Moderator: Moderators
If you guys stopped assuming what I am doing, and pay attention to what I am saying, you would do better. I am not appealing to authority.
As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan.
I did not always embrace these perspectives. As a graduate student in physical chemistry in the 1970s, I was an atheist, finding no reason to postulate the existence of any truths outside of mathematics, physics and chemistry. But then I went to medical school, and encountered life and death issues at the bedsides of my patients. Challenged by one of those patients, who asked "What do you believe, doctor?", I began searching for answers.
I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist's assertion that "I know there is no God" emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, "Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."
I'll explain.theStudent wrote:I am aware of what Francis Collins says he believes. It's in the same link I posted of the CNN interview.
I am also aware that some scientists as well as religionists accept that God may have started the process of evolution.
I await the time when they get a rude awakening, and have to explain why the Bible is not compatible with their views.
"Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."
Oh, so silly of me! Next time I will just close my eyes to all other evidence and just accept what you say. Boy, am I a dope.theStudent wrote: [Replying to post 279 by RonE]
It doesn't appear you understand what I said.
I did not ignore anything. I read it all. I posted the point I wanted to make - which was this:
Collins: Why this scientist believes in GodIf you guys stopped assuming what I am doing, and pay attention to what I am saying, you would do better. I am not appealing to authority.
As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan.
I did not always embrace these perspectives. As a graduate student in physical chemistry in the 1970s, I was an atheist, finding no reason to postulate the existence of any truths outside of mathematics, physics and chemistry. But then I went to medical school, and encountered life and death issues at the bedsides of my patients. Challenged by one of those patients, who asked "What do you believe, doctor?", I began searching for answers.
I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist's assertion that "I know there is no God" emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, "Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."
Why would I post the other bit that has nothing to do with the point I am making?
You can go ahead and post it if it interests you - which you just did. I have already addressed it. Are you paying attention to what I am saying, or just looking to see what you can criticize?
Here:I'll explain.theStudent wrote:I am aware of what Francis Collins says he believes. It's in the same link I posted of the CNN interview.
I am also aware that some scientists as well as religionists accept that God may have started the process of evolution.
I await the time when they get a rude awakening, and have to explain why the Bible is not compatible with their views.
First, it's not just the Genesis account that presents the creation of life as literal. Practically the entire Bible does. So those religionists and scientists alike who jump on the side of evolution will not be able to demonstrates that the Bible is compatable with their beliefs. They have to try twisting the scriptures to suit their beliefs, and it's not going to work.
Second, the reason I referred to Collins was to show that he was saying that some questions cannot be answered by science, and also that an atheist can be blinded to rational thinking, by his own personal views. As a former atheist, he admitted that he came to realize that. Atheist from his experience do assume a lot, and make their decisions based on such assumptions. He said,"Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."
So, let's get back to the old business since you seem to be running out of gas:theStudent wrote: [Replying to post 282 by RonE]
Well, you did ask a question.
How was I to know you didn't want an answer, or it would not be satisfactory?
Do pardon my lack of insight.
RonE wrote: [Replying to post 224 by RonE]
RonE wrote: [Replying to post 221 by theStudent]
I decided to break my response to your post #221 into two parts because it was getting rather long.
Well, no, I haven't because you have still not provided any credible scientific proof of your god.theStudent wrote:You have gotten your answer.RonE wrote:You have several unanswered calls for evidence of your claims. Mine in post #212 goes all the way back to post #183 has been requested several times. Others in post # 213 & post #215. I know it's really inconvenient to keep getting hounded for evidence but YOU made claims and on this site you must be prepared to provide the evidence to support your claim or to withdraw your claim.
theStudent wrote:Also, if you are following the thread, you are getting added information.
Extra? I don't see you've provided anything other that what I asked for and only some of that
theStudent wrote:I don't know why you are not replying to any of it, but keep repeating your request.
Please send me any post #'s where you've asked for something that I've not responded to.
In the mean time I assume you will get right on that list of your credible evidence of god to backup your extraordinary claims of your supernatural god. Since you gave me less than 45 minutes before you hit the impatient button I'll give you an hour before sending you a reminder.
I still find it interesting that in a topic headed "Belief in existence of god scientific..." that you have yet to provide any credible evidence of your god.
Instead of 45 minutes you've now had 4 days to form your response. Is that where this topic dies? You claim something is scientific, fail to provide any evidence and then just quit the debate. Sounds like you lost.
Actually? Really? Do you care?theStudent wrote: [Replying to post 284 by RonE]
Yeah. Too much gas isn't good.
What is the purpose of this post, Ron?
It seems to me, I don't know how to describe it. Are you okay?
Sorry for the delayed response benchwarmer, but the earth stopped spinning and I landed on a Flat Earth, .. real hard like, so I'm just trying to regain my bearings. It's not everyday that you go from a Heliocentric to a Geocentric world.benchwarmer wrote:Same with Noah? You appear to be saying the same thing as theStudent: animals, birds, and infants were wiped out in some sort of 'just punishment'. Now in defense, you show a somewhat contradictory view of God where He does try to come up with a more reasonable solution (though still about the same). I don't recall anywhere someone going around gathering up the infants and taking them with them before the 'just punishment' arrived for the city Abraham was in.arian wrote:
Genesis 18:32 Then he (Abraham) said, “Let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak but once more: Suppose ten should be found there?�
And He said, “I will not destroy it for the sake of ten.� 33 So the Lord went His way as soon as He had finished speaking with Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place.
Lord, .. how about if you found only one righteous, would you destroy the city for the sake of one righteous?
The Lord: "Yes, but I would yank that one righteous out of the city, along with his half righteous family and whomever were willing to escape with him!"
Same with Noah, God seen the whole world was evil except for Noah, so He saved his family too.
All this 'apologizing' boils down to is: God can do whatever He likes.
That's fine, but doesn't argue against the fact He is breaking His own rules.
If you don't believe in the stories in the Bible, what's your point?I have no idea what point you are trying to make. I don't believe either story. The point I was making is that I used only the Bible to show God is breaking His own rules. Did you want me to use Peter Pan??arian wrote:Do you believe in the story of Peter Pan? In the story, Peter Pan could fly, and I've seen pictures and even a movie where he did fly.To be clear I don't believe the story at all,
Show me where it says 'God broke His own rules'?YA, I know right? It's right there in Bible. Who'd a thunk it?arian wrote: God breaks His own rules, .. WHA??
Any programmer created game that everyone can buy and play. The Programmer created it, just because the Programmer made some rules where you can't cheat, rob and kill the other players don't mean the Programmer was unjust, right?Cool, I like games and I'm a programmer (though not a game programmer by profession).arian wrote: Let's say a Game-programmer makes one of his characters in the game he created able to walk through walls, and then kills off or erases a dozen other characters, would you say the Game-Programmer was unjust?
Your example is not very clear. Are you talking about a multiplayer game where the game programmer is playing against you using an 'uber character' or are we talking a single player game where you have to defeat a particular 'uber character' to move on?
The "Programmer created the game, and overlooking the game to make sure everyone follows the rules. The Programmer is very smart, and He devised the rules so "everyone can have fun", and if one helps the other, the game even gets better, more enjoyable.In the first case, that is cheating plain and simple. No different that if someone 'hacks' the game so they are invincible. In the second case, you are just describing a 'boss' character that is harder to defeat and part of the game so not cheating.
God is the designer, creator, and He devised a way to create beings combining laws, with a part of himself in them. So God is not actually playing the game, He gives power/life to the characters so each character is like the programmer, only with limited abilities. Their limitation is their bodies made up of laws (program, so to speak)Now you are talking about something completely different. Now you are talking about updates to the game to ward off players who cheat. Is the game designer one of the players that's playing and cheating? I'm lost.arian wrote: Here you are bought the game, you log online and find a whole bunch of things altered, changed, so what? All you have to do is read on the back of the disk: Programmers, Game designers and there is a number where you can call them: "Hey, you are unfair, you cheat!"
"How do I cheat? Am I playing the game? I created it for your enjoyment, when I see flaws, or the possibility of cheating developing, I change it to keep the game fair for everyone, what's your problem, huh?"
The Bible is a whole, I doubt anyone, even the Prophets really understood God and their relationship to Him as we do with having Christ revealed to us all these things. John chapter 1 information/revelation predates the O.T. Genesis creation story.Now you've gone off on another tangent. Where was I talking about Jesus? I restricted my examples to the OT.arian wrote: Now God sent His Son Word, who as Jesus did "play in the game God created", .. and what did Jesus do that was unfair? Now show us that!? What, "turned the other cheek"? Oh I know, He prayed for sinners, forgave the accused who repented and asked for His forgiveness, .. you find something wrong with that?
I responded to the Post labeled: "Belief in existence of God scientific. Denial - unscientific" .. if you didn't wish to hear what I had to say, you should of make that known. Anyways, denial of God is very unscientific. Man distancing from their Creator, wanting to be independent from his perfect rules and laws is what created religions with gods who are not God. And now it is more obvious than ever in history, man want's to alter everything God created; GMO, Trans Humanism, BB-Evolution stories to try to veil God from His creation etc.Opinion and preaching noted. Not part of the discussion I was having with theStudent at all.arian wrote: Remember God is only concerned with our lives, that it is best as it can be, He's not part of this here creation. This is the problem when people don't know God, any created thing can become their god and that's where distrust of God comes in.
Ahh, .. soo nice to be on the same page with somebody, thank you my friend!!theStudent wrote: [Replying to post 124 by arian]
When I read this, the first thought that came to my mind was Romans 1:20-23arian wrote:This is the problem when people don't know God, any created thing can become their god and that's where distrust of God comes in.
But it does highlight the truthfulness of verse 19.
Define water?Clownboat wrote:arian wrote:Word, .. He created the universe from His Word, .. that's what I see and understand from the Bible.
Readers, does it make any sense to claim that a god concept can create universes with words, but when it comes to killing off an entire planet (save 8) for example, he uses a flood for which there is no evidence for?
Universes with words, but gotta get rid of the sin from Adam and Eve, gotta have me some blood shed.
Welcome back, I really liked that explanation! We can disagree on just about everything, but you have a great sense of humor my friend.arian wrote: Sorry for the delayed response benchwarmer, but the earth stopped spinning and I landed on a Flat Earth, .. real hard like, so I'm just trying to regain my bearings. It's not everyday that you go from a Heliocentric to a Geocentric world.
That right there pretty much sums it up. If God can do whatever He likes regardless of whatever rules He puts in place for us, then there's really no point trying to understand what's going on.arian wrote: Yes, God does what He likes, what He considers good, and if you look around our world you can see that what we consider good don't work, .. well not for everyone anyways.
At the very least, how about just wipe out those who were committing the sinful acts? God created the universe with a word and can't selectively take out those causing the problems?arian wrote: So tell me, what should God do (without interfering with free will) to make it all right? All just?
I'm simply showing the internal inconsistency in the Bible.arian wrote: If you don't believe in the stories in the Bible, what's your point?
