Quote Originally Posted by bu villain View Post
Maybe I am misunderstanding you but it seems you are saying rules/order = conscious design? Along the lines of:

(a) There can be no order without design
(b) There is order in the universe
(c) Therefore the universe is designed

I would argue that if this is your logic, (a) is not proveable and thus can not be used as a basis for proving existence of a God. If I am misinterpreting you then please let me know.

Additionally, I'd be interested to hear why you think humans prove that natural selection is false but maybe that has to be another thread.
a) I am saying that order is evidence of design. Not absolute proof. I don't believe things can be proven, but I do believe that evidence can be provided in order to present a logical conclusion. Much like in a courtroom.

In a courtroom the evidence for the life of Christ is actually pretty astounding. For instance, it is very interesting that with such "ridiculous" accounts given to speak of Christ, through eyewitness testimony (the Gospels) I have yet to see one writer of that period come forth to say that this was ridiculous. Even tertullian, wrote of the massive eclipse and the earthquake that shook the world at the time of Christs death, and he was not a follower of Christ.

b) The rules of our universe provide order. Not ducks in a single file line, but identifiable order. For instance, we can identify a galaxy, we can identify gravity, light, etc etc because these things follow properties of order and do not function outside of them. If the observations of such things were not ordered we could not identify them and study them in the manner in which we do...relying on the observations and testimony of previous observers to direct our own and to aid in hypothesizing.

c) This and other things give EVIDENCE of a consciousness directing our universe. Not just because of their existence, but also because logically and philosophically, some of the things in our universe can not be given an origin in the theories we have for creation of our universe.


I was a biology major in college for a while. One of the things that I have a problem with is the idea of survival.

If life on our planet responds to the natural selection process then we need to be able to account for the emotional attachment as demonstrated by the human species.

For instance. If our goals are to pass along our own DNA, then why is it our that our morality defines things like infidelity, murder, stealing etc wrong. These are all actions that promote the survival of the species and if we are acting against them, and we are, we are demonstrating that this evolutionary process is not really guiding our actions. If this is the case then what is?

Then we look at the chromosomes in our DNA. If these are developing then we should be able to identify them in lesser value. For instance if we started off with a single chromosome, then what was its function, then what was the function of two, then 3, then four, etc. Biology does not give into account this problem, instead we postulate based on leaps in a very very broken evolutionary chain. In fact, I think that as I studied evolution, I had more problems with the missing components than anything else. We filled those missing components with non evidential hypothesis' and they became the rule of thought without evidence to support them. For that reason, (lack of solid evidence) evolution (natural selection, darwinian) remains only a theory which has yet to be proven, but has been marketed as fact.

then we come to the demonstrations as stated by lab professors. Every one of these, that I have seen have been catalyzed by some process. If we have to add a catalyst, then how is it natural. We are not demonstrating nature if we have to add in some sort of protein or we have to manipulate the cell to cause change.

This is the extremely watered down version. But yes this would probably need to be another conversation.

and again, I don't think anything can be proven, yet I do have evidence that leads me to believe that a reasonable conclusion to our universe is a conscious creator. And the evidence for one, is much stronger than the evidence against one. Now my christian faith is based on that evidence as well as the evidence that I feel makes a very strong case for the person of Christ.