Biblical Creationism is Incorrect

Rebuttal Rebuttals- A. Intelligent Design 1.You are asking me to objectively prove that the universe is intelligently designed using a product of intelligent design (that of human design; a computer), which is a kind of circular reasoning. 2.Common sense: Although a computer cannot use it, it is the key to determining everything is intelligently designed and is "a basic ability to perceive, understand, and judge things, which is shared by ("common to") nearly all people" [1], and therefore objective. 3.May I pose a question to you? After examining the immensity of complexity within DNA, genomes, the brain, and the like, how can you deny that they were intelligently designed? 4.You seem like a very intelligent person; however, if your brain is not a product of intelligent design, by whose standard of "intelligent" is it truly knowledgeable? 5.Albert Einstein once said, "The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books - a mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects." [2] Something need to be a complicated theorem or law to be scientific; therefore, because there is design in the universe, we know that there must have been a designer! That simple. B. Richard Dawkins Quote 1.You claim that evolution, by natural selection and mutation (I assume), can produce order and design. The fact is that natural selection does not and cannot create information; it only works with already existing information. This is one of numerous problems with the theory: it cannot account for "how it all started", only for how it happened afterwards. 2.Asimov does not need a degree in neuroscience to be credible. Nonetheless, Michio Kaku agreed with him, as do most of the scientific community, "The human brain has 100 billion neurons, each neuron connected to 10 thousand other neurons. Sitting on your shoulders is the most complicated object in the known universe." [3] C. Proportions 1.Citation two does support the claim that is succeeds. Citations 5-7 are from page 44. My apologies, the author of citations 5-7 was Henry Morris III. 2.Anthropic principle: these points do not merely affirm that humans can live on earth, but are comfortable in doing so. If some of these facts did not hold true any longer, we may still be able to live, just under circumstances of extreme discomfort. Further, life could still exist on earth if some of these fluctuated, but likely would be manifested by primordial soup or bacterium---not the conscious human organism we observe today in all its specifically designed structure and order. 3.Just because there are 300 sextillion stars, does not mean that each and everyone one of them can sustain life, let alone life that as advanced as human life. 4."The earth"s orbit is not completely circular"" The chance of earth and other space objects colliding is, in actuality, very slim". [4] 5.The coccyx is an extremely important attachment for muscle, tendons, and ligaments. The appendix strengthens the human immune system [5] and provides a place for beneficial bacterium to relocate [6]. "Modern technologies such as forks, spoons and knives, has made the need for wisdom teeth nonexistent" [7], so it is plausible that we originally needed them. The Plica semilunaris aids in cleaning the eyeball and acts as a third eyelid. [8]. Finally, goose bumps retain the body"s heat that would otherwise escape [9]. 6."An omnipotent God could just remove..." I am sure He could have; but He did not. This does not in any way disprove His existence. D. DNA 1.Information cannot arise from non-information because "natural selection can only operate on the information already contained in genes"it does not produce new information" [10]. E. Morals 1.I am not talking about the morals that supposedly came about from evolution; I am talking about the innate, intuitive sense that is there from birth in every human. 2.Actually, the innate morals we have by birth align quite well with the Biblical God"s character; we know intuitively that to lie, steal, etc. are wrong. F. Jesus 1.Asking me to prove Jesus was real while ignoring the Gospel accounts is like asking you to prove evolution without the fossil record. 2.Jesus of Nazareth was the most influential person in history, and to be so would indicate that, of course, He existed. Further, His disciples" lives were changed because of His influence. 3.Our calendar"s year is based strictly off His birth. 4.The gospel accounts are historical documents. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were eyewitnesses to Jesus" life and to say that they are implausible because they are in the Bible is absurd. There is absolutely no reason to trust any other historical document any more so then the Gospel accounts. No to mention, non-Christian historians, like Josephus and Tacitus, spoke of Jesus. [11] 5.Consider the lives He changed: all twelve Disciples, Stephen, Paul, Timothy, etc. 6.You ask me why I should take the Gospels literally. I ask you "why should we not?" You do not question whether Plato or Socrates existed, most likely, but there is actually more evidence of Jesus than both of them. 7.God has actually made it obvious, if you read His word, what is to be taken literally and what is to be taken as allegory, or the like. Further, just because the Bible uses literary technique like allegory, does not negate or weaken the entire message of Scripture. [12] 2 Peter 1:20-21 says, "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." You see, the Holy Spirit has ultimate authority how passages are to be interpreted; it is the Christians job to do the best he/she can by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. In fact, most all denominations of Christianity agree with the Bible's core message, affirming that God intended us to interpret it the way we are. G. Crucifixion 1.Jesus" willingness to be brutally executed proves that either He was insane, or He what He said was true. Absolutely NO historical evidence supports that He was insane, so the only logical conclusion is that His claims have, AT THE LEAST, credibility. H. Church friend healed 1.The man himself told the congregation this story. His life has been changed as mine has all by the power of Christ. God healed him, that simple. There was no mention of "false diagnosis", so that falls. I. Should the Bible be taken literally? 1. http://www.christianbiblereference.org... J. "Simply because the Bible was not incorrect in some instances does not mean that it is correct in all instances." 1.True. However, if you seek God with your full heart, soul, mind, and strength, you will find that it has never been incorrect nor will it ever be. I hope you will cease placing your faith in the fallible words of humans, and instead in God who does not lie. __________________________________________________________________________ References--- [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://www.simpletoremember.com... [3] http://www.brainyquote.com... [4] http://www.spaceanswers.com... [5] http://www.evolutionvsgod.com... [6] http://www.livescience.com... [7] http://scienceline.org... [8] http://www.allinterview.com... [9] http://www.scientificamerican.com... [10] https://answersingenesis.org... [11] http://listverse.com... [12] http://www.christianbiblereference.org...