The Belief That Life Was the Result of an Accident Is Unscientific

[alang1216]

Again we have someone too stupid to know just how stupid they are!!!
Once U235 is split, it is no longer an atom of U235.

roflmao, the irony is thicker than a London fog

1) the atom still exists, it was not killed

2) your attempt to move the goal posts was juvenile and too predictable, idiot.

You may want to rethink this post since Ed is right. The uranium atom is no more, the 2 atoms left have neither the mass nor the physical properties of the uranium 235. The subatomic particles not converted to energy still exist though.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Stop reading that silly book called the Bible.

Darwin was a man of science, are you a science denier?

Lol, there is nothing contradictory between evolution and the Bible.

“

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state as we may hope, than the Caucasian and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.”
― Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man

^^ one of the many reasons that Darwin so popular with racists and Nazis.

Which reminds me, when is the Klan rally again?

I dont keep your schedule for you, dude.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Again we have someone too stupid to know just how stupid they are!!!
Once U235 is split, it is no longer an atom of U235.

roflmao, the irony is thicker than a London fog

1) the atom still exists, it was not killed

2) your attempt to move the goal posts was juvenile and too predictable, idiot.

You may want to rethink this post since Ed is right. The uranium atom is no more, the 2 atoms left have neither the mass nor the physical properties of the uranium 235. The subatomic particles not converted to energy still exist though.

A rock split into two pieces are still rocks. The rock was not killed for obvious reasons.

An atom split is not killed either for the same reasons.

Maybe you need to rethink you post?

 

[PoliticalChic]

im not an atheist

If you're not an atheist, then why do you mock the concept of a creator?

i mock manmade religion

also mock folks who pretend to know.

im agnostic in terms of origins
im anti man made religion
im anti atheist, unless theyre one of the onces that defines themselves fancily as an agnostic

and as far as anyone has been able to show or reproduce to date, "we dont know" is the answer. anything else is dishonesty or hope/faith

When you mock those who believe in a creator, you are acting as if you know. In my view and in the views of others, there is significant evidence, scientific and otherwise, to suggest that there is a creator and that life exists after death. If you've got something to counter such a belief, by all means, share it, but stop with the k*nt act.

The Founders of this nation certainly believed there was a Creator....that's what they said in the D of I.

 

[Mac1958]

Those who are religious have to pass two (2) tests.

First, that there was indeed a Creator, and second, that He is as advertised: Omnipotent, able to read our minds, interested in all of our actions, responsible for a heaven and hell, demanding of our worship, operating kind of a divine North Korea, the whole shebang.

If there is a Creator, he appears to be an absentee landlord.

And, of course, no one knows for sure one way or the other, even if they claim to.
.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Those who are religious have to pass two (2) tests.

First, that there was indeed a Creator, and second, that He is as advertised: Omnipotent, able to read our minds, interested in all of our actions, responsible for a heaven and hell, demanding of our worship, operating kind of a divine North Korea, the whole shebang.

Well yes, you can get from here to there, but it requires small steps. there is nothing that proves the Judeo-Christgian God all in one argument.

And even so, what is being done is accumulating a mountain of evidence that makes a belief in God more plausible than not believing in God.

God gives us Free Will and enough evidence thereby to either believe or to not believe if we do not want to. Kind of like those computer generated 3D pics, you can see it if you want to.

If there is a Creator, he appears to be an absentee landlord.

And, of course, no one knows for sure one way or the other, even if they claim to.
.

God is not an absentee landlord. the problem is that in the modern age we have strung together a myriad number of explanations about what it *really* is when we see God and His interactions with us and our Universe.

Dont blame the savior of Israel for that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Those who are religious have to pass two (2) tests.

First, that there was indeed a Creator, and second, that He is as advertised: Omnipotent, able to read our minds, interested in all of our actions, responsible for a heaven and hell, demanding of our worship, operating kind of a divine North Korea, the whole shebang.

If there is a Creator, he appears to be an absentee landlord.

And, of course, no one knows for sure one way or the other, even if they claim to.
.

Well, FenceSitter.....I suggest you use the test that the brilliant mathematician favored...

"Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy devised by the seventeenth-century Frenchphilosopher, mathematician and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–62).[1] It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]"
Pascal's Wager - Wikipedia

 

[K9Buck]

I guess when one accepts the likelihood that there is a creator, then we can get into theology. However, I don't think it's possible to have theological discussions in this forum as atheist trolls come in and derail them.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I guess when one accepts the likelihood that there is a creator, then we can get into theology. However, I don't think it's possible to have theological discussions in this forum as atheist trolls come in and derail them.

1.In the book of Exodus, we find Moses up on Mount Sinai, when he sees a bush, on fire, yet not being consumed by the flames. Moses has a colloquy with himself, commenting on the incident…actually saying ‘Look at that great thing!’ Only after he comments on the event does God call to him…and he replies ‘Here I am.” The explanation of that passage is that God wanted him to notice the remarkable occurrence.


2. ✔ Here is one such remarkable occurrence.

The 50th anniversary of independence (1776) was anticipated by the people of this nation, the 'Golden Anniversary'! On that day, July 4th, 1826, remarkably, both Samuel Adams, 90 years old, and Thomas Jefferson, 83, were alive. What are the odds? And what are the odds that these men, having lived to see the 50th anniversary of independence would both die on that day? The people of America recognized that remarkable occurrence as the Hand of God at work.


3. ✔And, another. Prior to the Pilgrims landing, visits by other Europeans resulted in plague that wiped out most of the indigenous inhabitants. In fact, the Pilgrims found empty villages. But one of the residents had remained. This solitary Indian was invaluable to the Pilgrims, teaching them how to plant, hunt, and survive. What made him remain? What are the odds..... Sqanto....one fact about Squanto: he had been to England! And he was there, waiting. And he spoke English! What are the odds?


a. ✔ "Hardly four months after the Mayflower reached Plymouth Rock.... an Indian reaches your outpost... he opens his mouth. He speaks English! More amazing, he does so with a British accent and the demeanor of someone who had lived and worked among England’s elite.... a Patuxet Indian, associated with the Wampanoag... lured ...onto [a British] ship, ostensibly to discuss the beaver trade. Instead, as MayflowerHistory.com explains, Hunt kidnapped them to sell them into slavery....“most dishonestly, and inhumanely, for their kind usage of me and all our men, carried them with him to Malaga, and there for a little private gain sold those silly savages for rials of eight.”

... However, local friars sabotaged his scheme. They gained custody of, freed, and Catholicized the remaining Indians, including Squanto. Squanto somehow talked his way to London... Squanto soon found himself bound for Newfoundland,... In 1619, ... Squanto crossed the Atlantic yet again. Destination: Plymouth. To Squanto’s horror, a suspected smallpox outbreak had annihilated his village. Squanto moved in with the nearby Wampanoag, including its leaders, Massasoit and Squanto’s brother Quadequina. http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...dly-indian-who-dazzled-pilgrims-deroy-murdock






4. And we are encouraged to notice other remarkable occurrences, as well. Too many overlook similarly significant events in the history of this great nation.


When George Washington was 23, he served as a colonel in the Virginia militia. It was 1755, he was assigned to British General Braddock’s army, involved in an ambush at Monongahela. by Indians. To this day, it remains the single worst day in the annals of British military history. Of the thousand man contingent, only 23 escaped. And only three officers survived; only one of them, unwounded. Washington. And what a target he was: 6’3” at a time when the average was 5’5”! Two horses were shot out from under him...and he had four bullet holes in his coat! This was Washington’s comment, he was “protected beyond all human probability or expectation.”


a. Presbyterian pastor Reverend Samuel Davies, in a sermon that very year, 1755, said, “ I may point out to the public that heroic youth Col. Washington, whom I cannot but hope Providence has hitherto preserved in so signal [remarkable] a manner for some important service to his country.” http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/lessons/washington/ohio.html


b. “The really interesting part was the testimony of a pioneer woman, Mary Draper Ingles, who was captured by a band of Shawnee Indians and held in their village for several months. She overheard French officers discussing the battle of the Monongahela with their Indian allies. An Indian chief named Red Hawk said he had shot at Washington eleven times- claiming his rifle had never missed- and then he ceased firing, convinced that the Great Spirit was protecting him….Washington’s close friend and personal physician, Dr. James Craik, later wrote of meeting an elderly Indian chief who described the same battle in which the Indians ceased firing at Washington because they were convinced he was protected by the Great Spirit.”
"Bulletproof" George


c. A little-known sidelight connected with Braddock's defeat [referring to a battle Washington fought in during The French and Indian War, under a British General named Edward Braddock] was an "Indian prophecy" pronounced fifteen years later by an aged Indian chief. In the fall of 1770, Washington and several other men traveled to the Ohio to examine some of the western lands that had been granted to colonial veterans of the French and Indian War. During that journey the men were met by an Indian trader who "declared that he was conducting a party which consisted of a grand sachem and some attendant warriors; that the chief was a very great man among the northwestern tribes, and the same who [had] commanded the Indians on the fall of Braddock.... Hearing of the visit of Colonel Washington to the western country, this chief had set out on a mission, the object of which [he] himself would make known." After the two groups had arranged themselves around a council fire, the old Indian rose and spoke to the group through an interpreter:

'I am a chief, and the ruler over many tribes. My influence extends to the waters of the great lakes, and to the far blue mountains. I have traveled a long and weary path that I might see the young warrior of the great battle.

It was on the day when the white man's blood mixed with the streams of our forest that I first beheld this chief. I called to my young men and said, Mark yon tall and daring warrior? He is not of the red-coat tribe-he hath an Indian's wisdom, and his warriors fight as we do-himself is alone exposed. Quick, let your aim be certain, and he dies. Our rifles were levelled, rifles which but for him knew not how to miss- 'twas all in vain; a power mightier far than we shielded him from harm. He cannot die in battle.

I am old, and soon shall be gathered to the great council fire of my fathers in the land of shades; but ere I go there is something bids me speak in the voice of prophecy. Listen! The Great Spirit protects that man, and guides his destinies-he will become the chief of nations, and a people yet unborn will hail him as the founder of a mighty empire!' http://lindy1950.tripod.com/washington.html


5. And this.....During Andrew Jackson's second term, he became the first President to face an assassin's bullets. January 30th, 1835, age 67, a gaunt and ill man, suffering from malaria and dysentery, carrying two bullets from disagreements that took place prior to his presidency, attended an official event. A stranger came up to him...within 6 feet, took out a small pistol...BANG! Jackson wasn't wounded! The stranger took out a second pistol and fired....BANG! Again....Jackson wasn't wounded. Jackson went on the attack shouting 'They can't kill me!'


The stranger was Richard Lawrence, a madman. But the pistols were tested by the army, and found that the firing occurred but neither charge ignited! When reloaded....they worked! What are the odds that two pistols misfired?

Jackson, father of the modern Democrat Party....was not meant to die.


6. California is our most populous state. It's history reveals one more episode of the Hand of God in United States history. On February 2. 1848, "... the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo is signed, ending the Mexican-American War in favor of the United States. The Treaty of Guadeloupe Hidalgo added an additional 525,000 square miles to United States territory, including the area that would become the states of Texas, California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico and Arizona, as well as parts of Colorado and Wyoming. "
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo is signed - Feb 02, 1848 - HISTORY.com

The US paid $20 million to Mexico and assume up to $3 million in U.S. citizens' claims against Mexico.


a. Why is the date important?
James Marshall ) was an American carpenter and sawmill operator, whose discovery of gold at Suttter's Mill, in California, on January 24, 1848 set the stage for the California Gold Rush. The result was one of the fastest migrations in history: 80,000 streamed to California in one year! Had gold been discovered earlier....would Mexico have signed that treaty? Would the United States have grown so precipitously, an become a world power? What are the odds?


7. Was the nation punished by God for allowing slavery? There was a man who saw himself as an Old Testament prophet....he would often quote his favorite passage, from the Book of Job, 29:17, 'And I brake the jaws of the wicked, and plucked the spoil out of his teeth." The man was strange, a failure at everything else he did, but served as a 'vessel of justice.' He attended the funeral of Elijah Lovejoy, American Presbyterian minister, journalist, newspaper editor and abolitionist, who was murdered by pro-slavery mob in Alton, Illinois. At the funeral, 'the prophet' raised his hand and vowed that he would destroy slavery. John Brown's aim was to fight to end slavery; "Brown’s men murdered five pro-slavery settlers in Pottawatomie on May 24, 1856 by hacking them to death with cavalry broad-swords." http://www.thetelegraph.com/opinion/columnists/article_6f8815e8-ee38-11e1-85fc-0019bb30f31a.html

a. "John Brown is chiefly remembered today for his assault on the federal arsenal at Harper’s Ferry, Virginia, now West Virginia, in October of 1859. His plan was to capture the firearms and distribute them to slaves, who would then free other slaves in Virginia and the rest of the South. Ironically, the U.S. Marines who recaptured the arsenal for the federal government were led by Union Army Colonel Robert E. Lee, who in just two years would become the Confederacy’s most celebrated general.


Brown was tried, convicted and sentenced to be hanged. Five days after his sentencing, Ralph Waldo Emerson delivered a speech in Boston and proclaimed Brown to be a new saint awaiting martyrdom. If Brown is executed by hanging, Emerson said, he will make “the gallows glorious as the cross.” While awaiting execution, a jail guard asked Brown for his autograph. Instead, Brown wrote a short note that predicted the Civil War. “I, John Brown,” the note read in part, “am now quite certain that the crimes of this land will never be purged away except with blood.” Ibid.

In death, he became a prophet.


b. Newspapers throughout the nation filled with his fame...in the North, and in the South...for very different reasons.


c. He refused attempts to break him out of jail..."Some 1800 years ago, Christ was crucified. This morning, Captain Brown was hung. He is not Old Brown any longer; he is an angel of light." --Henry David Thoreau.... "Let them hang me," John Brown had written. "I am worth inconceivably more to hang than for any other purpose."

After a life of failure, John Brown was finally a success. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/brown/filmmore/transcript/transcript1.html


8. The Civil War ensued....and the Battle of Antietam. 'The Army of the Potomac, under the command of George McClellan, mounted a series of powerful assaults against Robert E. Lee’s forces near Sharpsburg, Maryland, on September 17, 1862. It is the bloodiest single-day battle in American history, with 22,717 dead, wounded, and missing on both sides combined. Battle of Antietam - Wikipedia

For comparison, the D-Day Normandy Invasion resulted in United States – 6,603 casualties (1,465 killed)
http://www.nationalww2museum.org/media/press-releases/d-day-fact-sheet.html


a. This battle was, perhaps, more significant than Gettysburg, as Lee's plan was to attack Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and sever rail connections between the East and West. Then, he could attack anywhere in Pennsylvania, or Maryland, or Washington, D.C. This presented the hope that Britain or France would recognize the Confederacy.


b. Lee's problem was a federal garrison at Harpers' Ferry, behind him...and McClellan slowly following him with a much larger force. But he knew how 'cautious' McClellan was, so he took the chance and split his forces; he sent Stonewall Jackson to attack Harper's Ferry.


c. Then...a remarkable occurrenc: " On the morning of September 13, the 27th Indiana rested in a meadow outside of Frederick, Maryland, which had served as the site of a Confederate camp a few days before. Sergeant John Bloss and Corporal Barton W. Mitchell found a piece of paper wrapped around three cigars.....The paper was Lee's battle plan, the splitting up of his forces! Now the Confederate plan was clear. He reportedly gloated, "Here is a paper with which if I cannot whip Bobbie Lee, I will be willing to go home."

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/the-union-discovers-lost-order


d. Antietam was not a victory for either side....but it ended Lee's plans. Three cigars saved the war for the Union. What are the odds?


9. " The Battle of Chancellorsville was a major battle of the American Civil War, ...fought from April 30 to May 6, 1863, in Spotsylvania County, Virginia....Chancellorsville is known as Lee's "perfect battle."
Battle of Chancellorsville - Wikipedia


a. " The victory, a product of Lee's audacity and Hooker's timid decision making, was tempered by heavy casualties and the mortal wounding of Lt. Gen. Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson to friendly fire, Confederate troops, a loss that Lee likened to "losing my right arm." Ibid.


b. The loss of Jackson deprived Lee of one of his best generals...and might have made the Battle of Gettysburg, July, 1863, a very different event. What are the odds?


10. April 4, 1865
Lincoln dreams about a presidential assassination
According to the recollection of one of his friends, Ward Hill Lamon, President Abraham Lincoln dreams on this night in 1865 of “the subdued sobs of mourners” and a corpse lying on a catafalque in the White House East Room. In the dream, Lincoln asked a soldier standing guard “Who is dead in the White House?” to which the soldier replied, “the President….he was killed by an assassin.” Lincoln woke up at that point. On April 11, he told Lamon that the dream had “strangely annoyed” him ever since. Ten days after having the dream, Lincoln was shot dead by an assassin while attending the theater. April 4 - President Abraham Lincoln's prophetic dream about assassination that happened 10 days later | WcP Blog


The above from Michal Medved's July 4, 2013 radio show: "The Hand of God in American History."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Stop reading that silly book called the Bible.

Darwin was a man of science, are you a science denier?

Lol, there is nothing contradictory between evolution and the Bible.

“

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state as we may hope, than the Caucasian and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.”
― Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man

^^ one of the many reasons that Darwin so popular with racists and Nazis.

Which reminds me, when is the Klan rally again?

I dont keep your schedule for you, dude.

The order of events in Genesis is astoundingly similar to what modern scientists posit.....

If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, then the seas appeared on earth, and that life forms were photosynthetic. Following that, he had to have realized that an eye evolved in an early animal in the geological past, which triggered the evolution of all the major groups of animals that exist today. Still further, he must have felt that all of this occurred in the seas, before animals moved onto land, and only when they did move out of the water did mammals and birds evolve.


The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.


Wow! What an incredibly lucky guess! What a considerable stroke of good fortune!


The alternative explanation is divine intervention.

1. “ a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41% say they do not.” What do scientists think about religion?

 

[edthecynic]

Again we have someone too stupid to know just how stupid they are!!!
Once U235 is split, it is no longer an atom of U235.

roflmao, the irony is thicker than a London fog
1) the atom still exists, it was not killed
2) your attempt to move the goal posts was juvenile and too predictable, idiot.

Even when shown their error, they are too stupid to see their error!!!

 

[edthecynic]

A rock split into two pieces are still rocks. The rock was not killed for obvious reasons.

An atom split is not killed either for the same reasons.

You obviously never heard of an atom smasher/particle accelerator.

 

[edthecynic]

The order of events in Genesis is astoundingly similar to what modern scientists posit.....

If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, then the seas appeared on earth, and that life forms were photosynthetic...
The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.

Sure, light and the day and night cycle formed on day one and vegetation formed on day three BEFORE the sun was formed on day four.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The order of events in Genesis is astoundingly similar to what modern scientists posit.....

If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, then the seas appeared on earth, and that life forms were photosynthetic...
The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.

Sure, light and the day and night cycle formed on day one and vegetation formed on day three BEFORE the sun was formed on day four.

So glad you'd slithered in for the education you so sorely require.....and not a minute too soon!

Let's go over the events:

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.



2. Modern science has largely revealed the earth’s history with respect to the land and the seas. Coincidently, the first chapter of the Bible relates a formation, a creation narrative, strangely similar to scientific understanding.


a. Genesis 1: 6-10…”And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dryland appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.


b. “The formation of the sea as well as the land is chosen as the second stage in the creation on the Bible’s first page. Modern science reveals that land and sea certainly were in place before the next stage in the scientific account of the history of the universe.” Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” p.54. What a coincidence….or confluence.


Curious, the author of Genesis lived in a landlocked region; and Moses wandered in the desert, not along the coast. Yet…sea and land appear in this prominent position in Genesis. Must be a coincidence….



3. The opening page of Genesis asserts that plant life appeared after the seas were formed, and names specifically, grass, herbs and fruit trees. According to the author of Genesis, this is the stage where life actually begins: this is the first mention life of any kind. Plant life. Yet, the simple forms of life that are considered plant life were not discovered until a couple of millennia after Genesis was completed. So…how come Genesis mentions grass, herbs, and fruit trees at precisely this moment on the creation narrative? Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter four.


a. Genesis 1: 11-12 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.


b. “ From about 400 million years back to 600 million years, all kinds of complex multicellular life would have been confined to the waters of the earth….Our world's ecosystems depend upon photosynthesis to construct the fuel that all life runs on; in an ancient world with conditions similar to today's, you would need plants (as organisms that can make complex "fuel" molecules using simple building blocks and energy available from the environment, plants are known as one type of autotrophs, or "self-feeders") to evolve first, or there would be no bottom link to the food chain.” Biology of Animals & Plants - Origins & History of Life on Earth



4. Track the events in the creation account of Genesis and it’s amazing how closely the events conform to the current view of modern science. An explosion- the universe – oceans/land - plants- …And next, in verse 20, we find: And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.


Kind of unusual…since the author of Genesis, and, if we are to believe that the first one to speak those words, Moses, didn’t really live in a habitat that one might call ‘sea side.’


Would have been understandable if this space in the Bible had, instead, have focused on the numbers of land mammals, birds, or insects found in ancient Israel, wouldn’t it? But, instead, marine organisms are specifically named: ‘Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life,…’


Wouldn’t it be interesting if science find lots and lots of marine organisms extant at this point? Imagine if Genesis actually parallels the history of life on earth as expounded by science. Be a heck of a coincidence.

a. A truly important development took place some 521 million years ago, in the geological period known as the Cambrian. “The most abundant and diverse animals of Cambrian time were the trilobites. Trilobites had long antennae, compound eyes, many jointed legs, and a hard exoskeleton like many of their modern arthropod relatives, such as lobsters, crabs, and insects. The Cambrian is sometimes called the "Age of Trilobites"…” Redirect


b. No earlier fossils were found during Darwin’s lifetime: “If the theory [evolution] be true it is indisputable that before the lowest Cambrian stratum was deposited ... the world swarmed with living creatures. [Yet] to the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these earliest periods. . . I can give no satisfactory answer. The case at present must remain inexplicable.” http://www.paleosoc.org/Oldest_Fossil.pdf

....life at this stage, about 500 million years ago, was entirely marine.

How could the Genesis writer have gotten this right?

That writer…he’s landlocked, knows little of diversity….what are the odds that ‘chance’ is the answer?


What are the odds?



5. The sequence of events from the creation of the universe, to the present, begin with great explosion that produces the universe, including the earth. The earth cools enough for oceans to form. The first life is plant life, able to photosynthesize, and add oxygen to the atmosphere. All sorts of simple non-plants fill the seas, most wormlike, with soft bodies. Along come the trilobites, hugely advanced, with hard bodies…and most amazingly, with true eyes! This makes them the primary predators….but, imposes enormous evolutionary pressure on the other organisms. The result is the Cambrian explosion, lots of small organisms with defensive armor and hard exoskeletons, some 521 million years ago. So says modern science.


a. “…Genesis shows remarkable accuracy when compared to the scientific story of life’s evolutionary journey. Here, the Genesis writer envisioned great creatures evolving from those tiny Cambrian forms, eventually making their way out of the sea….Genesis seems to have picked out all the events of the highest order of importance, and put them in the right order….I don’t know the odds against such a parallel- against making a successful guess at the scientific orthodoxy of three thousand year into the future from a knowledge base of nothing- but they must be extraordinarily long.” Parker, Op. Cit., p.163-164.


b. An interesting sidelight is the ‘evolution of the Bible’ itself. Christians have incorporated a great deal of science’s process. Early in the 20th century, the Scofield Reference Bible was published. This was a new version of the King James Bible with which added a note to Genesis, suggesting what is called the “gap theory.’ It allows that millions of years could have passed between God’s creation of the heavens and the earth, thereby freeing Genesis from the literal six-day process. “What it left was a series- the same series- of timeless events; and it is these that match the scientific account of life’s history.” Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” p. 160.


6. Unavoidable is the recognition that, once the restrictions due to the ‘six-day’ view are removed, the order of events established by modern science conform to the sequence in the first chapter of Genesis, written millennia earlier: light from an explosion (the Big Bang), universe/earth formed, the seas from the cooling earth, plants as the first life forms; abundant sea life (the Cambrian explosion), the (evolution) of the flora and fauna we see today. Neat, eh?

Lucky guess by the author of the creation account of Genesis?

 

[alang1216]

A rock split into two pieces are still rocks. The rock was not killed for obvious reasons.

An atom split is not killed either for the same reasons.

Maybe you need to rethink you post?

No, you seem to know little about either. Granite is a mixture of quartz and other grains. If you remove all the quartz you don't have granite, you may still have a rock but it is not granite. Likewise with splitting uranium. Once split you still have atoms but you no longer have uranium. In theory you have rock and atoms but in practice you have very different things.

 

[edthecynic]

The order of events in Genesis is astoundingly similar to what modern scientists posit.....

If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, then the seas appeared on earth, and that life forms were photosynthetic...
The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.

Sure, light and the day and night cycle formed on day one and vegetation formed on day three BEFORE the sun was formed on day four.

So glad you'd slithered in for the education you so sorely require.....and not a minute too soon!

Let's go over the events:

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Your own quote continues showing day and night without the sun, “And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.”

 

[edthecynic]

A rock split into two pieces are still rocks. The rock was not killed for obvious reasons.

An atom split is not killed either for the same reasons.

Maybe you need to rethink you post?

No, you seem to know little about either. Granite is a mixture of quartz and other grains. If you remove all the quartz you don't have granite, you may still have a rock but it is not granite. Likewise with splitting uranium. Once split you still have atoms but you no longer have uranium. In theory you have rock and atoms but in practice you have very different things.

Furthermore, atom smashers break atoms into their subatomic particles. The atom is no more an atom but electrons, neutrons, quarks, energy, etc.

 

[fncceo]

The order of events in Genesis is astoundingly similar to what modern scientists posit.....

If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, then the seas appeared on earth, and that life forms were photosynthetic...
The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.

Sure, light and the day and night cycle formed on day one and vegetation formed on day three BEFORE the sun was formed on day four.

So glad you'd slithered in for the education you so sorely require.....and not a minute too soon!

Let's go over the events:

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Your own quote continues showing day and night without the sun, “And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.”

I'm not sure if the Big Bang emitted light in the visible spectrum and it would be a while before stars began showering the cosmos with photons.

But, based in Hebrew Scriptures, we consider the start of every day to be the sunset of the previous days. First darkness, then light.

As a Neolithic analogy of creation goes, it's not too far off.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The order of events in Genesis is astoundingly similar to what modern scientists posit.....

If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, then the seas appeared on earth, and that life forms were photosynthetic...
The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.

Sure, light and the day and night cycle formed on day one and vegetation formed on day three BEFORE the sun was formed on day four.

So glad you'd slithered in for the education you so sorely require.....and not a minute too soon!

Let's go over the events:

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Your own quote continues showing day and night without the sun, “And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.”

So you continue to ignore the astounding similarity between the modern version of evolution and the Biblical recounting of same?

I've got the new symbol for your party right here:

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

This is who we are. Just a pile of elements from the Periodic Table.
View attachment 152348

Same elements you will find all around you. When you die, those elements will continue to exist with no effect upon them. Carbon atoms will still be carbon atoms after you die.
View attachment 152347

No matter how accurate you are in combing all of the ratios of atoms in a living being, it is not going to become animated.

View attachment 152349

Atoms are not going to write Beethoven, they does not want to listen to Beethoven, nor does the pile of atoms care if it a living being lives or dies, because the elements have nothing to gain or lose either way. Atoms have no interest in talking to each other, laughing at funny cat videos, or even reading and responding on USMB. Atoms just do not care.

How anyone can delude themselves to believe atoms do have sentient life is beyond me.

Scientists don't believe it was an accident. Selection is anything but random. So, how many completely false and stupid things have you said on this topic, now? Let's count:

1) Scientists say life came from rocks
2) Scientists say life happened from an accident
3) Scientists basically say minnows turned into elephants in 2 million years
4) Scientists haven't found any "transitional" species or fossils
5) Scientists say life came from "nothing"
6) We can't figure out if the chicken came first, or the egg
7) Scientists say life and species just "opped" into existence

When are you going to get the hint that you know less than nothing about any of this, and should probably never talk about it ever again?