Proof of GOD, (without attacking Old Earth or evolution)

[Enoch2021]

 

Over and Over and Over again with the same Ineptness.  The problem you have is you can't consider more than 2 topics @ Once and then assimilate them into a coherent stream of thought.

 

 

 

It is not about considering two or more topics, it is about combining things that do not belong together.  You saying that since A leads to B and B leads to C and C leads to D then A leads to D, and that is not how it works.  It is shocking someone that claims some sort of aptitude at science would have such a basic misunderstanding of processes. 

Each is a separate argument that must stand on its own merits.

 

 

Just for the Listeners:

 

Ya see, we don't live in a Vacuum.  We make conclusions with the preponderance of the evidence @ our disposal.  Since this subject has it's basis in the past, we have to Forensically (Historical Science) put the pieces together.  "Most" have @ their disposal: Intellect (Inductive/Deductive Reasoning, Critical Thinking/Problem Solving Skills, and good ole Fashioned Common Sense).  Combined with Sound Scientific Principles is a pretty powerful combination.

 

 

Now the reality as opposed to Enoch's fantasy...

 

Step 1:

"Specific Complexity"

 

Is an argument for a Designer.  It's hardly a  Slam Dunk but it is very compelling.  This is where the argument of Specific Complexity ends, it can tell you nothing else about the nature of the designer.   

 

Step 1a. (this is an argument for a creator, similar to the argument of Specific Complexity).  Enoch has choice 1 and 2 correct, but misses the boat on choice 3. 

 

1. The Universe has always existed (in Violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics);

2. The Universe created itself (in Violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics); or

3. The Universe was Created by Something (a creator)

 

When looking at this argument one must decide which of the 3 they will choose.  Once they make that choice then this step is done and can lead one no further.  This step cannot in any way address who/what the creator is.

 

Step 3:  IF one decides there is a creator/designer they then must determine the nature of said creator.  This step is totally independent of the steps above.

 

Well taking our thesis with 1LOT....the GOD who created 1LOT must be outside of Time and not bound by it's Laws: Holy Scripture confirms this....

 

(Isaiah 57:15) "For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy;..."

Eternity is not someplace with Lots of Time....it's the Absence of Time.

 

(Isaiah 46:10) "Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:"

 

(2 Peter 3:8) "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

This IMHO, is a Rhetorical Device (Metaphors, Similes, Idioms, Types, Allegories) of which there are over 200 styles in the Holy Bible.  I hear people quote the first half of this verse and arrive @ a Literal conclusion (a Day = a Thousand Years).  Taking the Whole Verse...this clearly is conveying HIS TIMELESSNESS.

 

So if HE is outside of time and able to declare "End from the Beginning", can we test this Empirically?.... Yes; PROPHECY.  And ALL must be 100% accurate without failure.  By a conservative count there are over 2000 Specific Prophecies in the Holy Bible.  85% of them have come to pass with 100% accuracy without Failure.  The last 15% or so are yet future....Revelation.  There are Prophecies throughout Scripture but the mother-load IMHO are in the Book Of Daniel.  Among 100's detailing (Babylon, Medo-Persia: Cyrus The Great, Greece: Alexander the Great and his 4 Generals, and Romans) He details approx 300 years of secular history beforehand between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid Empires. The most Breath Taking of all Prophecies IMHO Daniel 9:25: The Angel Gabriel foretells...to the the EXACT DAY, 500 years beforehand, of Christ's Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem.

 

Along with 2000 other examples with Prophecy.

 

 

 

Now with this Enoch makes a great case that the creator/designer is the God of the Bible that most of us here worship.  I have to give credit where credit is due. 

 

But back to the realty...Enoch wants to believe that Specific Complexity is proof of the God of the Bible, but this is false, it is just the first step in a logical process but cannot stand alone as proof of anything, let alone the God we all worship

 

 

 

====================================================================

 

 

My new technique is to just let you post...with the Majority of Simple Logic Flaws and Blatant Contradictions contained within the self-same post(s) that you Quote.

 

It saves time.

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=========================================================================

 

Can't explain it any simpler to you Sheniy.  Go ahead and reread the post.  The simple "Evidence" I provided renders your questions and the subsequent answers, moot.

 

 

No it doesn't. lol 

 

 

I reviewed your post and you said this:

 

All your positions are basically:  If you have Proof, what's the need for Faith.

 

Hmm.  First, you're lumping us all into the same assumption.  That's not my position.  I was disagreeing with your interpretation of Hebrews 11:1 that substance is physical evidence.  You were getting jumped on from all sides, so I understand the confusion. lol

 

Second, I think you misunderstand their position (whoever has that position). 

 

 

It is my position, but I think the biggest confusion is that too many people have too many different opinions on what "proof' is.  

Let me try this example...I tell you that Mercer just beat Duke in college basketball.  Now you have not seen the score but know that I am huge college basketball fan so you have faith that I am telling you the truth.  Then you turn on your TV and see the score on the screen, now you have actual proof so you no longer need to have faith in what I said, in fact it is now impossible to have faith because you now have proof.

 

 

 

I think the definition of "faith" is also an issue.  In your scenario, faith = belief in a general fact.   I think Enoch is equating "faith" with being a christian and trusting God.  Or something. 

 

Faith is a belief that is not based on proof, thus the "unseen". 

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

Over and Over and Over again with the same Ineptness.  The problem you have is you can't consider more than 2 topics @ Once and then assimilate them into a coherent stream of thought.

 

 

 

It is not about considering two or more topics, it is about combining things that do not belong together.  You saying that since A leads to B and B leads to C and C leads to D then A leads to D, and that is not how it works.  It is shocking someone that claims some sort of aptitude at science would have such a basic misunderstanding of processes. 

Each is a separate argument that must stand on its own merits.

 

 

Just for the Listeners:

 

Ya see, we don't live in a Vacuum.  We make conclusions with the preponderance of the evidence @ our disposal.  Since this subject has it's basis in the past, we have to Forensically (Historical Science) put the pieces together.  "Most" have @ their disposal: Intellect (Inductive/Deductive Reasoning, Critical Thinking/Problem Solving Skills, and good ole Fashioned Common Sense).  Combined with Sound Scientific Principles is a pretty powerful combination.

 

 

Now the reality as opposed to Enoch's fantasy...

 

Step 1:

"Specific Complexity"

 

Is an argument for a Designer.  It's hardly a  Slam Dunk but it is very compelling.  This is where the argument of Specific Complexity ends, it can tell you nothing else about the nature of the designer.   

 

Step 1a. (this is an argument for a creator, similar to the argument of Specific Complexity).  Enoch has choice 1 and 2 correct, but misses the boat on choice 3. 

 

1. The Universe has always existed (in Violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics);

2. The Universe created itself (in Violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics); or

3. The Universe was Created by Something (a creator)

 

When looking at this argument one must decide which of the 3 they will choose.  Once they make that choice then this step is done and can lead one no further.  This step cannot in any way address who/what the creator is.

 

Step 3:  IF one decides there is a creator/designer they then must determine the nature of said creator.  This step is totally independent of the steps above.

 

Well taking our thesis with 1LOT....the GOD who created 1LOT must be outside of Time and not bound by it's Laws: Holy Scripture confirms this....

 

(Isaiah 57:15) "For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy;..."

Eternity is not someplace with Lots of Time....it's the Absence of Time.

 

(Isaiah 46:10) "Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:"

 

(2 Peter 3:8) "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

This IMHO, is a Rhetorical Device (Metaphors, Similes, Idioms, Types, Allegories) of which there are over 200 styles in the Holy Bible.  I hear people quote the first half of this verse and arrive @ a Literal conclusion (a Day = a Thousand Years).  Taking the Whole Verse...this clearly is conveying HIS TIMELESSNESS.

 

So if HE is outside of time and able to declare "End from the Beginning", can we test this Empirically?.... Yes; PROPHECY.  And ALL must be 100% accurate without failure.  By a conservative count there are over 2000 Specific Prophecies in the Holy Bible.  85% of them have come to pass with 100% accuracy without Failure.  The last 15% or so are yet future....Revelation.  There are Prophecies throughout Scripture but the mother-load IMHO are in the Book Of Daniel.  Among 100's detailing (Babylon, Medo-Persia: Cyrus The Great, Greece: Alexander the Great and his 4 Generals, and Romans) He details approx 300 years of secular history beforehand between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid Empires. The most Breath Taking of all Prophecies IMHO Daniel 9:25: The Angel Gabriel foretells...to the the EXACT DAY, 500 years beforehand, of Christ's Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem.

 

Along with 2000 other examples with Prophecy.

 

 

 

Now with this Enoch makes a great case that the creator/designer is the God of the Bible that most of us here worship.  I have to give credit where credit is due. 

 

But back to the realty...Enoch wants to believe that Specific Complexity is proof of the God of the Bible, but this is false, it is just the first step in a logical process but cannot stand alone as proof of anything, let alone the God we all worship

 

 

 

====================================================================

 

 

My new technique is to just let you post...with the Majority of Simple Logic Flaws and Blatant Contradictions contained within the self-same post(s) that you Quote.

 

It saves time.

 

 

that is good plan, when people are left without a defense for their position they often fall back to such an action. With each post your claim of your aptitude with science gets to be more and more unbelievable.

[Sheniy]

 

I was disagreeing with your interpretation of Hebrews 11:1 that substance is physical evidence.

 

That's not my interpretation.....I never said it had to be "Physical" evidence.  See Multiple posts with (BMW/Sea Water/"Specific Complexity" et al)

 

Isn't that physical evidence...?  Would "natural evidence" fit better? 

[Enoch2021]

 

 

 

===========================================================

 

How's the Decommissioning of the All the Radio Telescopes going?

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

 

 

===========================================================

 

How's the Decommissioning of the All the Radio Telescopes going?

 

 

You must have me confused with someone else, you do seem to have trouble keeping up with who is who on here.  I dont work on Radio Telescopes, I am a data scientist!

[Enoch2021]

 

 

I was disagreeing with your interpretation of Hebrews 11:1 that substance is physical evidence.

 

That's not my interpretation.....I never said it had to be "Physical" evidence.  See Multiple posts with (BMW/Sea Water/"Specific Complexity" et al)

 

Isn't that physical evidence...?  Would "natural evidence" fit better? 

 

 

 

====================================================

 

It's Conceptual not Tangible Direct evidence in this Specific Case. The only way it can be Direct Physical Evidence, is if HE Manifested HIMSELF before us.......That's Coming 

[Sheniy]

 

 

 

I was disagreeing with your interpretation of Hebrews 11:1 that substance is physical evidence.

 

That's not my interpretation.....I never said it had to be "Physical" evidence.  See Multiple posts with (BMW/Sea Water/"Specific Complexity" et al)

 

Isn't that physical evidence...?  Would "natural evidence" fit better?

 

 

 

====================================================

 

It's Conceptual not Tangible Direct evidence in this Specific Case. The only way it can be Direct Physical Evidence, is if HE Manifested HIMSELF before us.......That's Coming 

 

So...what does that have to do with Hebrews 11:1 again?

[Enoch2021]

 

How's the Decommissioning of the All the Radio Telescopes going?

 

 

You must have me confused with someone else, you do seem to have trouble keeping up with who is who on here.  I dont work on Radio Telescopes, I am a data scientist!

 

 

 

========================================================================

 

Ahhh No, it's you: 

 

We'll get to the Sub-Atomic Particles @ some point  Classic

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

How's the Decommissioning of the All the Radio Telescopes going?

 

 

You must have me confused with someone else, you do seem to have trouble keeping up with who is who on here.  I dont work on Radio Telescopes, I am a data scientist!

 

 

 

========================================================================

 

Ahhh No, it's you: 

 

We'll get to the Sub-Atomic Particles @ some point  Classic

 

 

What is you rolling around laughing, causing a thread to be closed have to do with me and radio telescopes?  Perhaps this is just part of your same fantasy with your kraken? 

Edited March 21, 2014 by LookingForAnswers