Creation

I must correct my statement in which I previously addressed my opponent's round 1, I meant to say his round 2 response. I will now first address my opponents round 2 response and then his round 3 response. I suppose I will provide some more evidence of creation if space permits. Round 2 Response: You say, "Why would it take him six days to create everything? Wouldn't it take him only a moment or two? And why would he rest on the seventh day, or any day in fact? Is his strength not unlimited?" Answers: God could have created in six microseconds, but the Bible, in Genesis 1, is presenting what God did, not surmising about what He "could have done." His six day creation work and Sabbath rest are for His people (Exodus 6:10-11), our 7 day week is derived from God's creation week. He does not need to "rest," the text implies simply that He ceased from His work of creation. Yes, His strength is unlimited (Revelation 1:8, Colossians 1:16-17, Hebrews 1:3, Isaiah 26:4). You say, "We do not need a creator to exist. The evidence for Evolution is efficient enough." The law of biogenesis (http://creation.com...) and the laws of information science entail that life requires an intelligent life force for biological life to exist (http://www.debate.org...). You say, ". . .why did dinosaurs and humans not coexist instead of living millions and millions of years away from each other, which they actually did." What evidence do you propose that shows dinosaurs indeed lived millions of years before humans? Dinosaurs coexisted with man, these were the dragons, monsters, thunderbirds, and behemoths of times past (http://creation.com...). Extant dinosaur tissues seem to indicate very strongly a more recent existence (http://creation.com...). Also your cartoon is not biblical, dinosaurs would have been on board the ark along with the rest of the then extant animal species. You say, "If God were truly always there, then how did he originate? Did he make himself? Did he have another creator? This is the ultimate paradox. Whatever my opponent believes, I insist that if ANYTHING is impossible, it is that a being has ALWAYS existed." God did not originate from anything/anywhere/anytime. He is the eternal Father whose going forth has been from everlasting times (Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah 45:17, Jeremiah 10:10, Habakkuk 1:12). This is not a paradox, the fact that you can't wrap your brain around the everlasting existence of God does not disprove it. Most people cannot wrap there brain around E^2=M^2C^4+(PC)^2 but this does not make it impossible. Your "arguments" here are moot. You say, "The Universe does not need a Creator. The evidence of Evolution (fossils, DNA, etc.) is sufficient enough. For now, I made a strong case against Creation. If my opponent requests me to, I will provide plenty of Evolution evidence." You have made no case against creation and I will respond to your proposed evidence of your round three arguments. You say, "The Bible is an unreliable source." Based on what? The Bible is an entirely accurate source, prophetically, historically, scientifically, philosophically, theologically, and practically. You say, "Logically speaking, Creation does not make sense. However, Evolution is supported by scientific facts, unlike Creation. " How so? You should study creation science more. Evolution is supported by people not facts. You say, "Complexity doesn't suggest Creation. Complex things such as DNA and consciousness had to evolve. They could not have been created." I think an argument can be made that bio-complexity "suggests" creation, but it does not ultimately prove it. To say they had to evolve though, I think is statement made out of ignorance. How did DNA and consciousness HAVE to evolve? Of course they could have been created, don't be so na"ve. You say, "Christians simply assume the Bible is the truth. However, there isn't enough evidence, excluding the Bible itself, that will support the claims in it." Some Christians might assume things about the Bible, but the Bible itself says to prove all things (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Many Christians prove (test) the Bible historically, scientifically, etc. and then as the verse I just gave says, they hold fast to that which is good (true). There is plenty of evidence, I'm sorry you seem to be unaware of it all. I suggest you check out creation.com for starters to see some evidence for creation, every scientific claim they make is backed up by references and can (and should) be scrutinized. You say, "People believe in God simply because they were raised to do so. Now, what if they had not been raised to believe in God and had been raised to think scientifically? They would have been disgusted when hearing the notion of an all-powerful God creating everything. Even my opponent would be horrified by that if he were not raised a Christian." Your assumptions about be here are disconcerting. I would not assume that simply because you believe in evolution that you were a misotheist like Richard Dawkins. You should not assume things about your opponent. I was not raised Christian by the way. I came to know Christ as my Savior when I was 18, before then I was living a life against Him. In American society I was raised to think selfishly not scientifically. America is not scientifically minded, it is, as a whole, hedonistic. I began thinking scientifically after I became a Christian so your statement is moot. Disgusted? I am disgusted when I here professors teaching their students that they arose from pond scum millions of years ago and have developed through the animal kingdom to become what they are today. The truth of our Creator God who gave His own life (1 John 3:16) for us out of His great love toward man is just the opposite, it is beautiful. People all over the world are depressed, empty inside, lonely and feel unloved because they are unaware of the Creator God who loves and cares for them so much. They need to seek God, and God has promised that they will find Him, and those who come to Him will in wise be turned away (John 6:37). You say, "God cannot exist. Before the Universe, there was no time, thus there was no time for God to have existed. Once the Big Bang occured, time was set in motion. The Universe does not need a Creator. It can be explained with science." No honest scientist would say God cannot exist, that is just ridiculous. Time is relative (i.e. Einstein's theory of relativity). We only have time because God set it in motion. God is outside of time. The "Big Bang" is a model riddled with problems, people choose to believe in it because they refuse to acknowledge their Creator. How can the origin of the universe be explained with science? Were we there at its beginning? Of course not, all we can do is make observations and guess about the origins of the universe. Genesis 1 was given by God so that you may know where you come from. You say, "When you really think about it, if God were real, he would be a horrible role model. He would send people to hell simply because they did not believe in him. What happens to the people that were raised to believe in a different God? What if the evidence lead people to believe something different? Can God blame those people?" People go to hell because they reject the one true, living God. To reject God is to reject life, as all life comes from Him. People who believe things without seeking out the truth are without excuse because God gives every man the ability to come to Him for the forgiveness of sins. If, hypothetically, a person truly had no idea about the true God and never was given the opportunity to make a decision for Him, then because God is just, He would not condemn Him (Genesis 18:25). Babies and young children do not go to hell because they are not of the age of accountability wherein they are able to make a coherent decision for or against the one true God. I'm running out of space so maybe I'll answer the rest of you round 2 arguments in the next round. Round 3 Response: Your source does not provide any evidence for Neo-Darwinian evolution (tree of life/macroevolution). Homologous structures are only evidence for evolution within the framework of the evolution model. They are just as much evidence for a common designer, so homology is a poor evidence for both models. There is no proof that cells have ancestors, evolutionists presuppose this, they weren't there when this supposedly took place, it must be inferred. The only circumstance in which cells could be produced is by intelligent design. No known chemical process can put together amino acids in the intricate way they are found in cells. I challenge you to provide evidence of abiogenesis. The reason the law of biogenesis can still be effectively maintained as a law is because no exception has been observed. Until an exception is observed, it remains a scientific law. Life comes from life as far as we know, and that tells us, logically, that life had to be specially created (or intelligently designed). God finished creating on day 6 of creation week. This does not mean speciation and natural selection cannot take place. God has given animals a versatile genome and the ability to adapt to new environment (such as the post-Flood environment). You should check out this article (http://creation.com...). Informed creationists do not deny the fact of speciation, adaptation, natural selection, etc., what we disagree with is the idea of macro changes which require the introduction of new information. Where does the genetic information come from that allows, for instance, a dinosaur (over time) to develop wings, feathers, etc. This simply is not possible. And mutations do not help (http://www.debate.org...) You have given no evidence that cells have evolved. Please reread my arguments of irreducible complexity, you have not answered them.