I have been thinking a great deal about where I stand at this moment in time in terms of a belief in a creator verses a belief in an evolutionary process. I think the best way to describe it is an exploratory path. I look at what is around me and I acknowledge it is remarkable. This fact has for many years led me to believe in intelligent design, and I ignored (didn't even read) books and papers that would argue against my belief in a God. I am now looking at the alternative arguments, and they are quite compelling. Richard Dawkins often talks about probabilities, and the probability of something building in complexity over time is far greater than the probability of a complex structure appearing suddenly. This idea is confirmed in nature, even when we consider the world at atomic and molecular levels. The periodic table of elements starts off with Hydrogen the simplest of the elements. and build up to the heaviest of elements, the unstable radioactive systems. You can relate to the way the simplest atomic structures were the precursors to the more complex ones. It is the same when you look at life. The single celled plant and animal protozoa and plankton provide and insight into the building of the simple multi-cellular organism such as Hydra to more complicated Hydrzoa such as jellyfish. This simple to complex makes far more sense to me than the eternal existence of a high complex, highly intelligent designer. One of the biggest arguments against the evolution of life, certainly one that I bought into whilst a witness also revolves around probabilities. Life - How did it get here? By evolution or by creation on pages 43 - 45 talks about probabilities and spontaneous proteins. this book argues that spontaneous production of single amino acids then their combining to form protein molecules are highly improbable, it even suggests that isomerism of amino acid molecules would increase improbability. If that is the case how much more so is the improbability of a creator?
The Probabilty of there being an Intelligent Designer
by cantleave 140 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
wobble
I am in a similar position Cantleave,
I am examining the possibilities along with the probabilities, and looking at the actual evidence.
Evolution Theory does expect a slow progression from simple to more complex, and we have to answer the question then, why the sudden explosion of complex life forms in the Cambrian period with no evidence of their ancestors, more simple or not ?
Love,
Wobble
-
cantleave
Wobble, I Can't wait to discuss the important things with you over a beer or two.
-
EndofMysteries
My take on this......the probability of only 1 random life coming into existence without any intelligent design, let alone billions when taking into account bacteria, plants, animals, etc. AND if life was do easy and dynamic to happen on its own this way, then why can man, who is able to combine things instead of waiting for by chance nature to, create life. Why can't I create animal life that is non existant, or create a type of fruit or plant that does not exist, etc.
This is prob parroting an old WT illustration or one we've all heard, but I fully agree with it, in that it would be far easier to believe that the components of a car, a simple machine, would have greater chance of forming and randomly assembling to create a working car then new life. (or why can man create cars but not life)
Man can 'manipulate' life, but not make it on it's own.
I also like this illustration, one day the world's greatest scientist claimed he could create life just like God, so God challenged him. The scientist said I will also take dirt and form a living being out of it. So God accepted the challenge, and the scientist took some dirt, and God said, "woah, what do you think your doing? Make your own dirt. "
Finally, sometimes the concept of the impossible is also the only thing which makes sense. That an intelligent designer has existed for eternity is hard to believe, or where did he come from. Think of it this way, if he came from something, or if one did not exist, then many like to 'start' life or things in existance from a certain point, matter for example. Well where did matter come from? If they say energy, where did that energy come from, and you'll realize that it will be for infinity that something had to come from something, and that concept makes less sense then a God which had no beginning. There MUST be something that did not have a beginning, for which all other things had a beginning. If God had a beginning, then what caused his begining, and what caused the thing which caused his beginning, it would be endless.
So do you choose to believe in a chain of beginnings which are INFINITE and go on for eternity with which the chain of beginnings had no beginning, or a creator who's life was infinite and had no beginning? Either way, one of them must be chosen and both are hard to grasp or accept as everything humans know and see had a start.
-
snowbird
I also like this illustration, one day the world's greatest scientist claimed he could create life just like God, so God challenged him. The scientist said I will also take dirt and form a living being out of it. So God accepted the challenge, and the scientist took some dirt, and God said, "woah, what do you think your doing? Make your own dirt. "
QED.
Sylvia
-
PSacramento
Evolution and ID are not mutually exclusive of each other, I view the evolutionary process as one of God's many tools.
-
Mad Sweeney
There is no question in my mind that the absolute beginning of all things in our universe came from an intelligent mind. From that moment on, I don't think it matters. The universe is in motion and therefore constantly changing, evolving if you will. Is the original intelligence causing it all to happen on a daily basis or was it built into the original design and then left to chug along it's merry way? Again, I don't think it really matters which is true. BUT putting faith in one answer or the other limits one's ability to reason on evidence observed. Better to keep an open mind, IMO.
-
AK - Jeff
It keeps coming back to the 'Who created the creator?' for me. And of course, what was first? Something had to exist to form what came later in the universe, and how did that happen?
The questions are certainly more plentiful than the answers for me. I relate to your journey-point.
One thing about it though: How wonderful is it to actually use the brain in our heads for more than a hat-rack?
Jeff
-
PSacramento
It keeps coming back to the 'Who created the creator?' for me. And of course, what was first? Something had to exist to form what came later in the universe, and how did that happen?
The questions are certainly more plentiful than the answers for me. I relate to your journey-point.
One thing about it though: How wonderful is it to actually use the brain in our heads for more than a hat-rack?
Jeff
Perhaps science will answer the question of who/what created the creator, perhaps the creator was the first by product of the big bang rather than the cause of it, of course that begs the question who/what created the big bang and who/what created what created what caused the big bang.
We may never know, but the most awesome part may be the simple fact that we do ask these questions.
-
snowbird
One thing about it though: How wonderful is it to actually use the brain in our heads for more than a hat-rack?
Jeff
Word.
Sylvia