Big Bang

[Adrianay]

‘If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents—the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else’s. But if their thoughts—i.e. of materialism and astronomy—are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It’s like expecting that the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milkjug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.’

C.S. Lewis

 

[huajiro]

To discredit the natural effects in nature is to say that "God" purposely has earthquakes, tidal waves, hurricanes and tornadoes destroy us as well.

 

[standing_on_one_foot]

Wow...so, accidents, hmm? Among other things I have wrong with this, the word accident seems to imply that there is either some overall purpose that went wrong or there is some "right" way things should have happened. Another thing I have wrong with this is that once you "accidently" get organic life, it's no accident that it evolves. I mean, evolution is most certainly not random. It's very much driven by what works. We have intelligence because it helps us survive, and I'm disinclined to believe that we get stuff right when we use logic and apply it to the real world just on accident, you know?

 

[cvipertooth]

I believe we were not created by accident, we were created with intelligent design. So were all living and non-living things. It seemes almost pointless to live without being created for some kind of purpose. But, once again, just like we were not created by an accident, niether were the laws of science, natural selection, adaptation, biogenesis, space, time, matter, science, or life itself. These are not things man has created these are things man has discovered and put a name to. They have always been here, we have just not put them into terms we can understand

 

[The Voice of Reason]

cvipertooth -

If you believe in intelligent design, you should have shown the evidence for it in Pah's thread that specfically asked for it. Oddly, no one took up the Theists side of the argument in support of intelligent design.

Adrianay -
The quote from Lewis is riddled with one logical misstep after another. It is one conclusion after another that are not supported by the premises.

TVOR

 

[cvipertooth]

cvipertooth -

If you believe in intelligent design, you should have shown the evidence for it in Pah's thread that specfically asked for it. Oddly, no one took up the Theists side of the argument in support of intelligent design.

TVOR

Forgive me for being absent from the site for so long and not being present in pah's thread. I had DSL problems. I have now come to the conclusion that evolution backs up intelligent design. The evolution theory backs up creationism, oddly enough. The theory of evolution perfectly fits into the Genesis story. Since life does come from life God could have set evolution into motion in the beginning, whenever that was. It all boils down to one point: there really is no proof for when and where everything started. But if evolution is basically proven and it fits within the creation story, there really is no point in arguing between the two points.

 

[linwood]

I believe we were not created by accident, we were created with intelligent design. So were all living and non-living things. It seemes almost pointless to live without being created for some kind of purpose. But, once again, just like we were not created by an accident, niether were the laws of science, natural selection, adaptation, biogenesis, space, time, matter, science, or life itself. These are not things man has created these are things man has discovered and put a name to. They have always been here, we have just not put them into terms we can understand

How can you believe we were created by intelligent design and advocate biogenesis?

 

[cvipertooth]

How can you believe we were created by intelligent design and advocate biogenesis?

bi·o·gen·e·sis n.

1. The principle that living organisms develop only from other living organisms and not from nonliving matter.
2. Generation of living organisms from other living organisms.

Life comes from life

John 14:6 = "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way,the truth, and the LIFE:
no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

if life comes from life and god is life why could biogenesis not justify creation?

 

[linwood]

bi·o·gen·e·sis n.

1. The principle that living organisms develop only from other living organisms and not from nonliving matter.
2. Generation of living organisms from other living organisms.

Life comes from life

John 14:6 = "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way,the truth, and the LIFE:
no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

if life comes from life and god is life why could biogenesis not justify creation?

Ignore my idiotic reply .

I confused biogenesis with abiogenesis for a minute there.

Sorry.

 

[cvipertooth]

Ignore my idiotic reply .

I confused biogenesis with abiogenesis for a minute there.

Sorry.

its ok ive gotten the two confused before

 

[Ceridwen018]

I think Lewis was right on target. We are an accident.

 

[robtex]

There is a theistic bais in the premise I want to point out. That the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision. That would suggest a divine plan in opposition to the big bang making it a theistic arguement instead of an arguement against atheism. The word accident means unintentional implying divinity.


"But if their thoughts—i.e. of materialism and astronomy—are merely accidental by-products,"--qoute from original post...

To say that only accidents can come from accidents is a silly statement. A car hits another car on accident and an ambulance comes to the rescue and carts one of them off to the hospital. To follow CS Lewis logic the ambulance did that on accident.

 

[Soundoc]

To discredit the natural effects in nature is to say that "God" purposely has earthquakes, tidal waves, hurricanes and tornadoes destroy us as well.

The God who created the universe created it and said: "It is VERY good."

If anything was not good even by the weight or size of a speck of floating dust, Almighty God, being a 100%, infinitly perfect person would never have said it is very good.

It means at creation everything in the universe was perfect . What is perfect? Perfect is when there is no more room for even the slightest improvement.

That being so, I must say that anything that spoiled the initial perfecction has to be the work of another being who is equal in power to Almighty God or thereabouts.

The Holy Bible reveals such a being and he is Satan. Satan is **almost equal in power to Almighty God, the Creator of the universe.

Satan has the power to destroy everything that Almighty God created. But Satan has no power to go beyond what Almighty God **allows because Satan was created by Almighty God, not as Satan of course but the most powerful angel in heaven when he was created and his name was Lucifer. (Pl Google for Lucifer/Satan).

Being a destructor by nature , Satan is the one who is responsible for all the destructions in the universe. (Space scientists are talking about a huge body hurtling towards the earth. If earth is hit we are toast with nobody left to eat it)!

So, the next time you experience or watch a disaster on TV, pl stop blaming **Almighty God and blame **mighty Satan.

Right now Muslims are murdering each other as they have never done in human history. Who do you blame? Almighty God who loves all hunan beings?

 

[lew0049]

One term: Black Hole Theory