Does Understanding the Magnitude of {DNA} in Its Entirety Prove "Intelligent Design?"

[enoob57]

3 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

 

Darwin just assumed that God created the first living things.

Well, that's a testable belief:

"There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved."

Charles Darwin, last sentence of On The Origin of Species 1872

don't forget the test of God 'His Word' non else and Darwin held no respect for it ... also knowing satan wants to be god and he is identified by 'hath God said' 'you will not die' etc: anything that does not follow the Word of God is other not god...

[Guest kingdombrat]

19 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

 Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Amen!

If that verse does not clarify a purpose for researchers, just wanting to understand some of those invisible things would be more than enough.

Edited January 2, 2021 by kingdombrat

[The Barbarian]

2 hours ago, enoob57 said:

don't forget the test of God 'His Word' non else and Darwin held no respect for it ... also knowing satan wants to be god and he is identified by 'hath God said' 'you will not die' etc: anything that does not follow the Word of God is other not god...

If you think satan was the creator, then it's understandable why you'd not like Darwin's faith in God.

 

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, kingdombrat said:

If that verse does not clarify a purpose for researchers, just wanting to understand some of those invisible things would be more enough.

Yep.

 

[Alive]

15 hours ago, enoob57 said:

There's quite a debate on this... sources are everywhere... hard to know with research! But I can tell you Darwin had no respect for the Word of God as clearly 'after it's kind' was clearly and repeatedly written.... not to mention six literal days...

I have no argument with that...only that he clearly was not an atheist in the strict sense of that word.

As far as 6 literal days goes---I wasn't there at the time and many honest men differ on a great many scriptural interpretations. I think how we deal with that reality, says more than what we each believe about the various interpretations.

I have been fully convinced on a thing only to learn later that I was also fully wrong.

:-)

For myself and before the Lord---I seldom speak with authority on much besides the Cross, Reurrection and Ascension and what those real time historical events have to do with the 'Elect' of God.

Why? Read above. I have been wrong when fully convinced I wasn't.

;-)

[Guest kingdombrat]

14 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Yep.

 

But I believe what the Scripture is claiming, in a single day, God Spoke the Universe into existence at a generational/maturity point {let's use the 13.4 Billion year frame}, He spoke to a Specific Planet placing it from the sun to be a crucial key to life.   He set Earth into motion fully matured [to let's say 4.5 Billion years of age].   On Earth, He set life and Man fully matured.   We don't know what it is to God in how He views when mature begins at.   But we know He set all life forms loose on Earth in their "matured" stage, as He did the Earth and the Universe in a matured setting.

[The Barbarian]

24 minutes ago, kingdombrat said:

But I believe what the Scripture is claiming, in a single day, God Spoke the Universe into existence at a generational/maturity point {let's use the 13.4 Billion year frame}, He spoke to a Specific Planet placing it from the sun to be a crucial key to life.   He set Earth into motion fully matured [to let's say 4.5 Billion years of age].   On Earth, He set life and Man fully matured.   We don't know what it is to God in how He views when mature begins at.   But we know He set all life forms loose on Earth in their "matured" stage, as He did the Earth and the Universe in a matured setting.

Since he's the Creator, he made the universe to unfold as He wished.   Life didn't just poof into existence; the very rules by which this universe works, brought forth life from his existing creation, as the Bible says.

Man was very different many thousands of years ago, and changed over time.   I don't know when He gave two of us living souls, but it really doesn't matter.   It happened at some point.

As He deemed the earth by the second "day" as "good", before any life appeared, that would seem to me to be the point of maturity.    Around a specific main-sequence star, a planet perfectly situated for the life He intended, was in place and would form an environment in which life would appear and thrive as He commanded.

Based on a number of suboptimal parts in humans, we are not yet "mature" if perfection is the standard.   But we are "good" in the sense that we function pretty well in our place here.

 

 

[Guest kingdombrat]

7 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

Since he's the Creator, he made the universe to unfold as He wished.   Life didn't just poof into existence; the very rules by which this universe works, brought forth life from his existing creation, as the Bible says.

I still want to point out that what is required to either experience 13.4 Billion years vs Being God and knowing this without needing to complete the process, but to set the process into motion at a mature state are options God had to choose from.

7 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

Man was very different many thousands of years ago, and changed over time.   I don't know when He gave two of us living souls, but it really doesn't matter.   It happened at some point.

Most likely Adam was the [soul's] intro.  Soon as he sinned he understood.  He wasn't taught that by experience but by instantly knowing he was unworthy towards God for his sin.  Adam could only arrive to a conclusion of guilt from a Soul speaking to your Conscience.

7 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

As He deemed the earth by the second "day" as "good", before any life appeared, that would seem to me to be the point of maturity.    Around a specific main-sequence star, a planet perfectly situated for the life He intended, was in place and would form an environment in which life would appear and thrive as He commanded.

When the term "A day" meaning 24 hours vs ?  is debating when the Laws of Physics do not apply in God's existence, The Laws do exist but are subject to God and used by God.

 

And I do believe a stage of maturity that took place, even on the scale of "A Day," was how Earth became a bed of life of microorganisms/bacteria.   When we imagine what the sitting water on the face of the soil was staging, what receding the water and adding Light reacted, was enough to sustain nature itself so when God set specific creation into place it connected it all.

7 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

Based on a number of suboptimal parts in humans, we are not yet "mature" if perfection is the standard.   But we are "good" in the sense that we function pretty well in our place here.

That's why we love the mystery of it all.

[The Barbarian]

42 minutes ago, kingdombrat said:

I still want to point out that what is required to either experience 13.4 Billion years vs Being God and knowing this without needing to complete the process, but to set the process into motion at a mature state are options God had to choose from.

Yeah, that's what Aardsma's virtual history idea is about.    Why not just accept the evidence for what it is?

43 minutes ago, kingdombrat said:

Most likely Adam was the [soul's] intro.  Soon as he sinned he understood.  He wasn't taught that by experience but by instantly knowing he was unworthy towards God for his sin.  Adam could only arrive to a conclusion of guilt from a Soul speaking to your Conscience.

Yes.   Without the ability to know good and evil, he was incapable of understanding.   Do you see how this poses a logical problem for the story in Genesis as a literal history?

44 minutes ago, kingdombrat said:

When the term "A day" meaning 24 hours vs ?  is debating when the Laws of Physics do not apply in God's existence, The Laws do exist but are subject to God and used by God.

If we can insert a non-scriptural miracle at any point to clear up problems with a particular interpretation of Genesis, then anything goes.

Based on a number of suboptimal parts in humans, we are not yet "mature" if perfection is the standard.   But we are "good" in the sense that we function pretty well in our place here.

 

46 minutes ago, kingdombrat said:

That's why we love the mystery of it all.

Yes.

[enoob57]

16 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

If you think satan was the creator, then it's understandable why you'd not like Darwin's faith in God.

 

what ever this comment is it is not what I wrote in any form or fashion...