Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Gobee
Trad climber
Los Angeles
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 08:37am PT
|
Thru the Bible - Dr. J. Vernon McGee
It's the first day of going thru Hebrews!
Yeah buddy...
http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/thru_the_bible_with_jvernon_mcgee/Archives.asp
The Supremacy of God's Son
Hebrews 1:1-4, Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
|
|
Bronwyn
Trad climber
Not of This World
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 11:35am PT
|
The Second Law of Thermodynamics: Entrophy. "Entrophy is the measure of the disorder or randomness of energy and matter in a system. Entrophy always increases with time. Because of the second law of thermodynamics both energy and matter in the Universe are becoming less useful as time goes on."
Evolution states that all matter is becoming increasingly more complex and specific as time goes on.
Seems to me that there is a slight problem there. You have two laws of modern science, two supposedly fundamental laws, that completely contradict each other. You can't have both. They are in direct opposition, you have to choose one or the other...so which is it?
The Creator GOD INVENTED science...the Universe that was breathed into existence by His word, and His word alone.
If someone can logically explain to me how the phospholipid bilayer of the human cell could have "evolved", I would love to hear it. Study cellular biology...it will BLOW YOUR MIND.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 11:59am PT
|
the second law of thermodynamics applies to closed systems in thermodynamic equilibrium
as you know thermodynamics simplifies the kinetic motion of 10^30 atoms into single averaged quantities like temperature and entropy
there can be local equilibrium, and there can be local non-equilibrium and the overall global system is still in equilibrium
there are non-equilibrium processes that can take place also, and systems for which more than the apparent kinetic equilibrium (e.g. chemical reactions) change the apparent equilibrium away from just the kinetic equilibrium, crystalization is a form of something being ordered out of non-order
in short, the existence of life does not violate any of the laws of thermodynamics, and in many ways are governed by those very same laws.
also, evolution does not state that there is an increasing order...
|
|
Bronwyn
Trad climber
Not of This World
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 12:03pm PT
|
PS: Go look up the molecular structure of the laminin protein. It is a protein molecule that binds structures together. Laminin is a molecule that literally holds our bodies together. It is on Snopes. com, and other sites as well. It is a binding protein (part of what is sometimes termed the "basement membrane") that holds things together.
For those of you who may not have the time/inclination, the laminin protein molecule is formed in the shape of a CROSS. That is the scientific, structural arrangement of the protein, just as all proteins (and sugars, etc) have a unique structure that can be diagrammed. (As we all learned WAAAY back in biology!)
Colossians 1: 17 "He (Jesus) is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." It is the CROSS of Jesus Christ that holds it all together!!!
If you dig deeply enough, and don't accept at face value the status quo spin of much of "modern science" (which also has an agenda) you will learn that God IS the God of science.
I appreciate everyone's insights here, as well. It makes me realize how much miscommunication there is between those of who believe and those who don't, and how much we have done wrong in trying to communicate the Gospel. I think most of us just want to share Christ because we love Him and are excited about Him, and when you are excited about anything (such as a new route, new area) you want to SHARE it with others. It really is that simple. It is the sin and frailty of humans that has mucked it up.
PPS: I used to be an agnostic, then (some other things!) who made fun of Christians and Christianity. Just so you know. :)
|
|
Bronwyn
Trad climber
Not of This World
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 12:15pm PT
|
Ed, everything I have ever read or learned about evolution does state that the theory rest on the premise that species are changing in specific ways to adapt more specifically to their environment. Are you saying that man is not more complex than apes? The entire foundation of evolution theory is that man evolved from apes to a more complex life form, with more refined motor skills and a more complex nervous system. With a more fully developed consciousness. How can you state that man is not more complex than the life form we supposedly evolved from?
And since energy governs matter, I still think you've got a problem with the second law.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 12:19pm PT
|
Dr F -- "You do want to know the truth don't you"
LOL Hahaha
This proves right there that God exists Dr. God
You can not eliminate him.
Just look at your last preaching post above.
You are now taking the role of God, as an imitator.
|
|
Bronwyn
Trad climber
Not of This World
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 12:23pm PT
|
Dr. F., I DO know the truth. As I stated, I used to use all the same arguements you are now using, and I thought Christians were just a bunch of idiots who didn't know any better, etc., etc., all the same things you are now saying. I was very bitter against God, the organized church, and Christians in general.
God showed me the truth...I did not "discover" it. The only way to know the truth is to ask God to show it to you. What have you got to lose by asking Him, sincerely, as a seeker?
Scientists have their own agenda as well. Think about all the billions of grant money they get to pursue their agenda. You think they want to lose that source of revenue?
I appreciate your questioning things, just as I once did. It is only by asking questions that we learn the Truth. And the Truth really does set you free, in so many ways. Ways that I never could have foreseen.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 12:35pm PT
|
Even if you put all the atoms of every organism that ever lived together it would be an extremely tiny portion of the 10^30 atoms in the universe. So the complexity of this tiny subset hardly impacts the overall complexity.
This is like the global warming denier that notes that 'it sure has been cold around here, global warming must be a lie'
There is plenty of energy in the system to drive complexity into a small portion of the universe.
If we are not out of here before our sun supernovas, we'll be gone as well, our infinitesimal blip of complexity in the history of the universe will be cut even shorter.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 12:43pm PT
|
if you are going to make a precise statement then you must define what you mean precisely.
The idea that "man is the crown of creation" is really a 19th century concept.
No, man is not more "complex" an organism than an ape, or even bacteria. Don't forget that bacteria probably represent the largest, most diverse class of life on the planet.
Evolution is a statement of adaptation to environment, not about complexity, and in many ways it is a statement of equilibrium within the environment. It is the ultimate application of scientific method with a twist... if a particular structure does not survive, it is eliminated.
Interestingly, on the business pages of the NYTimes this week, was the announcement that company DeCode filed for bankruptcy. The company made headlines in the past using the people of Iceland as a way of detecting disease-causing genetic mutations.
To quote the article:
Whatever business errors deCode may have made, a principal reason for its downfall is scientific — the genetic nature of human disease has turned out to be far more complex than thought.
Many researchers expected that just a handful of genetic mutations would explain most cases of any given major disease. But the mutations that deCode and others detected in each disease turned out to account for a small fraction of the overall incidence. Natural selection seems to be much more efficient than expected at ridding the population of dangerous genes, even of those that act well after the age of reproduction. That leaves thousands of different mutations, each very rare in the population, as the probable culprit. And because most of the mutations are rare, they are extremely hard to find.
emphases added by me...
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 01:00pm PT
|
The seat of the soul is within the heart.
Watch .... whenever anyone says "I" and uses their hand as a gesture it always points towards the heart/chest.
When someone says I'm an idiot and uses their hand as a gesture they point to the head.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 01:01pm PT
|
Conceptual Entropy, Second Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. easy to understand):
Let's say you build a small pyramid in your backyard out of fluvial cobblestones. It is perfect: high order, higher state of energy in the form of PE. You leave it alone for a very long time. Over time without further energy input, you will notice it will fall down on its own accord, gravity, wind, weathering, earthquakes etc. It will go from a higher order of energy state PE to KE to eventually ground level, a lower order or state of energy, PE = 0 J. This is Entropy.
Where did the energy go? Back to the Universe. Does this violate the First Law of Thermodynamics? No, the overall balance of Energy in the Universe is still the same, just in a state of less usuable form.
So how do "things" and life overcome Entropy? Energy must be continually added in through Work performed. How do we overcome Entropy? We breath, we eat, we drink, we love, we believe in God, we worship God etc. We continually take in Energy. Bold = Not discussed in any science class ever.
How quickly would the process of Entropy start to occur if we stopped breathing and bringing in energy? Within just a few minutes.
As I said before, I'm a Theistic Evolutionist. God began it all and has continued to be involved with his creation at key moments and to continually make adjustments according to his will. Does evolution occur? Yes. We can see evolution happen even within our lifetimes here on Earth, through bacteria and viruses etc. mutating quickly, changing and becoming more resistant to drugs etc. Life forms do change and evolve, they adapt. Does it occur exactly as the theory of Evolution describes in modern biological science today, that is completely Godless? Probably not. It doesn't allow for God's input or his further involvement.
And like I said before, if UFOs and ET are a real phenomenon, and they are, then the theory of Evolution as taught today will have a major revamp when disclosure occurs. Modern Evolution assumes we are alone and that we have always been alone. Not true.
Now I can teach classic modern God-less Evolution just like any good Earth Scientist or biologist has too in school today, and I do, and I do a good job doing so. After hours and on my own time if you ask me do I believe it as it is taught, I would have to say no I do not. Many aspects are correct, but the entire theory is not correct. It leaves out GOD and it leaves out any other influence on modern man from any other intellectual living life form's influence and manipulation throughout our history.
To completely believe all aspects of Modern Evolution Theory as taught and studied today, you have to believe that The Merriam-Webster Dictionary would randomly occur in its finished form from the explosion of a printing press. What are the odds of that happening? Yea, a few words would randomly occur, but the entire finished dictionary? No way. Impossible.
By the way, the analogy of the Dictionary would = the smallest, simplest microbial life form that life evolved from. I remember my first Biology Professor whom I became good friends with and we became good climbing partners, we climbed in the US and in Europe together, said many times to me, "The simplest life form is far more complex than the largest non-living matter or object that you can imagine." And he is a stern Evolutionist.
Yep, so true.
|
|
Homer
Mountain climber
Santa Cruz, CA
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 01:02pm PT
|
Do we know that there's a distinction between knowing and believing, or is that just something that we believe? Do we know that we can tell the difference, or do we believe that we can? It seems like the answer to that lies in the amount of information that we have, and do we believe that we have all the information to answer that? It seems that some people believe that they do have all the information, and some believe that they don't. I think that a rational proof of either of those is going to take a lot of posts.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 01:17pm PT
|
Wow Klimmer, you teach science but don't understand it. As evident in your post above.
If believe God has a hand in ongoing evolution why don't you design an experiment to test that hypothesis. If you can do that and get a result that supports your hypothesis you will win a nobel prize and forever change our scientfic understanding of the universe.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 01:19pm PT
|
No Skip, that's still a belief.
For many people eating a good breakfast is more important than a positive affirmation.
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 01:21pm PT
|
Homer,
As EdH has pointed out, the distinction is between which hypotheses you can test and those which you can't, and those which survive testing and gain wide acceptance in the scientific community which makes it their business to specialize in that particular branch of skepticism.
It doesn't really matter what you think you know or what you believe if you can't demonstrate to a skeptic evidence to back up your statement.
But that is only the final step. People seem to pluck great ideas out of the ether. Henry Adams back in the early 1800s saw a fossilized fish and immediately realized it was approximately as complex as human beings. I don't think he had and special training or knowledge, just a good mind.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 01:25pm PT
|
It doesn't really matter what you think you know or what you believe if you can't demonstrate to a skeptic evidence to back up your statement.
Yes, exactly.
Otherwise blind faith, and robots .....
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 01:39pm PT
|
I wonder.
If those who "believe" in a god were sudddenly to say, "How might I test the hypothesis that there is a god?", what would change?
There isn't an obvious answer. There would not be an immediate effect. Our ideas for physical nature have been continually evolving and getting more accurate since long before the birth of christ and the end of polytheism. It takes time. If there is no way to test for the existence of a deity the search would take forever.
So the reluctance to "test" does not spring from fear of the consequences. From what is known now, there will be no proof deities do not "exist."
From whence comes the simple aversion to inquiry?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 01:49pm PT
|
From being cheated.
The amount of cheaters is astronomical.
Thus:
In the Western world, theologians have been unable to scientifically present the laws of God or, indeed, God Himself, and thus in Western intellectual history a rigid dichotomy has arisen between theology and science. In an attempt to resolve this conflict, some theologians have agreed to modify their doctrines so that they conform not only to proven scientific facts but even to pseudoscientific speculations and hypotheses, which, though unproven, are hypocritically included within the realm of "science." On the other hand, some fanatical theologians disregard the scientific method altogether and insist on the veracity of their antiquated, sectarian dogmas.
Thus bereft of systematic theology, material science has moved into the destructive realm of gross materialism, while speculative Western philosophy has drifted into the superficiality of relativistic ethics and inconclusive linguistic analysis. With so many of the best Western minds dedicated to materialistic analysis, naturally much of Western religious life, separated from the intellectual mainstream, is dominated by irrational fanaticism and unauthorized mystic and mystery cults.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Nov 20, 2009 - 02:01pm PT
|
Picking up from Werner:
The period of human history that was the most intellectually productive was that of classical Greece prior to the end of polytheism, as best I can tell. Today we seem even to have lost their art for logical inquiry.
Does Werner's very real schism date from the time of christ?
It took easily 1000 years for us to regain the freedom to inquire. Witness what Galileo went through and is still going through even unto today.
It is real. It is there, should we choose to look at it.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!