Re: Proof of God's existence? Why not evolution?

"SortingItOut" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Mark Earnest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > "Doug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > in reply to...
> >
> > > >> > How about God made everything, but used natural selection as his
> > > >> > tool?
> > > >>
> > > >> Ok, but why would god require natural selection?
> > > >
> > > > Just as we like to use tools to make things with, so does God.
> > > > Consider natural selection his artbrush.
> > >
> > > But why couldn't god just create all things at once.
> >
> > He did, but he stretched out the seven day creation into a continual
> > creation over billions of years.  This is possible because God does not
> > exist in time.
>
>
> I can't comprehend this at all (existing outside of time).  Could you
> elaborate a little?  Does that mean God has no memories of past events
> (even perfect memory)?  Does God not experience something like "a
> moment ago" or the predicted location of a falling object 10 seconds
> in the future?
>
>
> <snip>
>
> > >
> > > That said, your only support for your belief is your inability to
> > > comprehend how we have evolved.
> > >
> > > I will admit that even a single cell is incredibly complex, let alone
a
> > > human.
> > >
> > > But humanities inability to understand or explain certain phenomenon
has
> >  no
> > > relevance on reality.
> >
> > Yes it does.  If man can not explain it, it is likely a function of the
> > infinite, i.e. God.
>
>
> I'm afraid this is not a very solid argument.  Turn the clock back
> 5000 years and see if this rule applies consistently and reliably.
> For example, does it apply (5000 years ago) to weather phenomena, the
> cause of disease, the conception (birth) of human beings, the success
> or failure of crops, the cause and nature of comets, etc.
>
> Further, I'm not sure that there is any aspect of reality that can be
> shown to be impossible to explain by future generations of humans.
> Just because we can't explain something today doesn't mean we'll never
> be able explain it.  Do you know of a case where that's not true?
>
>
> <snip>
>
> > >
> > > Again your entire basis is your inability to comprehend the power of
> > > evolution.
> > >
> > > We can't define reality, we can only study it. All objective study and
> > > reasoning points to evolution rather then spontaneous creation.
> > >
> > > Do you even realize that you are using ignorance as support for god?
> >
> > No, I have seen what I am talking about.  I have encountered God and
> > conversed with him, and do so daily, learning from him and about him
every
> > day of my life.  That is the opposite of ignorance about God.
>
>
> This is actually a far more convincing argument for the existence of
> God than any analysis of the nature and origin of life.  Knowing for
> sure that God exists makes the issue of how he created life a rather
> trivial endeavor.  Who cares how he did it?
>
> But I'm curious about the details of these conversations with God.
> Not what is said, but how.  Rather than ask a lot of specific
> questions, I think they can be summed up into one question:  Is there
> any part of these conversations that is scientifically observable?  It
> would be so incredibly significant if the answer is 'yes'.
>
> If the answer is 'no', then can you please help me understand what you
> mean by "converse".  Every time I converse with someone, I can hear
> them or see them or see their written words and trust that there's a
> human on the other end...or something.  You know, something tangible.
> Does "converse with God" mean the same thing?  If not, why use the
> word "converse"?
>
Outside of clock time, conceivable, no? Outside of
lifetime, not, for me. Unless we're talking dreams.