitely. As you play cosmic history backward in time, the galaxies all come together to a single point
Being cannot come from non-being. that has not to be proven. It is true by the mere meaning of what absolutely nothing means. It means absence of anything.
God must be causally, but not temporally, prior to the Big Bang. With the creation of the universe, time began, and God entered into time at the moment of creation.
The cause of the Big Bang operated at to, that is, simultaneously (or coincidentally) with the Big Bang.
Existence cannot come from non-existence. Reality cannot come from Non-reality. Something cannot come from Nothing. The law of cause and effect is the most universal law of all laws known.
There must be a boundary. But Vilenkin found that this scenario falls prey to the same mathematical argument as eternal inflation: if your universe keeps getting bigger, it must have started somewhere
Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing, one with the very delicate balance needed to provide exactly the right conditions required to permit life
Mithani, and Vilenkin: Did the universe have a beginning?: At this point, it seems that the answer to this question is probably yes.
Here we have addressed three scenarios which seemed to offer a way to avoid a beginning, and have found that none of them can actually be eternal in the past. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.4658v1.pdf
This finding means that the observable universe contains only a finite amount of information, so information processing (and life) cannot endure forever Lawrence M. Krauss
NASA: The Big Bang created all the matter and energy in the Universe.
Can we have an infinite universe for example? The answer is no, the universe is finite. Stephen Hawking in A Brief History of Time' (1989 page 44) describes the universe as being finite but unbounded
Borde, Guth, andVilenkin were able to prove that any universe which has, on average, been expanding throughout its history cannot be infinite in the past but must have a past space-time boundary.
We do not need to understand how God created the universe, in order to conclude that a creator is the best explanation amongst the possible explanations.
A eternal universe is not possible. A universe from nothing is not possible. Eliminiative inductions lead to an eternal God which instantiated the physical universe
We don't know how exactly a mind might act in the world to cause change. Your mind, mediated by your brain, sends signals to your arm, hand, and fingers, and writes a text through the keyboard of the PC.
I sit here typing. I cannot explain to you how exactly this process functions, but we know, it happens. Consciousness can interact with the physical world and cause change.
But how exactly that happens, we don't know. Why then should we expect to know how God created the universe? The theory of intelligent design proposes an intelligent mental cause as the origin of the world.
Herbert Spencer: In regards to the origin of the universe, three hypotheses are possible: self-existence (atheism), self-creation (pantheism), or creation by an external agency (theism).
If the past is infinitely old, then getting from the past to the present would be like trying to climb to the surface of the earth from a hole infinitely deep—from a bottomless pit.
The necessary first cause of the universe must transcend the physical universe (since a cause is necessarily separate from its effects) and must be personal
(since only a personal agent can act discretely to initiate a new line of causation without its action being caused by a prior set of necessary and sufficient material conditions
A record of pre-Cambrian animal life, it appears, simply does not exist. Why this lamentable blank? Various theories have been proposed; none is too satisfactory.
Raup David: As every paleontologist knows, most new species, and that nearly all new categories above the level of families appear suddenly, not led up to by gradual transitional sequences.
In order to say that some function is understood, every relevant step in the process must be elucidated. The relevant steps in biological processes occur ultimately at the molecular level,
If God removes evil, he removes free will, and removes the possibility to love Either God avoids all evil altogether, and removes free will, or he permits that free will is possible, and permits evil
If there were 3,5mio years since the split of humans with apes, then there would be on average 60 mutations per generation, but the add of 200 th. neurons in the brain. How did evolution handle this?
The size of the brain of a chimp is 1/3 of that of humans. That would require the addition of about 67billion neurons in the time period of 3,5 Mio years.
We have found with high probabilty Noah's Ark on Mount Ararat.
Information is fundamental
DECODING REALITY VLATKO VEDRALO: Our reality is ultimately made up of information. Information (and not matter or energy) is the building block on which everything is constructed.
The grand dispute of worldviews is between mind-first (theism) and matter-first (atheism).If matter came first, chance is more powerful than the mind. How does that make sense?
Werner Heisenberg “The atoms or elementary particles themselves are not real; they form a world of potentialities or possibilities rather than one of things or facts.”
I think that modern physics has definitely decided in favor of Plato.
The smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas that can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language.
Of course, we all know that our own reality depends on the structure of our consciousness; we can objectify no more than a small part of our world.
But even when we try to probe into the subjective realm, we cannot ignore the central order…
In the final analysis, the central order, or 'the one' as it used to be called and with which we commune in the language of religion, must win out.
Quantum physicists discovered that physical atoms are made up of vortices of energy that are constantly spinning and vibrating, each one radiating its own unique energy signature. This is also known as "the Vacuum" or "The Zero-Point Field."
Martin Rees: In the beginning there were only probabilities. The universe could only come into existence if someone observed it.
Wherever there’s information processing, there’s consciousness. Complex information processing, like in a human, complex consciousness.
Werner Heisenberg “The atoms or elementary particles themselves are not real; they form a world of potentialities or possibilities rather than one of things or facts.”
Sir James Jeans Mind no longer appears as an intruder into the realm of matter; we are beginning to suspect that we ought rather to hail it as a creator and governor of the realm of matter.
Decoding reality: Information is a far more fundamental quantity in the Universe than matter or energy. We look at reality in terms of ‘bits of information’,
Planck: As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear-headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such.
All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force that brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together.
We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."
Laws of physics
Johannes Kepler The chief aim of all investigations of the external world should be to discover the rational order and harmony which has been imposed on it by God and which He revealed to us in the language of mathematics.
Laws and require a lawgiver. And interdependent systems a creator. Therefore, nature, the laws of nature, and their interdependence require a creator.
Jeans, J. : It is true, in a sense somewhat different from that intended by Galileo, that ‘Nature’s great book is written in mathematical language.’
The theory of relativity, the theory of quanta and the wave-mechanics are fundamentally mathematical. Therefore, the set up had to come from a mathematician - God.
Not through blind chance, but through mathematical design, the material universe has arisen. Mathematical design always comes from the mind of an intelligent person.
Sir Fred Hoyle: electrons, protons and neutrons. These are not particles in the everyday sense of the word, but mathematical particles, entities whose properties can be calculated with precision
We discover that the universe shows evidence of a designing or controlling power that has something in common with our individual minds which we describe as mathematical. - Jeans, J.
Sir James Jeans: We can also see why energy, the fundamental entity of the universe, had again to be treated as a mathematical abstraction - the constant of integration of a differential equation.
The real origin of our universe, of its matter and energy, of its atoms, particles, and waves, is highest mathematics, is thinking
It takes at least the mind of a human being, trained as a physicist and mathematician, to understand the high mathematics, contained in physics. An ape or an "ordinary" person cannot do that.
Man has only found the physical laws. He has not made them. They have been there already long before him. Why are there laws of physics at all, if a mind did not create them?
The universe operates based on the laws of physics. They are mathematical rules, imposed on the matter. There is no reason it to be so unless a mathematician instantiated them.
If the universe were not orderly, and based on mathematical laws, it would be pure chaos, and not intelligible. No universe at all could/would exist.
Can the laws of physics change ? Yes or no? If they can change, they are a fix. They are set up.
The laws were imprinted on the universe at the moment of creation, i.e. at the big bang, and have since remained fixed in both space and time.
If laws can be different, it means they are set up. Laws of physics vary throughout the universe, a new study suggests September 9, 2010
If there is no God, moral values are subjective. If that is so, why should someone behave in a socially acceptable range ? Jeffrey Dahmer
If there is no God, based on what objective moral standard can you say that slavery is wrong?
If you do not believe in God and claim that the God of the Old Testament condoned Slavery: Based on what moral standard is slavery wrong?
If a godless moral standard is to seek wellbeing: A unconscious woman can be raped by 50 men. She will not know what happened. Those men will improve their wellbeing. Is therefore rape ok?
Since we have our moral values imprinted in our conscience, we obviously know how to distinguish good from evil. This standard emanates from God's nature.
If there is no God, then we are ultimately not accountable for anything. From stardust we came to stardust we return, and what we did in between, nobody will remember.
If objective moral values exist, then God exists. 2. Objective moral values exist. 3. Therefore, God exists.
If there is no God, then morals are a human convention, based on consensus in society. If that is so, nobody can criticize Nazi Germany. Their morals were equally valid. Just different.
If there is no God, then morals are a human convention. If that is so, nobody can criticize Papua tribes. Their morals are to eat, rather than love their neighbors. Who are u to criticize them?
If there is no God, there are no objective moral values, since they are prescribed ought to be's. The human convention does not confer objective binding morality, since there are different conventions
If there is no God, then moral values are just a matter of personal opinion, and as such, no objectively or universally valid at all. Then unbelievers have no standard to judge any moral behavior.
To criticize God, atheists borrow from the theistic worldview, and as such, their criticism is self-contradicting and invalid. And IF they criticize God's choices, that would not refute his existence.
It's always wrong to torture and kill little babies for fun. Therefore, objective moral standards exist. If objective moral standards exist, God exists. Since they exist, God exists.
If there is no God, there can be no objective moral values, since they can only exist when they are grounded in ought to be's coming from a being above humans.
Where do you get a standard of right or wrong from? In your worldview, how do you justify what is good or evil without being arbitrary? Why is there good or evil to begin with?
If there is a sense of Evil in our minds, there must be a standard from which we get that sense. The standard has to be from outside of the human experience to be objective.
Without God, there is nor can be no evil. There's neither good. The universe does not care about us, nor our doings, nor what we should do, or lack doing.
Without a divine lawgiver, there can be no objective right and wrong, only our personally relative, subjective judgments. This means that it is impossible to condemn war, or crime as evil
In a universe without God, good and evil do not exist—there is only the bare valueless fact of existence, and there is no one to say that you are right and I am wrong.
Our recognition of the moral culpability of the driver (rather than the car) is an admission that materialism (physicalism) fails to explain who we are as humans.
Human Beings Are NOT Simply Physical Systems Our recognition of moral responsibility and our efforts to hold each other accountable are irrational and unwarranted if humans are merely physical systems
If we, as humans, are only physical systems , we ought to stop trying to hold each other accountable for misbehavior. In fact, there can be no misbehavior if we are only physical brains and bodies
How is it that blind, non-thinking processes manage to produce creatures that apprehend and respond to abstract moral principles? Could a non-thinking moral realm have possibly seen humanity coming?
Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.
It would still be more reasonable to defend the Biblical worldview because it shapes humanity to the better. In contrast, without a creator, there can be no enforcing agency of moral good
The only manifestation of atheism in state power is totalitarianism. For two centuries every atheist philosophy that has risen to power has brought hell to earth among the people under its boot.
Atheist 'secular humanism' has one salient characteristic-- it never survives the rise of atheism.
It is on faith in God, preserved pure and stainless, that man's morality is based. All efforts to remove from under morality and the moral order the granite foundation of faith and to substitute for it the shifting sands of human regulations, sooner or later lead these individuals or societies to moral degradation. The fool who has said in his heart "there is no God" goes straight to moral corruption (Psalms xiii. 1), and the number of these fools who today are out to sever morality from religion, is legion.
Mit brennender Sorge, Pope Pius XI, 1937
Like the proverbial bump in the carpet, the popular multiverse models merely shift the problem elsewhere – up a level from universe to multiverse”
Now let's suppose there was a multiverse generator. He would have had to make up to 10^123 attempts to get one universe with the right expansion rate.
If the mathematics of quantum mechanics is right (as most fundamental physicists believe and if materialism is right, then one is forced to accept the Many Worlds view However bizarre the consequences
Postulating God--a supermind--as the explanation of the fine-tuning is a natural extrapolation from what we already observe minds to do.
Many physicists, such as Albert Einstein, have observed that the basic laws of physics exhibit an extraordinary degree of beauty, elegance, harmony, and ingenuity.
This Flood left many evidences, from the fact that over 70% of the rocks on continents were laid down by water and contain fossils, to the widespread flood legends.
The evidence of the flood is everywhere There are sea fossils on the highest mountains of every continent. Even the top 1/3 of Mount Everest is all loaded with sea fossils.
The remains of whales have been found in the deserts of nearly every continent. Bones of sharks have been found in Kansas and other "plains states."
The rock strata of the world being found in layers with fossils in a general progression, though with some mixing, is very consistent with a global flood.
Flavius Josephus penned this paragraph: Now all the writers of barbarian histories make mention of this flood, and of this ark; among whom is Berossus the Chaldean.
It is said, there is still some part of this ship in Armenia; and that some people carry off pieces of the bitumen, which they take away, and use chiefly as amulets, for the averting of mischiefs."
If a Christian is wrong, nothing to lose. If an atheist is wrong, and the Christian God is real, he loses eternity and goes to hell. There is PLENTY of evidence why Christ is God.
Eliminative inductions argue for the truth of a proposition by arguing that competitors to that proposition are false. If natural mechanisms do not explain the origin of life, a designer does.
Intelligent design constitutes the best explanation of origins based on the fact that competing causal hypotheses will not demonstrate the power to produce information, machines, and factories.
The fathers of science: Copernicus, Kepler, Ray, Linnaeus, Curvier, Agassiz, Boyle, Newton, Kelvin, Faraday, Rutherford all believed that nature reflects the work of a designing mind
Gravity is inferred by observing an apple falling to the floor, so the existence of a non-physical non-created creator is inferred by observing the existence of a finite universe.
The natural world came about either by natural means or by an eternal creator. These are mutually exclusive, absence of evidence for one is evidence of the other.
Christianity means: Loving God, being loved by God, and loving people. It means having meaning in life and hope of eternal life.
Logic cannot be based on our subjective minds, a non-static universe, or immaterial abstractions outside of a mind. Objective logic depends from a preexisting necessary first mind with objective logic
Since there is being, being has always been. Creation requires a creator. Design requires a designer, Laws require a lawmaker. Creating mathematics requires a mathematician.
Rational skeptics do good to doubt that the natural world is all there is. How can we exist without a creator? I have never seen a rational answer ever given.
There is no compelling explanation of how we can exist without a necessary eternal creator.
Life without God is not only meaningless. It's the utmost boring.
Incredulity is reposing in confidence to our finite minds, that it is warranted to reject the infinite than to admit that the infinite is beyond the comprehension of our limited minds.
The in-comprehensiveness of ultimate reality does not justify rejecting it based on our wisdom, and finite perception.
Namecalling is the lowest form of discourse, the last refuge of those who cannot disprove an opposing point of view. The Internet is dominated by crude, the self-righteous, and the shrill.
Little science takes you away from God, but more of it leads you to God.
Eliminative inductions argue for the truth of a proposition by arguing that competitors to that proposition are false. Materialism is false, therefore, theism is true.
God is supernatural uncaused, beginningless, and eternal omnipresent & all-knowing unchanging immaterial (spirit) personal enormously Powerful timeless necessary
God is omniscient ( All-knowing ) absolutely independent and self-existent extraordinarily intelligent all-understanding God is purposeful
God is Supernatural in nature, Uncaused, beginningless, and eternal, Omnipresent & all-knowing, Changeless, Timeless, Immaterial, Spaceless, Personal
God is Enormously Powerful, Necessary, Absolutely independent and self-existent, Infinite and singular, Diverse yet has unity, Intelligent, Purposeful
If not God then chance is ultimate. The all encompassing powerful mechanism that brought all up. Spacetime, matter, energy, life.
Claiming that there is no evidence of Gods existence is just a personal opinion. It does not say anything about reality, or a factual metaphysical situation.
There is no evidence God was NOT needed to create the world. The beginning of the universe needs a cause. So the physical laws, and its fine-tuning, and so the origin of life.
Atheists must be able to explain how chance has more creative power than intelligence, able to instantiate systems, more complex and sophisticated than ANYTHING ever invented by man.
Francis Bacon: Superficial knowledge of philosophy inclines one to atheism while more knowledge of philosophy inclines one toward religion.
To be ultimate and singular means to be the source of all possibilities. How can you establish what is possible and impossible without referencing God?
We all ask: What must I do about God? Embrace him and believe, or hide and deny him. If there is no God I can do what I want. The mind will follow the heart. We believe what we want to believe
Complex machines derive from the activity of intelligent agents, the much more complex machinery evident in living organisms must also have originated from a designing mind.
The astonishing complexity and superb adaptation of means to ends in systems seen in nature cannot originate strictly through the blind forces of nature.
A code requires a code inventor. Engineering, an engineer. A machine requires a machine-maker. A factory, a factory-maker. Design, a designer. Cells host all these things.
What is the thing or the entity or the process from which everything else comes? If not “acts of mind” or “the plan of creation.”, what is it?
When an atheist says that he is not convinced that God exists, he has not adopted a neutral position. He affirms positively to be convinced to be an accident, coming from slime.
The denial of believing in God entails automatically, even if just implicitly, that we are a random accident in a random accidental cosmos, which happened to occur and to exist just randomly
We can know God exists by the effects. The information in DNA and life , we reason from an effect back to the cause. God does not make himself so obvious that we cannot go our own ways.
Planets in chaos: 02 July 2014 The discovery of thousands of star systems wildly different from our own has demolished ideas about how planets form. Astronomers are searching for a whole new theory.
Challenges in planet formation 31 OCT 2016:
The origin of planets is a vast, complex, and still quite mysterious subject. . Despite decades of space exploration, ground-based observations, and detailed analyses of meteorites and cometary grains (the only space samples available in our laboratories), it is still not clear how the planets of the solar system formed.
Proofs of Gods existence
Gods eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. His existence does not have to be proven.
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
God's existence cannot be proven, in as much as the claim cannot be proven, that the physical world is all there is.
Nobody has proof of whether there is a God or only the physical world. The right question is: How can we best explain our existence?
God's existence cannot be proven. In my view, the combo abduction, and eliminative induction is a good epistemological framework.
When you ask for proofs of God's existence, you show that you don't have a sound epistemological framework. God's existence cannot be proven. Materialism can't be proven either.
God has the power to do all things that power is capable of doing. Power can’t make an illogical statement logical; it can’t create, for example, a square circle.
Signs of intelligence
Something has always existed. Intelligence and consciousness comes only from consciousness and intelligence. Therefore, consciousness and intelligence has always existed.
The universe is governed by dependable, prescriptive immutable, absolute, universal, mathematical laws. Laws require a lawmaker
Cells are interlocked irreducible factories where a myriad of proteins work together to self-sustain and perpetuate life. We only know of intelligence making such things.
Something purposefully and intentionally developed and made to accomplish a specific goal(s). That includes specifically the generation and making of building blocks, energy, and information.
Repeating a variety of complex actions with precision based on methods that obey instructions, governed by rules.
Only ID makes instructional complex blueprints to make objects ( machines, factories, houses, cars, etc.) that are irreducibly complex, integrated, and interdependent systems
In living cells, information is encoded through at least 30 genetic, and almost 30 epigenetic codes that form various sets of rules and languages.
We do not need to test that only intelligence makes machines and factories. We know that chance cannot do it. Cells are factories full of machines, driven by genetic information
The initial conditions of the universe, subatomic particles, the Big Bang, the fundamental forces of the universe, the Solar System, the earth, and the moon, are finely tuned to permit life.
Pelagibacter ubique is one the smallest self-replicating free-living cells, has a genome size of 1,3 million base pairs which codes for about 1,300 proteins. It could never emerge by chance.
Science has unraveled, that cells, strikingly, are cybernetic, ingeniously crafted cities full of factories. Such things could not emerge by a lucky accident.
Atheists bitch constantly against slavery in the Bible. We, Christians, aren't. Do they care in as much about slavery ocurring right now, like sex slavery, child slavery etc?
Have YOU EVER done something to prevent it today ? There are organizations operating to prevent sex slavery. You could donate to them...
Took me seconds to google and find an organization. How much are you willing to donate against?
You think you are superior to God ? Are you all-knowing ? Do you think you as limited being are capable of making a better judgement in every situation? If so, based on what moral standard ?
If you are so concerned about slaves, why dont you buy a slave and set him free ?
Go to the bottom of the page:
Atheism has no moral standard and cannot say a SINGLE thing against God since, in their mind, He does not even exist, so it is speaking about which molecules determine what is right and what is wrong.
No atheist has any business ever speaking about morals, since there can be no objective moral values in the atheistic worldview. All is reduced to social convention, which boils down to opinion.
If logic does not account for justifiable special pleading then such logic is clearly flawed. Of course, an Infinite Creator Who created everything would involve a justifiable special pleading.
Such a Creator would not be like the rest of us. It is as simple as seeing the difference between an Infinite Being (notice I didn't say "existence") and billions of "finite beings."
It is as easy as seeing the difference between "those who have a beginning" who are finite versus an "Infinite Creator" Who has no beginning and alone possesses the attribute of Aseity.
Its not special pleading to say God is eternal since this is exactly what the atheist has traditionally said about the universe: It is eternal and uncaused.
What came first, the supernova or the star? Science claims that stars form due to the force of the supernova compressing gas so that gravity then takes over, but SUPERNOVAs were once stars.
It takes the death of one star to create another. So how did the first star form?
There is no way to unite the particles. As the particles rush outward from the central explosion, they would keep getting farther and farther apart from one another.
Science CRUSHES stellar evolution; chemical evolution; et al. Science gets in the way of the materialist's worldview of miracles. Biological complexity requires preprogrammed information.
Fine-tuning requires a fine-tuner, Codes require a code-maker. Codified information comes always from the mind. Life only comes from life. Logic comes from logic, Consciousness comes only from consciousness,
Factories require a factory-maker, Objective moral values come from a moral giver. Where was somebody saying something about God of the gaps??
The universe had a beginning, therefore a cause. Fine-tuning requires a fine tuner. Life cannot come from nonlife. Morality requires a moral giver. Codes require a Code maker.
I just can't understand how people can believe that the universe, life, consciousness, and moral values do not require a creator. How can someone not be convinced based on the overwhelming evidence?
The genetic program instructs how to make new structures, but that program must be precisely programmed, and the genetic regulatory circuits need also to be programmed.
That is, two separate programs need to emerge: 1. the program which defines the physical form and structure, and 2. the program which instructs where to find the genetic
information in the genome, and when to express is during development, that is in the right sequence. Those are different layers of information, which must exist fully developed
in order to make the new anatomical parts in question.
Origin of eukaryotic cells
The divide between prokaryotes and eukaryotes is the biggest known evolutionary discontinuity. The origin of the eukaryotic cells; suffice it to say that the picture seems more obscure than 20 y ago.
Last edited by Otangelo on Fri Apr 16, 2021 6:37 pm; edited 178 times in total