Shortest Proof for Creationism?

[F1fan]

Ah, that's not an either/or. I think his wording is very direct and clear, and it's more about whether you are willing to consider how he meant it: it's possible to be so much caught up in fighting against some wrong from your past that you don't notice the music of the spheres -- the wonder and enjoyable awesome nature of reality, what is all around us, and above us in the cosmos, and under our microscopes, and inside the often beautifully elegant equations of physics.

The quote was from the 40's or 50's, right in the depth of Red Scare. Plus, he says "opiate of the masses" as a reference which is Marx, the thinker who Communists borrowed from to develop their political theory. And traditional religion surely referred to the Russian Orthodox Church which was banned by Stalin.

As we see in contemporary atheists is very moral, emotional, and sensitive atheists who are well versed in the sciences and appreciate what science can discover about the universe.

 

[halbhh]

The quote was from the 40's or 50's, right in the depth of Red Scare. Plus, he says "opiate of the masses" as a reference which is Marx, the thinker who Communists borrowed from to develop their political theory. And traditional religion surely referred to the Russian Orthodox Church which was banned by Stalin.

As we see in contemporary atheists is very moral, emotional, and sensitive atheists who are well versed in the sciences and appreciate what science can discover about the universe.

Einstein did say a lot of quotes, and it's fun to read his quotes.

"As we see in contemporary atheists is very moral, emotional, and sensitive atheists who are well versed in the sciences and appreciate what science can discover about the universe."

That's right!

One of my best friends (who died from an accident years ago now) was very much that way, and sort of an atheist. I say sort of because he was also kinda unique, and he had some other....maybe I'll call them 'beliefs' (though they hardly fit any traditional category...), which you could say while not Christian nor about God, were still somewhat....mystical, or about subtle things.

Sorta like Einstein actually -- the 'music of the spheres'. That's a good analogy, actually.

And more than just a few I've known have been people I enjoyed knowing (I've moved several times, and lost track of many too).

So, yeah, no one group has any sort of monopoly on "very moral, emotional, and sensitive".

Some of the people I've liked the most haven't been believers. (There aren't actually as many believers as it may seem in the U.S. (or not quite as many as it may seem) -- rather, there are a lot of church members.)

 

[Tiberius]

Let famous scientists give us the answer:

Albert Einstein said: "Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced a Spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe; a Spirit vastly superior to man."

Isaac Newton: "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from thee counsel and dominion of an Intelligent and Powerful Being."

Louis Pasteur: "The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator."

Theoretical Physicist Michio Kaku: “I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence...To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

So what?

You think because they made discoveries in science that they are therefore somehow qualified in religion as well?

 

[halbhh]

ABSTRACT:
1. proof, that there are transitional forms in the modern theory of evolution.
2. statement, that they are not capable of living and surviving.
3. conclusion, that there is God.


Once upon a time, there were no humans on Earth.
But the leading lifeform was bacteria.
Therefore, there are transitional forms between us and bacteria.
Therefore, there are transitional forms (living on the planet) between us in 2021 AD and bacteria some billion years ago.

Later the leading lifeform became underwater plants.
There were no humans on Earth.
Thus, there are transitional forms between us and plants.

Later the leading lifeform became fish.
There were no humans on Earth.
Thus, there are transitional forms between us and fish.

Later the leading lifeform became monkeys.
There were no humans on Earth.
Thus, there are transitional forms between us and monkeys.

But the transitional forms are not capable of living and surviving.

We came to contradiction, therefore there is God.
We came to contradiction, therefore there is God.
We came to contradiction, therefore there is God.

The Biblical God tells, that there are many kinds of beings on the planet.
Theory of Darwin tells, that there is only one single organism in the origin of all life, including humans..
Thus, the Evolution tells an absurd, that there is only humankind on the planet, and no bird-kind, no worm-kind, no plant-kind. Namely, birds are humans too.

Darwin operates with the term species. Such a term is possible if to consider a kind. There are different species within the kind of beings. For example, there are black people and white people.
But they belong to one kind: humankind. Definition of a kind: all beings, who share a common ancestor. So, there is only one kind in the Theory of Evolution. You can name it with any word. But it is easy to remember: humankind. If we would discover organisms on Venus they would be venerian-kind.

According to the Theory of Evolution, there are many species within one kind of beings. There is only one kind on the planet.

According to so-called pseudo-science, there are many kinds of beings, each with its own species.
A kind can contain many species.

Suppose, that life on Earth has begun 7000 B.C. One of the first organisms was item A. It has multiplied itself into the multitude of all trees. It had no sexual relation to other lifeforms during all history of the universe, future, and past. Well, such a structure of trees that have ever existed and have one last common ancestor (LCA is the item A) God has named "kind of trees". Another LCA, item B has been multiplying without sexual relation to other lifeforms and item A, and has produced all cats in the history of the universe. Then this multitude of cats God has named cat-kind. The number of LCA-s is the number of kinds of life, which are on the planet. In Darwinian evolution, however, there is only one LCA, so there is only one kind: Earthlings. If we will discover life on Mars, they will add the second kind: Marsians. About the kinds in the Bible: Genesis, chapter 1.

I don't remember whether I included the most key thing of all in my response.

If the common Christian bible is correct, there cannot be any proof of God (until He chooses),

At least not if you are a Christian that thinks the New Testament is generally correct.

Because He has chosen, the New Testament repeatedly shows/says/instructs, that God requires 'faith' of us, and that faith is defined in the Christian bible as believing without seeing. (e.g. Hebrews 11:1, and many more places. Ask if you want more)

So, the idea of a 'proof' of creationism for example, which is merely a form of a proof of God -- contradicts the common Christian Bible.

Just so I'm not assuming too much about your own view, is it correct you are a 'Christian' believer? If so, you should read more of the New Testament, before you post, so that you don't contradict what it says. Right?

 

[gnostic]

Obviously the same materials that were used in evolution. Or maybe God has powers that a house builder or car maker does not have and can make his own materials.

You are making connections that are not there.

WHAT humans make and HOW they make it, aren’t the same things as believing in Iron Age fictional stories of creating nature or creating life.

For instances, in house building, you can meet and see architect, and if you really wanted to, you can observe this architect to draw up floor plan to your specifications. Then you can meet the contractor who won the bid to build your home, and you can meet every builders and subcontractors who their parts in building your home, from laying the pipe works in the ground and prepping the foundation for construction, to manual labourers who erect all the necessary wooden framework, to doing the brickwork and doing roof titling and guttering, to adding windows, doors, electrical works, plumbing, fitting, kitchen and bathroom cabinets, etc, to finishing works, such as painting, titling,carpeting, landscaping and gardening.

And you can record everything on video of single day, from the house design to during home building, right to the day of completion, before you move in.

The points are that you can observe and even record everyone in design and constructing your new home, as well as being while builders, plumbers, electricians, painters, tilers, gardeners, etc, and you can show up every single days while they all do their respective works.

The house didn’t construct themselves and they aren’t constructed by anyone who are invisible.

On the other hand, you have the people who wrote the Genesis creation at some time in the mid-1st millennium BCE, meaning the 6th century BCE, who isn’t Moses who supposedly lived in the Late Bronze Age, about 15th century BCE.

Moses didn’t write any of the books that were attributed to him as author, because no works exist in the 15th century BCE. Plus, you have supposed “prophet” who supposedly wrote about events that existed well into 2500 years before his time.

So essentially you are believing in mythical story of man (Moses) who wrote story of another myth about creation? You believe in stories that are based on lot of hearsay, a story about “invisible” being who magically created the world and life in this world?

You can observe god, let alone test his existence, and there was no one there to observe him (Creator) transforming lifeless dust into a living adult male human (Adam).

How is that the same thing as building house?

Everyone you meet (eg architect, builders, electricians, plumbers, fitters, etc), aren’t some imaginary invisible magical beings, like your Creator god, hence your comparison with Genesis creation isn’t even remotely in the same field as someone designing and building your own homes.

You claiming that Genesis creation and home building are the same thing, is based on false equivalence (logical fallacy). You relying on Genesis being true with story of god creating nature and life, are full of more fallacies, including circular reasoning and confirmation bias, argument from ignorance, etc.

It is exactly the same reason why Intelligent Design Creationism, because underneath every claims that nature being designed, is the preexisting invisible and all-powerful Designer.

All ID creationists have done, is changed Creator to Designer. I don’t see how changing the designated titles of God changes anything, since no one can see or test God.

Unlike the imaginary Creator or Designer - architects, builders, contractors and subcontractors are not imaginary some imaginary invisible beings, they are actually people you walk right up to, and interact. You don’t have to imagine nonexistent conversations you can have with them.

 

[night912]

Let famous scientists give us the answer:

Theoretical Physicist Michio Kaku: “I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence...To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

And his response to that was.........



“That’s one of the drawbacks of being in a public sphere: Sometimes you get quoted incorrectly. My own point of view is that you can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God.”[Source

And there's the answer. So you accept what he actually said, correct?