XPost: alt.talk.creationism   
   From: lunch@nofreelunch.us   
      
   On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 16:26:18 -0500, "Ri"  wrote:   
      
   >   
   >Le 26 oct. 2014 15:05 ,?<> a ?it:   
   >>   
   >>   it doesn't take a scientist to look up into a clear night sky and   
   conclude it's there by chance,   
   >> no, it takes an Atheist;  Huh !  to say the universe created itself out of   
   some Catholic Big Bang   
   >> idea is the same as saying a junk yard full of scrap iron exploded and   
   built for itself a Nimitz   
   >> Class Aircraft Carrier complete with fighter jets and rail guns.   
   >>   
   >>   all the elements that can not produce life are in the world yet these   
   Atheist's can't show which   
   >> one or ones actually give life to the other's.  How come ?  They say..."   
   the building block's of   
   >> life came to earth on a comet. "...  what building block's ?   what comet   
   ?  " building blocks "   
   >> are not life... if it were, then a dead person with all of the " building   
   blocks " still in him   
   >> shouldn't be dead.   
   >>   
   >>   and they won't say simply because they show themselves as avoiding the   
   only answer there is...   
   >> which God made known to everyone... " since the creation of the world His   
   invisible attributes, His   
   >> eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood   
   through what has been   
   >> made, so that they are without excuse. "  Ro. 1:20   
   >>   
   >>   the wonder of Creation is one of the ways by which God makes Himself   
   known... as well as by having   
   >> placed an innate awareness of the reality of His presence into every human   
   being possessing rational   
   >> thought... " that which is known about God is evident within them; for God   
   made it evident   
   >> to them. "  Ro. 1:19   
   >>  .   
   >>   the " they " of Romans 1:20 are " men who suppress the truth. "   
   >>   
   >>   the passage goes on to say that these who suppress the truth do so " in   
   unrighteousness, " which   
   >> means they are reprobate, non elect; " alienated from the life of God, "   
   Eph.4:18,  Atheists...left   
   >> alone in this world without God by God's choice ( Jn. 17:9 )  ...those whom   
   God sees fit to "   
   >> harden. "  Ro. 9:18   
   >>   
   >>   being left up to themselves by God it's natural for these to think '   
   natural, '  which is to say,   
   >> they invariably show themselves as Atheists since these are passed by   
   >> ( Eph. 2:12 ) for that saving grace which God delights in gifting those   
   miserable sinner's He's   
   >> chosen in and of Himself to be the objects of His mercy.   
   >>   
   >>   amazingly enough, an Evolutionist / Atheist ( the two are inseparable )   
   would never, repeat, never   
   >> agree to go to a surgeon for a cardiac bypass who has the same   
   understanding of surgery the   
   >> Evolutionist / Big Banger has of Creation.   
   >>   
   >>   when it comes to answering with proof as to how life started the   
   Evolutionist can not use the   
   >> Periodic Table out of which all things living and not living are   
   comprised.  He ' must ' turn to the   
   >> absurd and say that life came from outer space.  He can not reason well   
   enough to conclude that   
   >> outer space is a hostile environment and anything from space crashing to   
   earth is burned to a crisp   
   >> while passing through our atmosphere.   
   >>   
   >>   he can't say ' there was no atmosphere at the time this comet hit earth '   
   simply because he does   
   >> not prove life comes from the non-living Elements of the Periodic Table   
   from which every thing with   
   >> life in it is made.  Hey, boys, the Elements of the Periodic Table are all   
   right here on earth...   
   >> now make them come alive to prove your point.  He bypasses the most   
   fundamental point and quickly   
   >> moves pass it only to add more untenable science.   
   >>   
   >>  Furthermore, he can not prove his ' early earth ' model was even capable   
   of producing a living   
   >> thing since his explanation of early earth is that it was a sterile, toxic,   
   burned out molten mass   
   >> of the Elements of the Periodic Table completely incapable of giving life   
   to itself.  Poor, poor Mr.   
   >> Atheist.  Hey, wanna buy a bridge ?   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >As a scientist (biochemist to be exact) and a disciple of Christ, I have a   
   different point of view. Indeed, there or atheist scientist sees the chance, I   
   see the divine manifestation.   
   >   
   >And the manifestation of god is easy to see for a Christian!   
      
   You really need to review what you write to see how your argument is   
   circular and self-serving. Just because a believer can believe what the   
   believer believes, that does not imply in any way that any evidence   
   supports that claim.   
      
   >Let's start at the beginning. There is a "law" of physics called entropy.   
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy This law says that the entire universe   
   goes to the disorder. But then how do we explain the "life"? (for a scientific   
   "life" is an event that    
   creates order) So there is a problem. The "law" entropy is corrupt.   
      
   Not even close. My first assumption is that you lied to us about being   
   involved in science.   
      
   >Continue in the creation of life. At this point it is interesting to study   
   the works of Miller and Urey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mill   
   r%E2%80%93Urey_experiment Again we see the work of God. Because physiens   
   "predict" the chaos, but God brings    
   order. Indeed, the molecules tend to interact to give life. This is what   
   scientists Urey and Miller demonstrate . Life out of chaos itself. It is a   
   beautiful manifestation of God. And this is what is explained in 1.11 genesis   
   "the earth bring forth grass,   
    the grass seed, fruit trees that give fruit after his kind, whose seed that   
   contain on earth"   
   >   
   >We see here that science and Bible agree in genesis 1.11   
   >   
   >And as regards the creation of mankind, the Bible says in genesis 1:26 "Let   
   us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let him have dominion over   
   the fish of the sea, over the birds of the sky, the livestock, over all the   
   earth and over every    
   creeping thing that creeps on the earth. "   
   >God, through the Bible does not say how he made ??adam. He just said he did.   
   And also understand that God does not say how long it has been the "adam" (in   
   Hebrew adam means humanity). Genesis in 1.26, it is explained that God has   
   placed a day. One day!   
   >   
   >The issue is here! Does it mean a day in human time a day, or a day time god.   
   Indeed, we say (not the Bible) often a millennium is only little time for God.   
   I certainly have not found in the Bible that time "seen" by god and different   
   time "seen" by the    
   men.   
   >However if I share this assumption, 1.26 genesis and science are still okay.   
   >   
   >Please, do not be too hard on me. I am European, and at home creationism does   
   not exist. Again, the only real question is whether in genesis 1.26 a day   
   corresponds to one day.   
      
   Whatever. There's no evidence that any gods exist. There's no evidence   
   that any god, let alone an identifiable one, had anything to do with   
   creation.   
      
   >I am willing to discution.   
      
   Fix your newreader.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)