nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

I'm always amazed that people say they choose to "believe" something. To me, that's kind of like saying you like turnip greens when you don't. You can say you like them and even choose to eat them, but actually liking them? They are my favorite food when paired with fresh cream corn, corn bread, fried tators with onions and fresh tomatoes. I don't have to choose to like them because I truly do. Its no lie. But to "choose" to believe something which you truly don't, is a lie. You can "accept" it on faith, but that ain't belief. From what I've read of the bible,it appears this is the minimum that bible god wants. Faith.

I ain't buying into the bible myths, but hey, if a being exists which can speak into existence the universe as it is, with all the built in mysteries we now debate, then I'll accept that such a being could make it in the way the bible says. Well no, but I guess I could. Like, said god could have made the earth look really old but in reality, its made just as the bible says. Or he could build in all the things science has found and interpreted as being evolutionary but in reality, it really was made in just a few days, like the bible says. I could accept that, but I just don't. Because ultimately, I don't think it happened and thus don't believe it. It would be a lie to say I believe it are even to say that I accept it on faith.

Will "God" get mad at me? I doubt it. God has no reason to. God, of all beings, would understand how unbelievable the bible stories are. What I can accept is a God who sees all this and is belly laughing at us and our arguments about it. I can also see God getting a bit put out by those who defend the "belief" and put on the airs of religiosity. There might lie the greater danger to those who have worried for my soul and my "lack of faith", especially as they see it as a reproach to God and their christian sensibilities.

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

There are Dozen scientific papers on this, it is not theoretical

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Fine, I chose as most people do, what I like and can understand and appreciate, what makes me happy. This was in my comment that you failed to read. You like to think there is none. Fine. Your choice. My choice. And I do not like turnip greens.... nor okra.....slime in a pot!

I believe that my response to you was civil, but you still come back with anger. I have to ask why?

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Anger? No dear.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Okay, then just a tad bit on the nasty side. But, that is you and I am okay with it. Just wanted to know why you would respond to my post in such a manner.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

You said you "elect" to believe. I find that a puzzling statement. Thus my comment. I truly find it a strange concept, to choose to believe something.

Being an alien upon the earth I find many such conundrums. Ok, I'm not really an alien, as far as you know.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Perhaps you were raised in a home that did not allow you to make many choices. My parents encouraged me to develop reasons for electing to do one thing over another. I elected to attend public schools, I could have elected private. I elect to eat only vegetables, although my parents were not vegan. I elect to paint my house in colors that please me. I elect to believe that science is a process that is still evolving. I elect to give you the benefit of the doubt. What I have no choice in, paying taxes, having a president that does not represent me, court orders, and putting up with annoying relatives.

When given a choice, I will always chose what I feel comfortable with. I am not comfortable with the notion that I came from a slurp of slime that no one can explain how that one cell evolved into those annoying relatives. I am a computer engineer, trained in spotting patterns.

I find that the universe is much to perfect to be random. Therefore, there is an intelligence in its creation. Think about the probability factor. "During the last several decades a number of prestigious scientists have attempted to calculate the mathematical probability of the random-chance origin of life. The results of their calculations reveal the enormity of the dilemma faced by evolutionists.

Dr. Blum estimated the probability of just a single protein arising spontaneously from a primordial soup. Equilibrium and the reversibility of biochemical reactions eventually led Blum to state: "The spontaneous formation of a polypeptide of the size of the smallest known proteins seems beyond all probability. This calculation alone presents serious objection to the idea that all living matter and systems are descended from a single protein molecule which was formed as a ‘chance’ act."

In the 1970’s British astronomer Sir Frederick Hoyle set out to calculate the mathematical probability of the spontaneous origin of life from a primordial soup environment. Applying the laws of chemistry, mathematical probability and thermodynamics, he calculated the odds of the spontaneous generation of the simplest known free-living life form on earth – a bacterium.

Hoyle and his associates knew that the smallest conceivable free-living life form needed at least 2,000 independent functional proteins in order to accomplish cellular metabolism and reproduction. Starting with the hypothetical primordial soup he calculated the probability of the spontaneous generation of just the proteins of a single amoebae. He determined that the probability of such an event is one chance in ten to the 40 thousandth power, i.e., 1 in 1040,000. Prior to this project, Hoyle was a believer in the spontaneous generation of life. This project, however, changed his opinion 180 degrees. Hoyle stated: "The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40 thousand naughts [zeros] after it. It is enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence." Hoyle also concluded that the probability of the spontaneous generation of a single bacteria, "is about the same as the probability that a tornado sweeping through a junk yard could assemble a 747 from the contents therein."

Hoyle’s calculations may seem impressive, but they don’t even begin to approximate the difficulty of the task. He only calculated the probability of the spontaneous generation of the proteins in the cell. He did not calculate the chance formation of the DNA, RNA, nor the cell wall that holds the contents of the cell together."

But, even with this, some people persist in ascribing our design to evolution from slime to the beauties of music, art, and the birth of a live baby. I can not see that slime gave birth to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZGGqe293MM

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

You're mixing topics. Evolution is not the same as origin of life. Evolution is pretty clearly occurring and has ample support from many different fields of science. Origin of life from lifelessness not so. That is where your mathematical improbability is in play. I would point out, that no matter how improbably, the probability of a divine being which has always existed has a probability even smaller.

DotsMan

Let me get this straight:
There is this great immeasurable, unlimited, unending expanse of nothingness called "space". Suddenly one day this cloud of "gas" appears out of this nothingness and begins to morph into this heretofore nonexistent cloud of "dust" which begins to develop a heretofore nonexistent force that we now call "gravity". This "gravity" now causes the new "dust" to form into a ball and develop even more "gravity" so that it compresses itself into such a tightly compressed state that the heat of compression eventually causes it to explode. The explosion scatters the resultant pieces out over multiple billions of cubic miles where they form themselves into groups of small balls circling around bigger burning balls, groups that we now call "solar systems". This progressed into countless numbers of these "solar systems" forming into galaxies and then the galaxies spreading throughout this great expanse of space with such precision and balance that they are still circulating around in that precision order after billions of years.

NOW BELIEVING THAT TAKES ONE HUGE AMOUNT OF FAITH.

I find believing in an eternal, all powerful, all knowing, everywhere present God of creation a lot easier.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

This was great!!! Thank you. I am right next to you in believing in creation!!!



:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

Is that a quote for dummies........
That was an excellent summary in such few words.

cesspool jones Loc: atlanta

i call it the belief in the unseen with hope that things get better.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

I believe in the Divine creation, I believe in your description for the formation of the universe, I believe in Heaven and in Hell, I believe the Bible holds some truths, I believe in evolution. I do not necessarily believe all of it.

I believe my Divine Creator, God, caused all of the above and directs it. Everything that humans find unexplainable is explained as simply as it gets: God

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Actually Bgi Bang theory starts with nothing. Absolute nothing, no matter, no space, no energy; simply nothing. They used to refer to it as perfect symmetry. From that the universe sort of "fell out". One of the analogies they used to use was that of ice crystallizing our of liquid water when it first begins to freeze. Newer views are that the Big Bang and thus the expansion of the universe is akin to an event horizon of a multidimensional universe collapsing into a black hole of that universe. Much like a shadow of a three dimensional object is a two dimensional shadow, this universe is the resultant shadow of another universe "falling out of" a singularity in another universe with more dimensions that this one we appear to reside in today.

Of course, this is all speculative based upon present knowledge of matter and energy and observations of an expanding universe, being extrapolated back to as far as can be done with present mathematical theoretical models. Its an ongoing research project which will probably never be finished.

As the energy of the expansion diverged into its current form of being, matter came to be and it, driven by gravitational attraction formed stars and later planets.

Its not much but that's all science can come up with based upon what is known at present. I guess we could just say God made it this way, but to a scientist, that would be sort of a lie. Sort of.