by BurnTheShips 87 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
True, because it's artificial. The same question equally applies to God. If he was complex enough to make life, then he is complex enough to have required a makeer himself, and if THAT being was complex enough to design God, then IT is so complex it must have had a maker, so on and so forth.
It doesn't have to apply to God. God can/could exist outside of this spacetime continuum and not be subject to natural law.
It doesn't have to apply to God. God can/could exist outside of this spacetime continuum and not be subject to natural law.
That's an interesting idea that I have heard before, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. What natural laws would God not be subject to? If he exists outside of spacetime, the perhaps the physical laws of the universe might not apply, but that doesn't mean he isn't complex and subject to laws. For instance, could God lie? Be evil? Create something more powerful than himself? Die? If not, then he is clearly subject to some laws and an intelligence complex enough to create the universe, even thought it might exist outside of OUR spacetime, is still complex to require a creator.
I'm not trying to start a flame war but this video is funny shit. It highlights the God-exception-to-argument-from-complexity...argument.
NonstampCollector has a ton of thought-provoking satirical videos.
It is not worth to discuss science with Vampire as long as he gets his "scientific" brainwash education from religious magazines.
It is not worth to discuss science with Vampire as long as he gets his "scientific" brainwash education from religious magazines.
I'm not a WT apologist, douche. Are you going to say the same thing about Deputy Dog as well? I'm just not into worshipping anything man made like you do...
V665
PS: I'm not going to convince you and you're not going to convince me. Let's drop it...
So if we build a machine to do these things, you think it will be alive?
Let's say you have a machine....a '68 Mustang. Mint condition. You take it apart study all of its workings.
You figure out how an automobile works.
You have a pretty decent shop. Machine tools. Plenty of metal stock. Plastics. Rubbers. Glass. Oils. Fuels. Everything.
You then proceed to correctly manufacture and assemble every part from scratch. You might even make a few changes and improvements.
You've got yourself a working automobile at the end of it.
Now...let's say you have a simple microbe....a molecular machine.
You take it apart and study every component and how it operates.
You have a pretty decent laboratory. Molecular assemblers. Plenty of raw proteins to work with. Sugars. Solvents. Everything.
You then proceed to correctly synthesize and assemble every molecule from scratch.
What do you have at the end of the process?
It doesn't have to apply to God. God can/could exist outside of this spacetime continuum and not be subject to natural law
I am with you on this one. If it wasn't so (if every cause followed a cause without exception), we would be faced with infinite regress, which makes our current state of existence impossible. There has to be a beginning of the chain, an uncaused cause.
BTS
If Vampire is confused and if disagrees with the abiogenesis concept, he should say so instead of going out of the way and dismissing evolution. There is absolutely no scientific controversy on the existance and nature of evolution, regardless of what his creationists owners taught him.
I stumbled on this today (Danny Haszard posts in the comments):
http://www.dailytitan.com/2010/10/13/we-did-evolve/
By ALYSSA WEJEBE
Daily Titan Staff Writer
Published: October 13, 2010
When I attended community college, I once talked with a person at a religious booth after a science class—it was Jehovah’s Witness, I think. Well, they did most of the talking, especially when they said evolution wasn’t true—I completely shut up after that and just politely listened. Though at the same time I was marveling at the irony I wasn’t about to reveal to them—that I had just left a lecture from my anthropology class about human evolution.
Here’s a brief refresher course: evolution is the belief that a lower life form gradually changed, evolving into present humans today.
First of all, to make something perfectly clear—I believe in the evidence that points to us evolving from said lower life form, but that lower life form is not a primate or monkey as we know them today.
Kevin Dickinson says on his website, “Human Origins,” that the misconception started when scientists used modern technology to discover that humans and apes shared 98 percent of the same genes—and many people thought that meant humans evolved from modern chimps.
We actually share a common ancestor with the primates. According to Pbs.org, the common ancestor we share with chimpanzees is estimated to have lived 5 to 8 million years ago. In fact, every organism is related, whether they are living or extinct. We even share a common ancestor with bacteria, though way more distant.
Dickinson said that even Charles Darwin himself noted that “humans and African apes must have shared a common ancestor.”
Funny thing: I really don’t think evolution makes a grand statement that God doesn’t exist after all. When I first learned about evolution, I found it didn’t clash with the Bible studies I’d been taught at my private elementary school. It just seemed like evolution was just the specific description of how God created life. I saw no problem in thinking that the Bible didn’t literally mean God created life in seven days, reconciling with evolution’s lengthy time. In my mind, evolution was how God created life.
What surprised me was that thinking has a concrete name: according to SocyBerty.com, such thoughts can go by the name of the Deist Clockwork Cosmos, a universe “God set in motion (with) a set of physical laws governing the evolution of all things, both living and non-living elements.”
According to the University of Oregon online, Isaac Newton supported this line of thinking, “that God had created the world as a perfect machine that then required no further interference from Him.”
It is not the same as the Intelligent Design Theory, despite some strong similarities. According to gotquestions.org, most believers in this theory use the elements of complex design they see in the natural world as proof of God’s existence.
This too is not to be confused with Biblical Creationism. It’s said on gotquestions.org that they are in a way reversed–Biblical Creationists start with the Bible and try to prove it, while Intelligent Design theorists again simply observe the biological world first and then conclude God must’ve made it.
Ultimately, it doesn’t always have to be science versus faith with evolution—they can coexist.
