Jump to content

Evidence That God Exists


Slamdunk
 Share

Recommended Posts

EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTANCE OF GOD

 

It's very simple. Messages, languages, and coded

information ONLY come from a mind. A mind that

agrees on an alphabet and a meaning of words and

sentences. A mind that expresses both desire and

intent.

 

Messages, languages and coded information never,

ever come from anything else besides a mind.

No one has ever produced a single example of a message

that did not come from a mind."

 

Nature can create fascinating patterns - snowflakes,

sand dunes, crystals, stalagmites and stalagtites. Tornados

and turbulence and cloud formations.

 

Non-living things cannot create language. They

*cannot* create codes. Matter cannot think, talk,

communicate, or create information.

 

It is believed by some that life on planet earth arose

naturally from the "primordial soup," the early ocean which

produced enzymes and eventually RNA, DNA, and primitive cells.

 

To the person who says that life arose naturally,

you need only ask: "Where did the information come from?

Show me just ONE example of a language that didn't come

from a mind."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Dave

    7

  • dibby

    3

  • Kuroikaze

    2

  • Jun

    2

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

To the person who says that life arose naturally,

you need only ask: "Where did the information come from?

Show me just ONE example of a language that didn't come

from a mind."

 

DNA isn't a language.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Non-living things cannot create language. They

*cannot* create codes. Matter cannot think, talk,

communicate, or create information.

 

It is believed by some that life on planet earth arose

naturally from the "primordial soup," the early ocean which

produced enzymes and eventually RNA, DNA, and primitive cells.

Slam I suspect that many here will dismiss these assertions and questions, but I for one would like to applaud you in daring to address these subjects.

 

I see two things here. First, I see an assertion about the nature of life (or organisms), a proposed means of distinguishing non-living from living. This is heady and complex stuff in my opinion. What distinguishes a non-living system from a living system? Fantastic question!

 

Second, I see an assertion about the beliefs of others on how terrestrial life originated. This is also heady and complex stuff in my opinion. I have my own take on the event that happens to differ from the one presented here. However, I still believe that life emerged naturally. There is a great deal of debate and disagreement among scientists about the origins of terrestrial life.

 

If we are going to debate these things then it might entail that we spend a significant amount of time here. Are you up for it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTANCE OF GOD.....
Where was the evidence? :shrug:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a false analogy. The result of chemical reactions is NOT the same thing as a set of man made symbols used for communication purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTANCE OF GOD.....
Where was the evidence? :shrug:

 

Good question. I see no evidence here. So, like the old commercial used to say, where's the beef?

 

:Hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slam, this is still not evidence that any god exists. Language as a starting point just does not cut it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTANCE OF GOD.....
Where was the evidence? :shrug:

 

Good question. I see no evidence here. So, like the old commercial used to say, where's the beef?

 

:Hmm:

Well, if slam is going to claim to be showing evidence for a god's existence, he should probably start with spelling "existence" correctly. However, this COULD be a trick. slam could be an NSA employee, speaking for his god's Exi Stance. You know, where he stands on EXI (Extra-Xian-Intelligence), which is possibly a COMINT bureau for tapping non-Xian phones. And the xian god would surely be FOR that, so slam is arguing for his god's positive EXI Stance. Does that make sense?

 

Let me go polish my tin hat, now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTANCE OF GOD.....
Where was the evidence? :shrug:
Good question. I see no evidence here. So, like the old commercial used to say, where's the beef? :Hmm:
Maybe he's vegetarian?

 

Let me go polish my tin hat, now.
Make sure the shiny side is on the outside. The dull side is a plastic film and instead of reflecting the signals being beamed into your brain by the Black Helicopters, it will focus them into your brain. :eek:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the letters in dna arn't actually printed there or anything! you know that right? Patterns occur naturally all the time. Throw enough random darts and some will eventually line up. The point is this very unlikely thing only had to happen once in a vast amount of time and space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is considered bad form, or another word for it is "Plagerism", or fraud, to copy and paste an entire text as was done in the opening post of this topic, without citing the originating source! See here: http://www.astronomy.com/ASY/CS/forums/38/...7/ShowPost.aspx

 

In answer to "Charvell's" post on that forum which was copied and pasted above without credit (who knows if he's the source either since he didn't quote a sorce himself), I will quote from one of the reponders on that forum, and give the link for the sake of granting ownership to the original poster:

 

Ho hum, this is so tedious and boring but here goes:

 

DNA is not a language, it's a sequence of molecules. It's a template. Nothing more
. When the DNA molecule splits and replicates, it does so by folowing the sequence of molecules and duplicating them. It is not a language, it's just a sequence of molecules that has worked before and so has been passed on to the next generation. Random mutations to that pattern may be beneficial, detrimental or benign. If they are detriimental, the molecule either does not replicate or produces an inferior organism the next time. If the mutation is beneficial (to the organism), it is not only replicated but confers an advantage over organisms that don't have the mutation and so produce more, better offspring than the other organisms of that species. The mutation is passed on to subsequent generations. If a mutation is benign, neither beneficial nor detrimental, it is passed on. The build up of beneficial mutations is what drives evolution and causes the gradual change of one species into another new and better version or a new species altogether. This can take millions of years.

 

An example that I like are the skinks. A family of lizards, some of which are evolving into snake-like creatures. They are following the same evolutionary path that snakes followed millions of years before. If you look at the various sub-species of skinks, some are long with shortened legs, some are very long with really short legs, some are very long with legs that are atrophied and no longer useful, some have no legs at all and resemble snakes. Each of the sub-species is at a different in-between stage. I posted a link a while back to a website with photos of the various sub-species and it's so obvious what's happening to them that it just smacks you in the face. Snakes have hips. No other animal has hips that doesn't have legs. Fish don't have hips. Hips are for attaching legs and nothing more. Pythons have vestigial leg bones. Snakes used to have legs but don't now. Fossils of their ancestors have been found with legs.

 

Another example, though not necessarily so obvious are the marine mammals. River otters are pretty well adapted for an aquatic environment, sea otters are even more adapted, their back legs are almost useless on land. In fact, evolution of this species has been observed over a short period of time. The California sea otter at one time was nearly identical to the Alaskan sea otter. The California sea otter was hunted almost to extinction because they eat fish and abalone that fishermen use commercially. The Alaskan sea otters were not. Now the California sea otters can hardly get around on land at all where before they could, as do the Alaskan sea otters. There back legs have evolved into flipper-like appendages and so they can't walk very well. The reason is that the ones who came close to shore a lot were killed. The ones who stayed at sea more and that were more adapted to living at sea were not killed so they reproduced more. That's exactly how evolution works, by eliminating the weaker or less-adpated of the species.

 

Anyway, seals are the next phase, they are much better adapted to sea life than sea otters, then comes sea cows, manatees etc. on up to the whales which are perfectly adapted.

 

Another good example of seeing some slight evolution take place over a short period of time is a species of crab that lives off the coast of Japan. They used to have a random pattern of lines on their backs. Occaisionally, one would be found that appeared to have a face that looked like a grimacing samurai. Those were always thrown back because of superstition. Now almost all of the crabs have the samurai pattern. The ones that didn't got killed! The ones that did reproduced. This is classic evolution.

 

I've said my peice, don't ask me for any further "evidence". There are mountains of it but I don't feel like keying it all in here. Go to the library, get books on the subject, study them thoroughly. Then tell us you still don't believe it. Then show us your evidence to disprove it. We don't accept declaritory statements with no real evidence. We also don't accept so-called eveidence from wackos on the inernet with no credentials. And we certainly don't accept milenia old myths as evidence of anything.

 

from here: http://www.astronomy.com/ASY/CS/forums/38/...7/ShowPost.aspx

 

It only seems fair to include his response, since it was their discussion originally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that since conscious intelligences comes out of the universe then consciousness/intelligence must be implcit in the universe. But Slam dunk...just because there could be a case for intelligence or consciousness, why does that mean that the anthropomorphic christian god is real?? :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the usual that we can expect from the Christian's point of "evidence." There is no evidence presented in any of those six short paragraphs Slam. Just because you say that matter does not create information does not automatically lead to this "God" figure. It is proof that we have meteors and it is proof that we have atoms, but it is not proof of this "God." Everything in the world that we can sense are real and they present themselves as evidence, but beyond that? That's a mystery. Don't jump to conclusions like, "God." It is too far-fetched to state it as fact that something is out there when we have not encountered an intelligent lifeform in any part of the universe that we've been able to reach with robots, satellites, trackers, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTANCE OF GOD.....
Where was the evidence? :shrug:

 

[slam] Did you miss it? Information, codes, language. Such things don't originate from lifeless matter.

 

 

It is considered bad form, or another word for it is "Plagerism", or fraud, to copy and paste an entire text as was done in the opening post of this topic, without citing the originating source!

 

[slam] You are correct. It was part of the site you listed which I received as an email. I seek no credit for it, only something to make those who believe that life came from non-life to think more critically about it.

 

I've said my peice, don't ask me for any further "evidence". There are mountains of it but I don't feel like keying it all in here. Go to the library, get books on the subject, study them thoroughly. Then tell us you still don't believe it. Then show us your evidence to disprove it. We don't accept declaritory statements with no real evidence. We also don't accept so-called eveidence from wackos on the inernet with no credentials. And we certainly don't accept milenia old myths as evidence of anything.

 

[slam] You have heard the declaratory statements time and again from the evolutionists I have listed here, but choose not to believe them. Convince them and you convince me. (Not really of course since the ToE is as "wacko" as it gets:-)

 

 

 

 

I believe that since conscious intelligences comes out of the universe then consciousness/intelligence must be implcit in the universe. But Slam dunk...just because there could be a case for intelligence or consciousness, why does that mean that the anthropomorphic christian god is real?? :shrug:

 

[slam] At least you see intelligence emanating out of the universe. Could it be possible that such intelligence does in fact come from the God of Christianity who is described as One of intelligence, wisdom, power, glory, honor, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[

Slam] At least you see intelligence emanating out of the universe. Could it be possible that such intelligence does in fact come from the God of Christianity who is described as One of intelligence, wisdom, power, glory, honor, etc.

 

No. I don,t think its possible that a jewish tribal god is the infinite consciousness that is behind the universe. That is a deity made of conceptual opinions of the jewish people of ancient times. The infinite cannot be captured by humans in words or opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be surprised and delighted if someone here could explain to me what distinguishes a non-living system from a living system.

 

I would also be surprised and delighted if someone here could explain to me how terrestrial life originated.

 

Yet I have to wonder if a lack of understanding is in anyway a proof of the existence of God. It doesn't seem to be proof to me. If I don't understand then this implies nothing other than that. I simply do not understand. Why must I resort to God?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTANCE OF GOD

 

It's very simple. Messages, languages, and coded

information ONLY come from a mind. A mind that

agrees on an alphabet and a meaning of words and

sentences. A mind that expresses both desire and

intent.

 

DNA is not an alphabet in the normal sense, as the letters are not agreed upon, they exist because of chemical properties. A bonds with T, G with C, other ways are not possible n the structure of DNA. And DNA has no intent besides replicating itself.

 

Messages, languages and coded information never,

ever come from anything else besides a mind.

No one has ever produced a single example of a message

that did not come from a mind."

 

DNA's not really a message. It's a list of ingredients, wich are chosen by a set of chemical reactions requiring no outside involvement.

 

Nature can create fascinating patterns - snowflakes,

sand dunes, crystals, stalagmites and stalagtites. Tornados

and turbulence and cloud formations.

 

Non-living things cannot create language. They

*cannot* create codes. Matter cannot think, talk,

communicate, or create information.

 

DNA isn't really a code, but a complex pattern. Created and sustained by chemical interactions.

 

It is believed by some that life on planet earth arose

naturally from the "primordial soup," the early ocean which

produced enzymes and eventually RNA, DNA, and primitive cells.

 

You have it in the wrong order. RNA undoubtedly came before anything else contained in cells. RNA can easily replicate on its own, unlike DNA and enzymes can be encoded from it, while it also has some enzymatic activity.

 

To the person who says that life arose naturally,

you need only ask: "Where did the information come from?

Show me just ONE example of a language that didn't come

from a mind."

 

Which language? The series of patterns encoded in DNA? It came from earlier organisms, which got it from earlier organisms. New information was created by duplication and mutation. No deity necessary.

 

I would be surprised and delighted if someone here could explain to me what distinguishes a non-living system from a living system.

 

I would also be surprised and delighted if someone here could explain to me how terrestrial life originated.

 

Yet I have to wonder if a lack of understanding is in anyway a proof of the existence of God. It doesn't seem to be proof to me. If I don't understand then this implies nothing other than that. I simply do not understand. Why must I resort to God?

I can do number 1, and attempt number 2.

 

A living system is different from a non-living one in one asect and one aspect only. It uses energy to go from a less ordered state to a more ordered one, seemingly defying the second law of thermodynamics. However, living beings are far from closed systems and cause disorder to ile up in there srroundings, therefore not defying said law.

 

There are many theories as to how life came to be. My favorite is that RNA was created spontaneously and replicated on its own, eventually creating better ways to do this. As it became more efficient, it also became more complex and more like a modern cell. It could do this because RNA has properties of both DNA and proteins, although it is much more similar to DNA in terms of its components. Eventually proteins and DNA took over many of its functions since they were more efficient at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Language, like everything else, evolved. So how does this prove the existence of God?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[slam] Did you miss it? Information, codes, language. Such things don't originate from lifeless matter.
I didn't miss anything. You failed to present proof. You made several baseless, unsupported claims, but you presented no proof. Just because you do not understand a few things does not mean that a god created those things.
[slam] At least you see intelligence emanating out of the universe. Could it be possible that such intelligence does in fact come from the God of Christianity who is described as One of intelligence, wisdom, power, glory, honor, etc.
No, neither the god nor this "intelligent"universe exist.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well???/ where is the evidence that "god" exists????, or god or god,, or even god?????

 

Slamdunk, does president exist??" how about king????

 

please specify a god , and then provide evidence that the god exists,,,,,,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTANCE OF GOD

 

It's very simple. Messages, languages, and coded

information ONLY come from a mind. A mind that

agrees on an alphabet and a meaning of words and

sentences. A mind that expresses both desire and

intent.

 

Messages, languages and coded information never,

ever come from anything else besides a mind.

No one has ever produced a single example of a message

that did not come from a mind."

 

Nature can create fascinating patterns - snowflakes,

sand dunes, crystals, stalagmites and stalagtites. Tornados

and turbulence and cloud formations.

 

Non-living things cannot create language. They

*cannot* create codes. Matter cannot think, talk,

communicate, or create information.

 

It is believed by some that life on planet earth arose

naturally from the "primordial soup," the early ocean which

produced enzymes and eventually RNA, DNA, and primitive cells.

 

To the person who says that life arose naturally,

you need only ask: "Where did the information come from?

Show me just ONE example of a language that didn't come

from a mind."

 

 

This doesn't show that a "God" made anything. And if a "God" is responsible, why not Zeus, or Amaterasu, or Altjira?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Language is a very cool thing, granted. So is the human mind's capacity for symbolic thought, which helps make language possible.

 

Existence of language isn't "proof" of anything other than the existence of language, though. It's quite the leap to claim symbolic thinking is evidence of the existence of a deity, and I'm curious exactly how you got there.

 

What are the steps in your thinking? How exactly does one go from "language exists" to "language is evidence of a deity"? I'm not seeing it.

 

Eagerly awaiting enlightenment, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eagerly awaiting enlightenment, however.

 

Join the queue and bring a book to read. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTANCE OF GOD.....
Where was the evidence? :shrug:

 

[slam] Did you miss it? Information, codes, language. Such things don't originate from lifeless matter.

 

 

 

Guess what, genius? Minds originate from lifeless matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minds originate from lifeless matter.

 

How do they do that?

 

 

Where are you Slamdunk?? Have you been slamdunked? Come on ......we don,t bite.........much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.