Evidence of a Creator, Evidence of God

Life can only come from Life.

 

It has been my observation that everything tend to disorder unless 'managed' by intelligent input. Over the millennia it has never been observed that life came to be from non-life. Everything excavated by archaeologists over the centuries are either

from nature or made by man. It follows that everything has a designer, the things in nature are significantly more complex than the things made by man, however.

The complex DNA/ RNA replicating system, had to be perfect from the get-go, for life to be possible. Why, some think, that, perfection can arise from blind chance is

beyond me.

In the beginning, the so-called Big Bang, as matter formed, so did anti-matter, these tend to balance each other, unless, some Input, intervened, allowing matter to form without being 'neutralized' by anti-matter. Also, the velocity of expansion had to be concise/ precise or, the universe could not have resulted. If too slow, the expanding matter would collapse, if too fast, it would have disintegrated, thus, no planets, stars, galaxies would have resulted.

The physical and chemical laws were either pre-existent, or simultaneous. The particular isotope of hydrogen, allowed water to exist, without which, life could never exist. Everything, about the Milky Way galaxy, as it relates to earth, show indisputably, that there was Intelligent Input. A few of these are:

1. The relative position of earth, and its orbit.

2. The size, and relative distances of, the earth, its moon, the sun.

3. The earth's tilt

4. The ozone layer, and earth's atmospheric makeup

5. The cycles, water, nitrogen, carbon, etc.

6. The symbiosis of plants and animals.

7. The bio-diversity

 

It must be stated, that, only a sincere desire, and an earnest indepth  search of  the Bible [utilizing various translations to detect errors in rendering] can begin the journey to truth, and to knowing God Almighty Yahweh/ Jehovah, and the One God sent, Jesus the Christ.

 

You should be aware that belief in God, does not grant you special favors, note this passage please:

 

James 2:19 (American Standard Version)

 

 19 Thou believest that God is one; thou doest well: the demons also believe, and shudder.

 

http://hubpages.com/hub/Science-can-only-Prove-the-Bible-is-from-Yahweh-Jehovah

 

http://hubpages.com/hub/Big-Bang-and-the-Bible

Comments 28 comments

AKA Winston 6 years ago

Have you considered that even if everything in this hub were accurate that it still would not point to any specific god nor would it point to a god who intervened in day-to-day living of mankind?


True Truthseeker profile image

True Truthseeker 6 years ago Author

Why not explore the links. Do your search, if it is deep enough, the truth will be seen.


AKA Winston 6 years ago

T.T.,

I've explored these issues, but I did not go to authors looking to promote a religious slant.

Your argument is poor and your conclusions are invalid.

For example, you say, (It has been my observation that everything tend to disorder unless 'managed' by intelligent input. Over the millennia it has never been observed that life came to be from non-life. Everything excavated by archaeologists over the centuries are either

from nature or made by man.)

And then you draw this conclusion: (It follows that everything has a designer,)

This is a total non sequitur. There is nothing about your premises that require a designer. The moon is in orbit around the earth because other rocks that flew around the earth either crashed into the planet or flew off into space. That is the natural explanation for why the moon orbits the earth. Would the Milky Way still exist if it only had 5 planets? Yes. So why the 8? No reason - certainly not for design reasons.

I would suggest you investigate how all your "designs" may have come about totally unaided and solely by natural mechanisms.

Then you may rethink your assertion of a designer, or at least produce a better argument.


True Truthseeker profile image

True Truthseeker 6 years ago Author

1. The other planets help to reduce the risks of space debris [meteorites] impacting earth.

2. Scientists have been trying to 'create' conditions suitable for biogenesis, for years, all efforts have failed, miserably. For over a hundred years mutations have been facilitated to prove micro-evolution, these too have been inconsistent.

Even with DESIGN from man, biogenesis of life is unattainable, by man's efforts. Advances in DNA recombinant technology, it is at best semi-synthetic.

The evidence only evades those who deny the existence of a Designer of all things visible.

The Bible has been proven to be way ahead of man in key concepts. This either suggests that there are aliens, or, a Grand Creator, who left man His thoughts, for direction, guidance, and life.


AKA Winston 6 years ago

T.T.

(1. The other planets help to reduce the risks of space debris [meteorites] impacting earth)

If so, then why didn't Mr. Designer just build a shield around earth to deflect ALL impacts, or simply eliminate ALL other celestial bodies that are threats to earth from RANDOM collisions? Don't tell me that the solar system has free will, too, so it won't be God's fault if the earth is crushed by a comet or asteroid when God, if he did design the solar system, could have eliminated the threats of comets and asteroids by doing away with them in his design or simply put up a great big plexiglass screen just past the moon to deflect such threats? (I'll let you figure out why this last one won't work, btw. :-))

(Scientists have been trying to 'create' conditions suitable for biogenesis, for years, all efforts have failed, miserably)

ROFLMAO. Are you SERIOUS?!?!

Here's an experiment. Look around until you find an ant on the ground. See how tall it is? That represents the time spent by scientists on biogenesis. Got it? Now, look up at the night sky until you spot the planet Venus - look for the brightest dot close to the horizon. Find it? Now, the distance from the ant to Venus represents how much time passed for biogenesis to occur. Got it?

And you really claim the last 50 years of science proves it can't happen?!?!?! Are you sure you want to write that where other people can read it? Have you no shame????

(The Bible has been proven)

Yes, proven to be copies of copies of copies of copies, and no one has the original texts, it's mistransalated, altered, and no one knows who wrote it other than a bunch of men who were trying to pass along oral legends.

You can get away with this weak tripe when standing in the pulpit and preaching to a congregation of like-minded believers, but when you bring this weak-ass crap out into the real world you get crushed by rationality.

Sorry. Don't mean to be harsh, but faith doesn't cut it as a rational explanation of the natural world.


Brian Whyte profile image

Brian Whyte 6 years ago

It seems to me that the Bible has more answers as to the creation of the world than evolution, which is FULL of contradictions...(can't fully support the 7 points above listed by Truth Seeker.)

But the most wonderful thing about the Bible is that it not only tells us where we came from, but also the knowledge of God's individual love for each of us, His wonderful plan for our lives & His desire to know & love each of us as if we were the only one.

But to understand & experience this truth (and love) requires an element that can't be measured by science--faith. A lot of the truth in the Bible can't be explained scientifically (like the miracles God did for His people), but interestingly enough, many events spoken of throughout the Bible, coincide with recorded events in history--dates, kings, events, civilizations, etc.

Apart from the historical aspect of the Bible & history of God's people, this is the main purpose of the Bible--an expression of God's love for us & His desire to be close to us now & for eternity. The messages given through His people (recorded in the Bible) portray that single most important message we could ever receive in life--The reason why we were created & put on this earth in the first place.

Once you understand "the message" personally, then you'll more clearly be able to understand how God (out of his infinite love & immense power) put the universe together as the perfect environment to house His children..

I hope you come to know this immensely awesome Love & Truth for yourself, Winston..I pray you will..


NothingtoSomething? 6 years ago

You can get away with this weak tripe when standing in the pulpit and preaching to a congregation of like-minded believers, but when you bring this weak-ass crap out into the real world you get crushed by rationality.

Amen


True Truthseeker profile image

True Truthseeker 6 years ago Author

AKA Winston & NtS.

Do not use the hypocrisy and Neo-Plantonism fallacies of professed Christianity in the 'mix', as I do not subscribe to either.

Assimilate this, please. The alleged billions of years it took blind chance to achieve biogenesis, surely, with the technology, knowledge and 'interventions' from our scientists, we can achieve this in tens of years.

Try throwing a set of scrabble pieces in the air and see how long it would take for all the pieces to form REAL words in one language. It will NEVER happen, yet, the DNA-RNA replicating system, if not perfect, would NOT have permitted life to exist.

Probability alone, points irrevocably to DESIGN, to INTELLIGENT INPUT.

Perhaps, you may never see this, unless you realize, that all information that is available to man, is from outside of man. What is the source of all information, of the original language, and why do we have so many different languages today.


AKA Winston 6 years ago

(The alleged billions of years it took blind chance to achieve biogenesis)

T.T.

You create a straw man to smash. Do you joust windmills, as well?

You obviously have no inkling how the natural world works or else your "random chance" argument would die on the vine. Chemical reactions are not "random chance". They are predictable. The only thing that might be considered remotely random is the likelihood of certain chemicals to be in contact with each other so as to interact, which is actually a question of probabilities, which is the study of chance. Suffice it to say that probability says there was plenty of time for biogenesis to occur naturally given all the possible planets in the universe and the length of time involved. As for evolution, it is a series of small, incremental changes in which traits are passed on generation to generation - each new generation is NOT a whole new random occurence; each generation builds upon the previous generation.

No one knows precisely the mechanics of initiation of life from elements; however, a non-explanation does not mean that creationism is automatically the answer. To make that claim is to make the Argument from Ignorance.

See, the problem is you demand 100% proof, when proof is nothing but opinion, anyway, so no proof will ever be good enough to disrupt your belief. The best science can ever do is theorize, i.e., explain rationally how life occured.

That is more than creationists can accomplish - all creationists can do is appeal to followers to believe their story.

To compete with science, creationists have to be able to explain rationally how something can come from nothing, whereas the scientist only has to rationally explain how pre-existing matter interacted chemically to jump-start life.

So we have this Creationist/Scientist dichotomy:

1) An invisible being created Something from Nothing

2) Chemical reactions in existing matter jump-started life, which evolved gradually with tiny incremental alterations over billions of years.

Now, which one of those two again do you claim is the most logical, rational, and believable?


AKA Winston 6 years ago

(Probability alone, points irrevocably to DESIGN, to INTELLIGENT INPUT.)

T.T.

Do yourself a favor and look up the logic fallacy of begging the question - because that is the fallacy you are using in your fallacious argument from design.

We cannot know or study what a non-life (i.e. god) creature might include in his design, therefore we can only assume what m-i-g-h-t be, and thus when we find the case to exist as we imagined it would be, we are only proving our own assumptions - i.e., begging the question.

You assume, for example, the God would only create DNA strands that utilizes the 4 nitrogenous bases because that is what we know DNA uses, and then you say this proves a God creator - but a God creator may well have used a totally different and more efficient method entirely for replication. Your argument is that only intelligence could create DNA, and that finding DNA then proves intelligence created it.

Your argument is no different than one that says that only invisible cookie-making elves would put cookies inside packaging in stores labeled Keebler, and then claiming that finding a Keebler cookie package in the grocery was proof of the work of invisible cooking-making elves.

Now, replace "invisible cookie-making elves" with "God" and "cookies inside packages labeled Keebler" with "design" and I have replicated your ludicrous and non-sensical argument and I didn't need RNA or DNA to do it.


True Truthseeker profile image

True Truthseeker 6 years ago Author

AKA W, you should realize, as I have stated earlier, that, much of the terminologies, definitions, terms, used today, are, manmade. Being "manmade", they are subject to modifications.

The Law of Conservation of Matter, previously stated: "Matter can neither be created nor destroyed." This was modified to include: "...by chemical means." It

is now a proven fact that matter can be created by intense energy, and, energy can neither be created nor destroyed. The LIVING God, had this recorded, thousands of years ago.

Isaiah 40:26

“Raise YOUR eyes high up and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who is bringing forth the army of them even by number, all of whom he calls even by name. Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one [of them] is missing.

Genesis 1:1

1 In [the] beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

It is observed that you consider my comments debatable. That may be so, but, it was never my intention to enter a debate. Your debating stance is regrettable and quite unnecessary, unless, you propose the existence of aliens, and that aliens wrote the Bible.


AKA Winston 6 years ago

(It is observed that you consider my comments debatable)

T.T.

Hey, you put forth the argument, not me. Did you not expect your claims to be challenged?

For example, you posited that Life Can Only Come From Life and that the relationship between earth and the Milky Way shows a designer.

If you make thosee kind of claims in writing you surely must anticipate a response in writing, especially from a divergent point of view - especially when all you do is make assertions and fallacious arguments.

In fact, some would feel it a duty to point out the inconsistencies in your arguments - a duty to rational thinking everywhere.

Sorry if your beliefs can't answer the challenges of reason, but them's the breaks. Not my fault that you have to fall back on Bible quotes as your "proof". It only shows what your hub clearly showed to any thinking person in the beginning: you are simply a creationist who enjoys parroting the irrational claims of the Discovery Institute's creationists who try in vain to promote their irrational worldview as rational.

Here's a tip: Bible quotes don't help make your argument look like it is scientifically based.

I return to my first comment - are you aware that even if all you assert were accurate, it would not point to any specific god so to claim proof of a specific god is still fallacious.

It is circular logic, i.e., begging the question.


True Truthseeker profile image

True Truthseeker 6 years ago Author

The universe is vast, limitless, based on all available data. All available data concerning the Milky Way galaxy, reveal, unhospitable parameters. Does it not strike you as at least a little odd, that ALL conditions have been TWEAKED for life to exist on earth?

If you lock up your house, car, and leave them unattended for a year, the degree of decay, dust, rot etc., should help you to infer at least one truth, without intelligent input, EVERYTHING tends to disorder. Exprapolate this simple truth to earth, and ALL the conditions [man's negative input excluded] that exist, that facilitate life.

The contents of the Bible, for those of us who truly understand, could not have come from man himself, but, as it rightly says, from the Grand Creator, Himself.


Creative 6 years ago

I don't mean to step in and break up the love affair here, but I just can't quit laughing over AKA Winston's statement from 43 hours ago that said:

"The moon is in orbit around the earth because other rocks that flew around the earth either crashed into the planet or flew off into space. That is the natural explanation for why the moon orbits the earth."

LOL; laugh out loud; I'm laughing out loud!

The moon is the most mysterious "object" in the solar system and you, Mr. Rational Winston, say THAT for an explanation?! Holy Lunar Lunatics! I even realized the queerness of our moon, early on in life. ...But later on, I researched even further, a lot further, only to find that my original assumptions were right on track with our slowly drifting, blissful moon that appeared from not-so-typical conditions.

Man, you are either behind the times or perhaps you just temporarily had a mental version of a lunar eclipse or something?

Okay, I just wanted to interject with my slop to counter the protruding swill within the comment field. Good day to all...oh, and cheers now! ;)


AKA Winston 6 years ago

Dear Creative,

You miss the point entirely - the reason the moon orbits the earth at the proper distance is because it could not orbit the earth at an improper distance. Too far and it would not be captured by earth's gravity; too close, and it would crash into earth.

The earth moon is not the only moon in the solar sytem. Whether or not other rocks were closer or not is irrelevant, but the idea that the moon was "placed" at a precise distance is ludicrous.

That idea makes me LMAO.


True Truthseeker profile image

True Truthseeker 6 years ago Author

You realize that measurements of the speed of expansion of the universe, have revealed that gravity alone cannot explain, why the universe is so organized?

So scientists ascribe terms such as dark force and dark energy, to account for the deficit.

When all parameters are considered, it is significantly more plausible, that Intelligent Input, caused the universe to be, and prepared the earth for life, than for blind chance to 'create' intelligent life.


AKA Winston 6 years ago

(Does it not strike you as at least a little odd, that ALL conditions have been TWEAKED for life to exist on earth?)

T.T.

First off, how do you know conditions were "tweaked"? You cannot explain the method of creation you claim, nor a method of natural life-starting and neither can I. But I am not surprised at all that there is life on earth. Why would I be? I KNOW there is life on earth.

Consider this: if there is only one planet that supports intelligent life it is 100% guaranteed to be earth, regardless of the chances of any life developing anywhere on any other planet. Therefore, the fact that there is life on earth is not surprising at all, seeing how there is life on earth.

If you don't know the causes of life formation, it is impossible to calculate the odds of its occuring anywhere else. It is silly to simply claim "X" number of planets means "Y" probability of life occuring. The only way to know is to understand the exact process of initiation of life and then find the number of planets with those conditions and compare those planets to earth - at which point you would have an idea of the odds of it happening.

For example, there are over a billion different bridge hands that can be randomly dealt; the fact that you hold any specific hand does not prove a purposeful dealer or that someone changed the odds by rigging the deck.

There are 8 planets in our solar system - and that just happens to be the number, not because we couldn't live with 3, 5, or 7, but because randomness gave us 8. The fact that they stay together has nothing to do with a pleasing design but with physics.

If you want to marvel at miracles, marvel at the miracles of nature. It is pretty awesome what it can and has accomplished.

(You realize that measurements of the speed of expansion of the universe,)

T.T.,

A serious question - do you understand that what you quote as "proof" is nothing but opinion? Do you have any idea that the Hubble Effect (aka redshift) is NOT universally recognized as proof of an expanding universe?

You do not reason, my friend, you argue your beliefs. I don't mind people arguing beliefs, but they should be honest and not try to hide their faith inside false attempts at rationality.

It doesn't surprise me you quote dark matter: here is a mystery to you, I'm sure, but maybe with effort you can understand it: dark matter is simply a modern term for God or the hand of God or any other concept you want to use to make the equations work.

Good luck.


True Truthseeker profile image

True Truthseeker 6 years ago Author

You need not respond,but the discipline of statistics, makes your stance, and indeed the stance of any atheist, or, supporter of blind chance achieving the feat of the great 'orchestration' seen in creation, as quite unreasonable.

Again, I state, it is highly improbable, that conditions in all other planets and their moons are so averse to life, yet, conditions on earth are so pro-life, yet blind chance, somehow accounts for this.

The physical, chemical laws, the predictability of the Periodic Table, the cycles, the electromagnetic forces of stable isotopes allowing for certain compounds with their particular properties to exist, ALL helping to facilitate life.

From the 1950's scientists have tried in vain to 'create' life in the labs. If blind chance could accomplish all things visible, surely, man, should be able to 'create' a unicellular lifeform. The truth is, nothing that is alive is simple, every living organism is quite complex. It is safely said, it is impossible, for life to be generated, without Intelligent Input.


AKA Winston 6 years ago

T.T.

I appreciate your civility and I do not question your faith or have any reason to want to challenge your faith.

The only complaint I hold is when a believer claims a logical reason for belief, a rational reason for the irrational assumptions, and proofs as binding on nature.

In that vein, I offer this final comment adjustment to make your position clear: (I believe that): "It is safely said, it is impossible, for life to be generated, without Intelligent Input", (but I could be wrong).

At the same time, I could be wrong, as well.


AKA Winston 6 years ago

(It will NEVER happen, yet, the DNA-RNA replicating system, if not perfect, would NOT have permitted life to exist.)

T.T.

I meant the above comment to be my last but forgot to include something I thought you might like to investigate for yourself instead of listening to me.

I suggest you research RNA World Theory as an explanation for life without DNA.

See ya.


Creative 6 years ago

Dear AKA Winston,

You enlightened me with: "The earth moon is not the only moon in the solar sytem."

Really? I knew that when I was 5 or 6 years old!

By the way, our moon does not even compare to the existing, discovered moons that have been previously labelled by man - within our solar system - for reasons I obviously feel no need to elaborate upon due to the lack of intuition that I'm dealing with within the current comment field. I call it the "mysterious moon," for many reasons that you'll probably never care to even try to fathom.

Oh, and by the way, your "RNA World Theory" hogwash is just that...a hypothesis or an assumption without a backbone. For example, no self-reproductive RNA system has yet been found...blah-blah! That theory is just more scientific, religious-based excuses that nearly mimics dogma in its own right, just to try and cover up the ignorant, ego-tripping rationalists out there with limited thoughts and cognitive function. I'm sorry that many folks still need to draw with crayons, but whatever makes y'all happy as, like yourself, I'm not here to bash your faith or anybody else...well, within reason. LOL!

Who in the hell said the universe was rational?

What if the whole interwoven fabric of existence was one giant woo-woo that leads to these eternally recycled forms of life...and in turn, that ultimate, universal fluency of constant reincarnation never ends - which is why it is all about the experience anyway, no matter what you believe.

Maybe I get so tired of hearing people talk about a universe that they have no idea about, but only to discover.

Maybe that's why I detest organized religions and boisterous atheists, but now, freshly added to the list, I'm starting to dislike these self-proclaimed rationalists since they make religions look better every day with their tunnel visions and microscopic viewpoints...all while claiming such large territory.

Cheers now, I suppose...


AKA Winston 6 years ago

Creative,

Wow. You have certainly helped my understanding of the nature of the universe with your pointless assertions about reincarnation and the critical nature of "experiencing".

(Maybe that's why I detest organized religions and boisterous atheists, but now, freshly added to the list, I'm starting to dislike these self-proclaimed rationalists)

Maybe you only detest yourself?


AKA Winston 6 years ago

(Oh, and by the way, your "RNA World Theory" hogwash is just that...a hypothesis or an assumption without a backbone)

Creative,

I suggest you stop wasting your break time away from therapy trolling the internet and try to make sure you take your meds on time.

February 22nd 2010

"A new RNA molecule created by University of Colorado scientists can catalyze a key reaction needed to synthesize proteins. The discovery may have significant implications, researchers say, because it further substantiates the 'RNA World' hypothesis, which proposes that life on Earth evolved from early forms of RNA. The research is detailed this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."

Why don't you quit pestering thinking people with your petty religious belligerent posturing about alien reincarnation and go back and tell the doctors you have had a change in heart and will O.K. the shock therapy they suggested as "your only hope of something anywhere close to a normal life"?

After all, it is the rational thing to do...


Creative 6 years ago

AKA Winston,

...and that study goes on to say:

"In other words, we may have taken a substantial step toward the very origin of Earthly life," he said. "However, keep well in mind that the tiny replicator has not been found, and that its existence will be decided by experiments not yet done, perhaps not yet imagined."

It still remains a theory...

By the way, the only meds I take come in liquid form by way of beer, maybe you should try it sometime, have some fun, or perhaps get out more.

I expected this typical, "you're crazy" type of response. Thanks; coming from you, I take that as a compliment. Well, this comment field has been polluted enough. I'll try to steer clear from the sensitive, limited, stiff minds out there. All of y'all that often speak about therapy are usually the ones who actually need it. Thanks again, for acting so childish...

Live long & prosper, Mr. Alien hater.

Cheers!


True Truthseeker profile image

True Truthseeker 6 years ago Author

Perhaps, you folks, might want to share the 'love' and civilty, by perusing links of my search?

http://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/Science-ca...


AKA Winston 6 years ago

T.T.

Sorry your comment section was infested with a troll. As soon as you see the words "It still remains a theory... " you should understand that you are dealing with intelligence equal to that of an amoeba and stop attempting any type of rational dialogue.

Kind of like ignoring a gnat that insists on buzzing around your ear.


Wicked Maggot 6 years ago

AKA Winston speaks about infestation and gnats, while he goes a step further and mimics a parasite, by using other people's words to vouch for his "rational" religion of human-based science. This is a poor excuse if used in conjunction with false accusations of incompetence, even for a maggot like himself.

Hypothesis = Theory, so what is it you don't understand about that, dear little minded one?

Oh, okay...I'm an Amoeba now? Do you have an inferiority complex or something? Only people like you, with poor cognitive function - along with other hidden issues, would even think of any human being equaling such. Unlike yourself, dearly beloved, cyber-based "keypad warrior," I don't have to "Google it" or PRETEND I'm knowledgeable about anything...as I'm not full of baloney like you.

I'm just an unusual being who is aware of some of the stages...and I can't help it if you fall under the ignorant majority. It's okay, there is no need to cry about it...but also I must remind you, I've had my share of research and...uh, no, there is no need to talk about my credibility since it is not like I'm trying to get access to NASA's database or anything, so never mind on that one.

Anyway, since you seem to enjoy talking about mental illnesses, maybe you did miss your appointment for a full lobotomy...and apparently, science sure hasn't seemed to be able to fix your (hopefully temporary) chemically unbalanced self...

T.T.: Thanks for the invite; I landed here just in time for more entertainment...before I head off for some offline recreation that, obviously, some folks need to try more often. It would be nice to exchange comments without people with ego issues showing up...

Either way, I'll swing by and at least check it out for now. I'm sure the "trolling" (as he loves to state) Winston has already commented on that post, as well. Hmm, talk about cheap entertainment... Ha-ha!


True Truthseeker profile image

True Truthseeker 6 years ago Author

It is appreciated that not all proverbs from man make absolute sense, "Wise think alike" and "Fools seldom differ", supporting this point. But I implore all to stick to the issues, and leave the pettiness to perhaps the weather?

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working