• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The first living thing could not have come into being by random chance, therefore, God Almighty created all things. Just 1 proof.

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
Literally no one has to. It's your list. You have to show those things say what you claim they do. Explain them. Provide legitimate sources.

But that's not going to happen right? Right.

Not much point in following these threads that are really meaningless posturing as near as I can tell.

You have a wonderful day.

I can't recall how many times the OP has been told that since he made these claims, it is his responsibility to prove how they are true. He hasn't done that.
 

Dan From Smithville

"We are both impressed and daunted." Cargn
Staff member
Premium Member
So you cannot even answer any of these simple questions or refute these well known thugs that falsify evolution and billions of years.
Don't have to. It is your duty and responsibility to support your claims. You've said you aren't up to it. I believe you.

There is no evidence that the theory of evolution was falsified. No evidence for a global flood. No evidence that the Earth and the universe are only 6,000 years old. No evidence that abiogenesis should be rejected.

You've literally done NOTHING.
 

Dan From Smithville

"We are both impressed and daunted." Cargn
Staff member
Premium Member
I can't recall how many times the OP has been told that since he made these claims, it is his responsibility to prove how they are true. He hasn't done that.
From the style, my initial take was that these particular threads would play out as they have. If anything that is being claimed were valid, they would be in the legitimate literature. They could and would be defended and explained and the positions supported. Nothing like that is going to happen.

What I see, I consider best described by the metaphor of pigeon chess.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
From the style, my initial take was that these particular threads would play out as they have. If anything that is being claimed were valid, they would be in the legitimate literature. They could and would be defended and explained and the positions supported. Nothing like that is going to happen.

What I see, I consider best described by the metaphor of pigeon chess.
There is plenty of legitimate literature that proves recent creation by God and refutes evolution and billions of years.
When you have a false position of evolution and billions of years, try anything else by facts and truth.

Censorship is not science. It leads to propaganda and indoctrination into delusion and lies.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
The first living creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible.

A first living creature would have to have had at least 100,000 amino acids in a particular sequence. This is extremely generous. The smallest free-living thing has over 1,300,000 base pairs. I also have not included having over 500 million other atoms in it.

The odds against a sequence of 100,000 amino acids (20 types, 39 counting handedness) coming to be by random chance is (10 to the 160,000 power) to 1. That could never have happened anywhere in the universe over the supposed 13.7 billion years of its existence. It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. There are other factors that make it impossible. It would be a miracle.Where would such an amount of amino acids even occur in nature to even make a first creature? They must be in very near proximity to where the first creature came to be. In water they would immediately diluted and chemical reactions would destroy it. And above ground or in space, it would be destroyed by the the sunlight. So the first creature is impossible.

If such a great miracle did occur, the poor creature will not survive long at all. It is not protected from its environment. Chemical reactions will begin to destroy it within seconds. Which is just another problem. It would take too long to assemble itself. Destruction will happen faster than construction.
The poor creature cannot feed itself. It will also not be able to repair itself.
It will not be able to have any offspring. So it could never exist. So even if it did come into existence, it would die quickly and could not have offspring

And that is just to get to the first living thing. There would have to at least 1 trillion other miracles to produce all the living creatures by evolution. That would be about 70 miracles for each of the supposed 13.7 billion years.

That is impossible to have happened by random chance.
Therefore, God created all things.

A simple elegant proof.
Assume no God. Show the contradictions. Therefore, God exists.
The proof that the Bible is the true word of God is also easy.

The atheists have been deceived into believing that the first creature could come into existence by random chance.
Never has been observed. Simple analysis shows it is impossible. There is no record that it ever did.
So, the evolutionist has the burden of proof.
God did create life, just not the way the Israelites speculated in their story of origins. Genesis was written by the Hebrew priest class for consumption by the Israelites to bolster and preserve their faith and nationalism.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
God did create life, just not the way the Israelites speculated in their story of origins. Genesis was written by the Hebrew priest class for consumption by the Israelites to bolster and preserve their faith and nationalism.
Actually the Bible is given by inspiration of God. But I am glad you believe that God did create life. There may be hope for you.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. - 2 Tim 3:16-17
 

Dan From Smithville

"We are both impressed and daunted." Cargn
Staff member
Premium Member
There is plenty of legitimate literature that proves recent creation by God and refutes evolution and billions of years.
When you have a false position of evolution and billions of years, try anything else by facts and truth.
And yet, you offer none. Explain none. Support none. Odd with all that plenty.
Censorship is not science. It leads to propaganda and indoctrination into delusion and lies.
I have no idea what you are talking about. But empty claims are not science either or facts.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
There is plenty of legitimate literature that proves recent creation by God and refutes evolution and billions of years.
When you have a false position of evolution and billions of years, try anything else by facts and truth.

Censorship is not science. It leads to propaganda and indoctrination into delusion and lies.
There really isn't any. No one is advocating for censorship. But facts are facts...When debating science you need to use scientific sources. Almost all creationist sources require their writers to swear that they will not follow the scientific method. That makes them unscientific and worthless in a debate.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Actually the Bible is given by inspiration of God. But I am glad you believe that God did create life. There may be hope for you.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. - 2 Tim 3:16-17
Too bad that you do not understand those verses. They do not support your claims.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
No. Scripture is not even defined. You need to start out by defining that properly and supporting that claim.
Scripture is defined as the 66 books of the Holy Bible.


and from verse 17 and the rest of verse 16 it must be defined.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. - 2 Tim 3:16-17
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Scripture is defined as the 66 books of the Holy Bible.


and from verse 17 and the rest of verse 16 it must be defined.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. - 2 Tim 3:16-17
Sorry, but you are abusing the dictionary again.

Don't you know how to debate at all?
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Sorry, but you are abusing the dictionary again.

Don't you know how to debate at all?
Sorry but you lack knowledge
from the dictionary

scripture​

noun

scrip·ture ˈskrip(t)-shər

1
a(1)
capitalized : the books of the Bible

—often used in plural
(2)
often capitalized : a passage from the Bible
b
: a body of writings considered sacred or authoritative

So it means all the words of the Holy Bible,

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. - 2 Tim 3:16-17
 
Top