• 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!

Ask a Catholic

Deeje

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
@metis see
PopeADope said:
Certain forms of evolution have been proven , and the Church recognizes this.

The idea that our ancestors were single-celled organisms or fish is not accepted by the church.
Click to expand...

Evolution was part of the discussion metis. I didn't bring it up. I merely enlarged on it. If a church supports evolution then there has to be evidence to demonstrate that the process happened gradually over time. The video I provided demonstrates that gradual changes could not have produced the thousands of biological mechanisms that living things exhibit, that all needed to be present and functioning for the organism to survive. There is no room for a slow evolutionary process otherwise the species would have died out.

Regarding the Wiki entry.....it contains Darwin's own misgivings, which have never really been addressed. If there are transitional species for all these creatures, then where are they?
 
Deeje

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
PackJason said:
I can't watch the video because I'm at work, but I'm sure it's no different than any of the other dozens of pro-intelligent design videos that I've debunked in the past.

Ask me a specific point that the video makes and I'll gladly make a counter argument.
Click to expand...

Have you really "debunked" them or just denied them?
There are too many to choose from...if you have the time, please watch the video and address the points you think are the most relevant.
I have no idea who the presenter is but his arguments are sound IMO.
 
Milton Platt

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Deidre said:
Hmmm....I thought that belief was a tenet of the Catholic faith (priests being the ones who have been given Divine authority to do this) :blush:
Click to expand...

I asked essentially the same question....do Catholics actually eat their god? That would be cannibalism....the eating of human flesh (Jesus was both god and man). I can no longer find my post.
 
Deeje

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
PackJason said:
No, bring up a specific point and I will demolish it.

... unless yer afeard.
Click to expand...
Afeared of what? The truth? Never.

OK, here's one....lets start at the beginning....

The basic unit of living things is the cell, and the basic material that makes up a cell is protein. Evolutionists acknowledge that the probability of the right atoms and molecules falling into place to form just one simple protein molecule is about 1 in 10113, or 1 followed by 113 zeros. In other words, it could take 10113 chances for the event to occur once. But any event that has one chance in 1050 is dismissed by mathematicians as never happening.

However, far more than one simple protein molecule is needed for life to occur. For a cell to maintain its functions, some 2,000 different proteins are needed. What, then, is the probability of all of these happening at random? It is estimated that it is 1 in 1040,000, or 1 followed by 40,000 zeros! Are you willing to rest your faith on such an outrageously remote probability?

Your explanation please? :)
 
Milton Platt

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Deeje said:
Afeared of what? The truth? Never.

OK, here's one....lets start at the beginning....

The basic unit of living things is the cell, and the basic material that makes up a cell is protein. Evolutionists acknowledge that the probability of the right atoms and molecules falling into place to form just one simple protein molecule is about 1 in 10113, or 1 followed by 113 zeros. In other words, it could take 10113 chances for the event to occur once. But any event that has one chance in 1050 is dismissed by mathematicians as never happening.

However, far more than one simple protein molecule is needed for life to occur. For a cell to maintain its functions, some 2,000 different proteins are needed. What, then, is the probability of all of these happening at random? It is estimated that it is 1 in 1040,000, or 1 followed by 40,000 zeros! Are you willing to rest your faith on such an outrageously remote probability?

Your explanation please? :)
Click to expand...

Please list the assumptions for your numbers and show how you determine they are anywhere near correct. It is utterly impossible to come up with a statistically valid number because you DO NOT have any way to confirm your assumptions are correct. What were the EXACT conditions on the earth at that time?

Most of these silly number games are based on the assumption that the attempted combining of said chemicals happens one at a time, one after the other over time in a linear fashion. It is entirely reasonable to assume that they were happening many hundreds of billions of times very second over several billion years. Furthermore, this could be presumed to be happening in the same way on billions of other planets as well. To have a number that is even worth considering you would have to know how common the conditions were in the entire universe, and for how long on each planet.

One chance in 1050 is dismissed as never happening? Really??? And yet people win the lottery every month with the odds being one in the tens of millions??? Buy a new math book, dude.
 
Deeje

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Milton Platt said:
Please list the assumptions for your numbers and show how you determine they are anywhere near correct. It is utterly impossible to come up with a statistically valid number because you DO NOT have any way to confirm your assumptions are correct. What were the EXACT conditions on the earth at that time?

Most of these silly number games are based on the assumption that the attempted combining of said chemicals happens one at a time, one after the other over time in a linear fashion. It is entirely reasonable to assume that they were happening many hundreds of billions of times very second over several billion years. Furthermore, this could be presumed to be happening in the same way on billions of other planets as well. To have a number that is even worth considering you would have to know how common the conditions were in the entire universe, and for how long on each planet.

One chance in 1050 is dismissed as never happening? Really??? And yet people win the lottery every month with the odds being one in the tens of millions??? Buy a new math book, dude.
Click to expand...
So here come the excuses...OK.

How about we forget the mathematics and concentrate on the design of the cell itself....

Our body is made up of about 100 trillion (100,000,000,000,000) tiny cells. The complexity of each living cell can be likened to that of a city with its many operations, such as power generation, management, transportation, and defense. In addition, the cell’s nucleus contains tens of thousands of genes in the intricately arranged DNA. It is said that our DNA contains enough information to fill an encyclopedia of 1,000 volumes. All this information constitutes a genetic blueprint and determines our skin color, hair type, stature, and countless other details of our body. If all construction blueprints require meticulous design, then who designed the complex genetic blueprint in our body?
 
Last edited:
L

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Maybe you can put all the chemicals together in the right amounts but does that make it a LIVING cell or just a bunch of chemicals lumped together?
 
Shiranui117

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
Carlita said:
Are you eating and drinking Jesus flesh and blood? (Not the Eucharist but his actual/literal flesh and blood)
Click to expand...
First, define "literal"? Literal, as in, physical human tissue and body fluid, or literal as in real?
 
U

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Shiranui117 said:
First, define "literal"? Literal, as in, physical human tissue and body fluid, or literal as in real?
Click to expand...

They are one and the same.

For example, I know my ancestors are literal here in spirit and I know, therefore, they are real.

They cant be real if I do not know (not believe, anyone can do that), but know they do not exist.

I know they exist literally so they are real.
--

So they are one and the same.

Given that is true:

Are you eating and drinking Jesus?
 
Shiranui117

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
Carlita said:
They are one and the same.

For example, I know my ancestors are literal here in spirit and I know, therefore, they are real.

They cant be real if I do not know (not believe, anyone can do that), but know they do not exist.

I know they exist literally so they are real.
--

So they are one and the same.

Given that is true:

Are you eating and drinking Jesus?
Click to expand...
Yes, I am. The Eucharist is not something you can put under a microscope and see muscle cells or skin cells or blood cells, no. But it is truly the Body and Blood of Jesus.
 
D

Deidre

Well-Known Member
Milton Platt said:
I asked essentially the same question....do Catholics actually eat their god? That would be cannibalism....the eating of human flesh (Jesus was both god and man). I can no longer find my post.
Click to expand...

LOL yes, not quite. When I followed Catholicism, it seemed to make sense. My thought about certain ''religions'' in general, is that if when you start questioning the religion, and the answers make no sense, and you can only proceed if you push those questions from your mind, then...maybe that's not the 'right' religion for you. In other words, when I practiced Catholicism, as long as I didn't dwell on certain aspects, it all seemed to make sense. 'Faith is a mystery,' but that only goes so far. I'm not knocking Catholicism, it just has too many red flags for me, anymore.
 
Milton Platt

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Deeje said:
So here come the excuses...OK.

How about we forget the mathematics and concentrate on the design of the cell itself....

Our body is made up of about 100 trillion (100,000,000,000,000) tiny cells. The complexity of each living cell can be likened to that of a city with its many operations, such as power generation, management, transportation, and defense. In addition, the cell’s nucleus contains tens of thousands of genes in the intricately arranged DNA. It is said that our DNA contains enough information to fill an encyclopedia of 1,000 volumes. All this information constitutes a genetic blueprint and determines our skin color, hair type, stature, and countless other details of our body. If all construction blueprints require meticulous design, then who designed the complex genetic blueprint in our body?
Click to expand...

So you are abandoning your first argument? Okay. That saves time. However, i was not offering excuses, I was ctiticizing your argument.

But it looks like you haven't abandoned the math. That's okay...math is a good thing.

Well, how many cells there are in the average human body is not important, in fact, there are far more in larger animals.
As to genes within a human cell, the estimate is between 20,000 and 25,000, so I guess that technically qualifies as "tens of thousands".

There is no "blueprint" in the literal sense. The information is chemical in nature. There is no plan in the sense you are implying. Matter behaves in predictable ways in nature. I do not get the encyclopedia comparison. If it can be contained chemically within a single cell, then obviously far less space is needed.

All that aside, If both abiogenesis and evolution were determined to be wrong tomorrow, that still deos not get you to god. It only gets you to "we don't know".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top