Replies

"The complexity of the physical world does not prove that God exists. "

Actually, the complexity by mere human reason alone, should lead one to God since Supernatural design took place. The evidence points one to God since it cannot be explained by evolution.

Yeah, evolutionists keep coming up with new "theories" but they don't pan out. There is always a new crop to take their place when even an evolutionist can no longer defend it. And on and on it goes. It's pride on not being wrong and thinking they know more than God that keeps them going - similar to the fall of Satan.

I's no surprise our country at large and academia in particular rejects the Judeo Christian God in all forms.

Actually, the complexity by mere human reason alone, should lead one to God since Supernatural design took place.

Um, okay -- why?

To point out just one of the gaping holes in your line of "reasoning", you have not ruled out the possibility that an unimaginably advanced alien civilization used their vast technology to create life on Earth for reasons of their own. So it's an unsupportable leap for you to go from "gee, life on Earth is gosh-darn complex", to "therefore only an all-powerful supernatural God could have done it". Your conclusion does not follow.

The evidence points one to God since it cannot be explained by evolution.

Sure it can. And the direction that all the evidence points is toward the conclusion that modern life *did* arise that way.

Yeah, evolutionists keep coming up with new "theories" but they don't pan out. There is always a new crop to take their place when even an evolutionist can no longer defend it. And on and on it goes.

What on earth are you talking about? Your description bears almost no resemblance to the history or current state of evolutionary science. What do you imagine has not "panned out"? I can't think of a single aspect of Darwin's original multifaceted description in his 1849 "On the Origin of Species" which has been invalidated, nor has any development of the theory since then been found to be faulty. There have certainly been modifications to some of the *details* of what we know about the *history* of life on Earth, as new evidence has been uncovered, but that's hardly the same as saying that the *theory* has required any major overhauls.

Are you sure you know the field well enough to properly critique it?

It's pride on not being wrong and thinking they know more than God that keeps them going - similar to the fall of Satan.

Ah, there you go again... Stop trying to be an amateur psychoanalyst, you're not very good at it.

You remind me of someone, who could it be... Hmm... Ah, I've got it: "Could it be... SATAN?!?"

I's no surprise our country at large and academia in particular rejects the Judeo Christian God in all forms.

"I's no surprise" that you don't understand why people might disagree with you.

Yeah, evolutionists keep coming up with new "theories" but they don't pan out.

That's the whole point of scientific theory: to propose an explanation by which quantifiable and consistently-reproducible scientific predictions may be made. Once the theory is proposed, then comes the long and arduous testing by which the theory is either supported or discounted.

Contrary to the popular notion, all of science is theory. Even the much-vaunted "law of gravity" (and other misnamed "laws" of science) is nothing more than a theory which can be readily abandoned if a better theory is proposed with stronger evidence to support it.

I personally don't understand why some people think that faith and science are in competition. It isn't that way at all. Science can only tell us the 'what' and the 'how' of things. Only our faith in the Almighty can answer the 'why.' In concert, faith should neither detract from science, nor vice-versa. If anything, they complement one another quite well.