Hi guys, I apologise for the long wait. I’ve been busy these days. Do not thing that I’m trying to run away… keke… I’m still not done with refuting Darwinism, so please pardon me for backtracking.
First of all, I welcome Red for joining us in this discussion. I’m so glad that somebody is willing to take up the responsibility of defending the reality of God.
As for J. Kudo’s question regarding the worshipping of Jesus, I’ll come to that once I’m done with this.
Locke wrote:There are billions more experts that think the idea of Christian "God" is absurd, lol.
What country do you live in?
I live in Singapore. My assertion of countries that persecute Christians are those of the communist regime. (I don’t think I need to spell out the names.) It’s amazing to hear atheist of declaring, “religions are the cause of troubles these days” when I always get to hear how communist regime torture people for not recanting Jesus. That’s really a food for thought. It goes to show that atheists who declare this, had never seriously done a thorough check or they simply ignore the problem. By the way, when you claim that there are “billion more experts”, please show me the quotes of the billions expert that you are referring to. Then again even if there are a billions, I doubt their education for since many top scientists rejected evolution as a mere myth. I’ll will go through them later.
To J. Kudo:
I’m very glad that you’ve decided to search on quotes that people believe there is no God. If you believe that they are right. Good for you, but as far as I’m concern, I want facts, evidence and not just some philosophical ideas. (You seems to be the person who reminded me this in the first place.) I’ll only point some out to refute, as for the others I’ll just say that they may have their point of view.
J.Kudo wrote:
Not only does God play dice, but... he sometimes throws them where they cannot be seen.
- Stephen W. Hawking
Einstein said, “God doesn’t play dice.” He was right. God plays scrabble.
- Philip Gold
J.Kudo wrote:
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein, in The New Convergence
I’m not quite sure why you point this out. I’ve never said that my faith is blind. I prove them with my personal experience and credible scientific evidence from various experts.
Atheists claim that we are created from some random atoms, that we do not have any purpose or reason for being alive. They claim that life is just like itself and at the end of life, we will just rot away.
If what they claim is true, what’s the point of living? What is there to life? We might as well die once we are born, for why suffer for the next 70-80 years meaninglessly?
Consider the words of Sir John Templeton.
“Would it be strange if a universe without purpose accidentally created humans who are so obsessed with purpose?”
Take some time to ponder this. Is it possible that the Earth’s location, it’s size, is composition, it’s structure, it’s atmosphere, it’s temperature, it’s internal dynamics, and many of its intricate cycles that are so crucial and essential to life like – the carbon cycle, the oxygen cycle, the nitrogen cycle, the phosphorous cycle, etc. which are so exquisitely and precariously balanced to allow the inhabitants of planet Earth to be just a mere coincidence, a mere act of random mutation of amino acids? You really needs more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in a Intelligent Designer.
More and more scientists have come to a conclusion that evolution theory is just a myth with no credible evidence that it happen.
“Scientists who utterly reject evolution may be one of our fastest growing controversial minorities… Many of the scientists supporting this position held impressive credentials in science.”
- Larry Hatfield in Science Digest
In fact some time ago when PBC broadcast a seven-part series titled Evolution, claiming that “all known scientific evidence supports [Darwinism] evolution” as does “virtually every reputable scientist in the world”. A group of about one hundred scientists and experts of different fields-biologists, chemists, zoologists, organic chemists, geologists, etc… All of them had their doctorates from prestigious universities such as Cambridge, Stanford, Correl, Princeton, Yale, Berkeley, Chicago, etc… came together to published a two-page advertisement under the title: “A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism”. They want to let the whole world know their point of view.
“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encourage”
-“A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism”. A two-page advertisement,
The Weekly Standard (October 1, 2001)
These neither are not religious radicals nor are they narrow-minded fundamentalists. These are in fact well respected, world class scientists like, Nobel nominee Henry F. Schaefer, the third most cited scientist in the world; James Tour of Rice University’s center for Nanoscale science and Technology; and Fred Figworth, professor of cellular and molecular physiology at Yale Graduate School.
In fact there was also a detailed 151-page critique that claims that the series “failed to present accurately and fairly the scientific problems with the evidence for Darwinian evolution.”
Agnostic molecular biologist, Michael Denton in his book, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, points out that, “[Evolutionary theory] is still, as it was in Darwin’s time, a highly speculative hypothesis entirely without direct factual support and very far from that self-evident axiom some of its more aggressive advocates would have us believe.”
Many other experts too agree that the Darwinian evolutionary theory is just a myth the they want to believe so that they can put an intelligent designer out of the picture. Consider their points:
“Is it possible that the laws of nature are such that life is possible? Might this not be an important clue to the nature and destiny of humanity?”
- Alister McGrath, in his 3-volume series “A Scientific Theology”
“It is quite easy to understand why so many scientists have changed their minds in the past thirty years agreeing that the universe cannot reasonably be explained as a cosmic accident. Evidence for an intelligent designer becomes more compelling the more we understand about our carefully crafted habitat.”
- Walter Bradley, co-author of The Mystery of Life’s Origin.
In fact former professor of theoretical physics of university of Adelaide, who was once skeptical, now conclude that, “Through my scientific work I have come to believe more and more strongly tat the physical universe is put together with an ingenuity so astonishing that I cannot accept it merely as a brute fact. I cannot believe that our existence in this universe is a mere quirk of fate, an accident of history, and incident blip in the great cosmic drama.”
- Paul Davies in the Mind of God
Sir Fred Hoyle put it this way, “ I do not believe that any scientists who examined the evidence would fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed with regard to the consequences they produce inside stars.”
This observation prompted Harvard astronomy professor Owen Gingerich, senior astronomer at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory to comment: “Fred Hoyle and I differ on lots of questions, but on this we agree: a common sense and satisfying interpretation of our world suggests the designing hand of a superintelligence.” (Owen Gingerich, “Dare a Scientist Believe in Design?” in John M.Templeton’s Evidence of Purpose.)
Oxford-educated John Leslie, in his eye-opening 1989 book, Universes, said that if ours is the only universe- and there is no scientific data proving ay other exists- then th fine tuning is “genuine evidence… that God Is real.”
In the New Story of Science, Robert Augros and George Stancin, said that, “A universe aiming at the production of man implies that a mind directing it. Though man is not at the center of the universe, he appears to be at the center of its purpose.”
John O’ Keefe earned his degree from Harvard and the University of Chicago, went on to be a renowned astronomer and pioneer in space research. The late Eugene Shoemaker called him “the godfather of astrogeology.” He was awarded many honors including, the Goddard Space Flight Center’s highest award and is credited to many breakthrough discoveries in his scientific research at NASA. It was the discoveries of astronomy that bolstered O’ Keefe’s faith in God. He concluded that,
”We are, by astronomical standards, a pampered, cosseted, cherished group of creatures, our Darwinian claim to have done it all by ourselves is as ridiculous and as charming as a baby’s brave efforts to stand on its feet and refuse his mother’s hand. If the universe had not been made with the most exacting precision we could never have come into existence. It is my view that these circumstances indicate the universe was created for man to live in.”(John O’ Keefe, “The Theological Impact of the New Cosmology, in Robert Jastrow, God and Astronomers, 118).
Regarding the fossil record of Darwin’s, David M. Ramp the curator of the Field Museum of National History in Chicago, said that, “We are now about one hundred and twenty years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species, but the situation hasn’t change much… We have even fewer example of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin’s time.”(David M. Ramp, “Conflicts between Darwin and Paleontology”, Bulletin, Field Museum of Natural History, January 1979.), speaking about Darwin’s claim that future discoveries of fossils would vindicate his theory, which till date still have not.
Consider the words of Werner von Braun, the father of space science:
“The vast mysteries of the universe should only confirm our belief in the certainty of a Creator. I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of scince.”
I’m confused as to why J. Kudo would list out Einstein’s quotes about faith without science is blind. I would like to ask this, since when did I base my faith on just mere faith? Haven’t I pointed out that may scientists have lots of evidence that evolution just isn’t possible and that all evidence points so clearly towards an intelligent designer? Consider the words of another expert: “Science and religion… are friends, not foes, in the common quest for knowledge. Some people may find this surprising, for there’s a feeling throughout our society that religious belief is outdated or downright impossible, in a scientific age. I don’t agree. In fact, I’d go so far to say that if people in this so-called “scientific age” knew a bit more about science than many of them really actually do, they’d find it easier to share my view.”(John Polkinghorne, a physicist who went on to be a theologian after find God in Physics.)
Allan Rex Sandage, the greatest observational cosmologist in the world. He deciphered the secrets of the stars, plumbed the mysteries of quasars, revealed the use of global clusters, pinpointed the distances of remote galaxies and quantified the universe’s expansion through his work at the Mount Wilson and Palomar Observatories. The New York Times dubbed him the “Grand Old Man of Cosmology”. He was at a 1985 conference on science and religion. It seems so certain for everybody who he would side. Surely he would side with the atheistic scientists, however, instead sitting with the atheists, he took seat with the theists! Those who believe in an intelligent designer.
The Big Bang, he told the shock audience, was a supernatural event that cannot be explained within the realm of physics. Science had taken us to the First Event, but it can’t take us further to the First Cause. The sudden emergence of matter, space, time and energy pointed to the need for some kind of transdence. In the mist of the talk, he even confessed to be a Christian.
Sandage is not the only person who rejects evolution. Dean Kenyon, a biophysicist from San Francisco State University, who had co-authored an influential book, ”Biochemically Predestined”, states that the emergence of life might have been biochemically predestined, because of an inherent attraction between amino acids. However, Kenyon later repudiated the conclusions of his own book, declaring that he had come to the point where he was skeptical of all naturalistic theories of origins. Due to the immense molecular complexity of the cell and the information bearing properties of DNA, Kenyon now believed that the best evidence pointed toward a designer of life.
In fact he was being released from teacher in the university for not going with the norm, of believing in evolution. One should really consider the credibility of today’s scientific information. Are they truthfully told or are they just merely theories with no credible foundation at all. Is Darwinism a fact or a myth? Could it be that many scientists had already rejected evolution but due to the fear of persecution amount the science community, they had decided to keep quiet about it?
Check out this link:
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9401/scopes.html
Is this what science is all about? Suppressing the information because it doesn’t go with the popular belief of evolution?
Having said so much I came to a conclusion that science done right, point towards an Intelligent Designer. Darwinism is a myth, with no credible evidence just plain theories. In fact I observed that it’s not the lack of evidence that prevented people from believing, but it’s really this:
First, I observed that due to some mistakes that some people who claim themselves to be Christians, causes many of them to hated God and refuse to admit Him. To these people, I could only offer an apology for what my brother or sister had done that have hurt them. I asked that they will be willing to forgive whatever wrongs the Christians in the past may had done to you. It’s not worth it to harbors the hurt all the rest of your lives. Just let it go. Forgive that person. Jesus is worth everything to us.
Secondly, I observed that people cannot believe that in this great and vast universe, God would actually take notice of us. In fact one study actually shows that most of history’s most famous atheists – including Bertrand Russel, John Paul Sartre, Fredrich Nietzsche, Albert Camus, Sigmund Freud, Madalyn Murray O’ hair, and Karl Max – had a strain relationship with their father or their father died early or abandoned them at a young age, thus creating difficulty in believing in a heavenly Father.
Thirdly, the pride of the human heart. The desire to be in control and not by a supreme being. The refusal to admit that he is weak and need helps. It’s extremely hard for a person to admit that after years of research and study, he had actually been wrong in his opinions. If a scientist can actually admit his mistakes, that will be very courageous of him. I have find people who refuse to admit that they are wrong, or that to admit that they don’t know and have no answer for the questions that I‘ve post. So I sincerely hope that non of you fall into this pride category.
To end this I would leave you guys to read the words of Michael Denton’s and Bertrand Russel:
“No other theory or concept ever imagined by man can equal in boldness and audacity this great claim… that all starry heavens, that every species of life, that every characteristics of reality exists [to create a livable habitat] for mankind… But most remarkably, giving its audacity, it is a claim which is very far from discredited prescientific myth. In fact no observation has ever laid the presumption to rest. And today, four centuries after the scientific revolution, the doctrine is again reemerging. In these last decades of the twentieth century, its credibility is being enhanced by discoveries in several branches of fundamental science.” (Michael Denton’s Natural Destiny.)
“Why should a bunch of atoms have a thinking ability? Why should I, even as I write now, be able to reflect on what I am doing and why should you, even as you read now, be able to ponder my points, agreeing or disagreeing, with pleasure or pain, deciding to refute me or deciding that I am just not worth the effort? No one, certainly not the Darwinian as such, seems to have any answer to this…. The point is that they are no scientific answer.” (Michael Ruse, Darwinian Philosopher, in Can a Darwinian Be a Christian?)
There are more, but I’m running lack of time and I do wish to know all of your points in this. Please do not feel that I’m against anybody here. I love all of you though I may not know each and everyone of you. I’ve use to be a believer of evolution until I came across a secular book about Dinosaurs. In it states that scientists believes this and that…having a theory in this and that…Although I was only about 9 years old, I understood the meaning of credibility, it was from then I rejected evolution and decided to seek a more solid foundation for the origin of life.
Books to refer:
Nature's Destiny By Michael Denton
Evolution: A Theory in Crisis By Michael Denton
Darwin's Black Box By Michael J. Behe
The Design Revolution: answering the Toughest Questions on Intelligent Design By William Dembski
Darwin on Trial By Phillip Johnson
Icons of Evolution By Jonathon Wells
kyo83
.
]
..If you feel so, obligated to argue then could you just stop repeated the same things over and over and oooooover.](./images/smilies/wall.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
, and post a reply according to what i have said, instead of making a comment on what i said.
....