Posted on 08/25/2017 7:42:24 AM PDT by Raymond Pamintuan
Proverbs 8
27 When He prepared the heavens, I was there, When He drew a circle on the face of the deep,
Nelson, Thomas. Holy Bible, New King James Version (NKJV) (p. 623). Thomas Nelson. Kindle Edition.
“The theme of this book is that a universe comes into being when a space is severed or taken apart.”
Spencer-Brown, George. The Laws of Form, page xxii.
You’ve taken it a lot farther down the road than needed.
If, in violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, a collection of molecules were somehow to magically configure themselves into a cell of algae, and it further magically comes to life “somehow”, what causes it to then split in two and each of the two halves to then regrow to the size of the original cell and repeat that process indefinitely?
There are two basic approaches; the universe always existed or someone created the universe. I subscribe to the latter; creation by plan, not accident.
Many atheist and agnostics have publicly revised their thinking after becoming acquainted with the DNA language.
You really need to read past the first paragraph. The author’s point is the axiom is wrong.
“Given enough time and the chemical opportunity, living cells self-assemble.”
Yes, just like we’ll eventually find a fully assembled iPhone or Ferrari on a planet with no intelligent life.
Easy Peasey - It was the guy on the right:
...
Who created the guy on the right? It appears he’s made out of the same material.
A wild assumption with absolutely no basis for belief. It’s like saying, “And then a miracle happened!”
...
We simply don’t know how abiogenesis occurred. We do have a good idea of the environment, that it was much different than today, and that it only occurred once.
The well respected Christian philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, believes that evolution supports theism more than it supports naturalism.
Just because we don’t know how it happened, doesn’t mean it was a miracle.
“When Craig Venter’s team created the first synthetic cell, they didn’t assemble a cell from scratch; they replaced a living cell’s DNA with a modified version. In other words, they replaced the molecular software of an already existing computer. The hardware already existed. While I greatly admire Venter’s efforts and consider it to be one of the most important and promising developments of this century, it is important to point out they did not create life from nonliving materials.”
Even if they had, the only thing it would have proved is that an INTELLIGENT human can DESIGN and assemble a cell, not that random events guided by forces of nature did it.
The easiest way to explain it is just like our computers. When you get a new, blank computer and turn it on, leave it sitting for a month or so. The computer, through trying to run, will make accidents and create better and better programs the longer you leave it.
The fact that many people have programs like Adobe, Microsoft, GoogleChrome, etc. is all just convergent evolution. DNA is far more complex than computer code, but since we know computer code creates itself, so can DNA.
/s
That was the late AE Wilder-Smith’s whole point with his review of “The great debate” between Huxley and Wilberforce.
Complex structures ALWAYS fall apart easier than they go together.
The whole “formula for life” promoted today is nothing but a variant of the “gambler’s fallacy.”
God is great all the time...His creations are amazing, and that understates everything.
This should be added; Life arising naturally out of nonliving materials not only cannot be proven it also cannot be disproven.
This describes how precise the plan or accident need be to create life. Has Science Found Proof of the Existence of God!
LOL
But if anyone came across this formation at the bottom of a slide, would they for a second believe that it came about "naturally"? Of course not.
And even though the complexity of DNA makes this formation look like a stick figure next the Mona Lisa, we're told to believe that DNA developed "naturally".
Don’t they produce CNN???
“But scientism seeks to claim that any questions science can’t answer are invalid.”
They limit their scope of research to the material world - the world of our senses, and arrogantly (and maybe ignorantly) insist that nothing else exists.
Imagine what the world of an amoeba must be like. An amoeba has no awareness of us humans as huge, powerful, intelligent beings able to create things and with the power of life and death over millions of amoebas. To their senses we don’t exist, but obviously we do.
So perhaps we humans are like amoebas to something out there much bigger, powerful and intelligent than we are.
An excellent book on the philosophical(as opposed to “scientific”) basis for the theory of evolution is Benjamin Wiker’s MORAL DARWINISM.
In his book, Wiker makes it quite clear that the major impulse behind this philosophical basis is the desire to “prove” that life—whether on earth or not— has no Creator, and our human drama no Author.
IOW, it uses a pre-conceived conclusion for its theory instead of scientific data.
Yes because evolution is religion. Actually it's idolatry.
Jer 2:27 Saying to a stock, Thou art my father; and to a stone, Thou hast brought me forth: for they have turned their back unto me, and not their face: but in the time of their trouble they will say, Arise, and save us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.