Religion & Spirituality

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

God Created [Spirituality & Religion]

I will be removing all rude and condescending comments.

There are currently 829 comments and so many of them are rude and condescending!

Currently, there is a rather misleading thread which asks...

"For my creationist friends who reject that evolution has occurred: What do you consider to be the best COUNTER-EVIDENCE that evolution has occurred?"

This question is misleading. Most Creationists believe that God created a world with many Kinds of creatures and that these creatures multiplied and grew in diversity. We believe that God used genes as building blocks for creatures in the same way that we might use cement to build very different structures. Similarities between creatures that are of different Kinds are simply the result of having the same building blocks. A dome structure and a skyscraper might both use cement but the similarity means nothing. It means nothing in biology as well.

Similarities between organisms might be used to classify organisms but using similarities to make assumptions about origins is ridiculous!

I am, however, thankful that God gave each Kind of creature the genetic ability to become diverse. So, we have many kinds of birds... many breeds of dogs... etc. Some call this ability evolution... but it does not imply that dogs came from an ancient bacterial ancestor. lolol.

So, does evolution occur? Yes, within each Kind of animal, of course! Does that mean that Darwin's dream might have merit? Of course not. The intricacies of nature and the masterful use of genetic building blocks implies a Creator... an organic architect and engineer.

[media=https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U0u3-2CGOMQ]

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

NewBecky · 51-55, F

For those that deny the existence of a supreme being... consider this:

The universe can be looked at as a system because it has a finite amount of energy and the network of galaxies is moving in harmony. The energy within the universe is finite. Also, the growth of entropy in the universe is constantly occurring. Think of energy as water being poured out. It is spreading out. So is the energy in the universe. While stars are born and while stars die it is clearly seen that overall, energy is dissipating into a cold, dark, nothingness.

Now, while the universe is constantly descending into a loss of order, we are able to create order... aren't we? We, as intelligent beings, can take minerals that are spread out on the land and bring them together in an orderly fashion to make a car, for instance. Intelligent beings can create order out of disorder.

This is the Christian premise. Everyone knows that there has always been something in eternity past. We merely believe that the something is intelligent. It must have been because you cannot have something which is in a constant growth of entropy for eternity past. Eternal entropy is utterly impossible. Someone had to create and give order to the system which is wearing down. The system as a whole had to have a birth. In the beginning, God created.

1-25 of 53

LordShadowfire · 46-50, M

@NewBecky

The system as a whole had to have a birth.

Why?

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@LordShadowfire Because eternal entropy is impossible. Did you read all of it? You can create a motor... giving order to it... but the motor will wear out. Everything is wearing down. Entropy is constantly growing. Energy is constantly dissipating.

LordShadowfire · 46-50, M

@NewBecky So, because things lose energy, that equals God. Here's the problem with what you're saying. Energy doesn't die, ever. It just changes. It dissipates, it returns, but it can never be destroyed. Sometimes it becomes matter, and then sometimes that matter is destroyed and becomes energy again.

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@LordShadowfire You aren't following. The fact is that the universe is experiencing constant entropy. Yes that does imply an intelligent creator because while energy doesn't die it does dissipate. That is constantly occurring.

LordShadowfire · 46-50, M

@NewBecky

1. Energy. Cannot. Die.

2. The universe is a closed system.

3. Energy is not dissipating everywhere. That would mean it was dying. See point 1.

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@LordShadowfire Energy dissipating is not the same as energy not existing anymore. Water dissipating doesn't imply that the water doesn't exist. The water isn't dieing simply because it dissipates.

The universe is a system which is experiencing constant entropy. Energy cannot dissipate for eternity past. Eternal entropy is impossible.

Sharon · F

@NewBecky

Because eternal entropy is impossible.

Entropy increases. Enternal entropy is the final fate of the universe. You seen to be confusing your terms.

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@Sharon You cannot have a system experience entropy for eternity past.

Sharon · F

@NewBecky

The fact is that the universe is experiencing constant entropy.

No it isn't. Entropy is not constant at all, it's increasing.

Sharon · F

@NewBecky

You cannot have a system experience entropy for eternity past.

What do you mean by that? You don't seem to know what entropy is.

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@Sharon

It is constantly occurring. Not at a constant rate but it is always occurring. I believe the rate is constantly growing but even if the rate were constant you couldn't have that occur for eternity past.

Entropy: a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.

This message was deleted by the author of the main post.

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@Sharon Firstly, you imply ignorance and assume ignorance which is condescension. All condescension will be deleted and you have opportunity to reply without condescension.

The point is that no system is able to experience entropy for eternity past. Thr system had to have a beginning because eternal growth in entropy is impossible.

Sharon · F

@NewBecky You refer to another thread as misleading but expect your opinions to be accepted as fact without question. I see you've deleted a lot of posts. All the deleted comments says a lot about how tenuous your position is. Go ahead and delete this one too.

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@Sharon Actually, I am only deleting condescension. You are welcome to bring up logical points. I am firm in the point that no system is capable of experiencing a growth in entropy or constant entropy for eternity past.

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@NewBecky How are you defining ‘order’?

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@newjaninev2 I use the word as it is commonly used so any common definition will be great.

I tend to like the definitions in Webster's but I have faith that you could use Google and find a satisfactory definition.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@redredred Yes, 10 is very generous. lolol

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@redredred

as it is commonly used

A key component of your argument and it is undefined? That leads to endless Particularity Assumptions... that whatever particular position is selected is orderly, ignoring all other positions

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@NewBecky

we are able to create order

So is the tide

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@newjaninev2 oh... You misunderstood my reply. I said that I use the word "order" as it is commonly used so every common definition is sufficient. The word is defined. You are welcome to use any common definition and it will describe precisely what I mean by order. Thank you.

redredred · M

@NewBecky such as, “a burger and fries”?

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@NewBecky Your argument, so it requires your definition. If you don’t have one, then you have no argument.

When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to mean... neither more nor less.

The question is, said Alice, whether you can make words mean so many different things.

The question is, said Humpty Dumpty, which is to be master — that’s all.
(Lewis Carroll: Through the Looking Glass)

NewBecky · 51-55, F

@redredred As a noun not a verb. Bother, as in setting your house in order. There then.

1-25 of 53