If God is all powerful, ...

[onefour1]

If God is all powerful, all knowing, and an all loving God, then why didn't he create us to be perfect?

If God is all powerful and can do all things, surely he would be able to create a perfect being who has all power, all knowledge, and is a perfectly loving being. To say that he cannot create such a being is to admit that God is not all powerful.

If God is all knowing surely he has the knowledge to create a perfect being and to give that perfect being a perfect knowledge.

If God is an all loving being who loves his creations then he would surely want the best for his creations. He would want his creations to be perfect. Thus he would create us to be perfect. Even in a world or universe where free will exists, if God created us to be perfect, then we with our perfect knowledge could surely reason out that we should choose good over evil always and never make a bad decision. We would be created with a heart filled with love for our fellow beings and our own creations. God would spare us the evil we experience in this world as we would have started out from creation as perfect beings never to commit any act that is contrary to what is right and good.

So why didn't God simply create us to be perfect?

The Adam and Eve story explains this.

How so?

 

[Frannie]

Yes DNA wrote itself, its evolved from 1 cell organisms.

When computer operating systems grow in ponds, not before

PS. Can you explain how DNA is the result of one celled organisms that can not exist without DNA? Presumably you do know that the smallest one celled organisms have hundreds of thousands of lines of DNA that can be in only one position for the cell to form, but that the cell only forms from another cell anyway.

Nope you can't demonstrate any of this, but have fun dying trying

.

PS. Can you explain how DNA is the result of one celled organisms that can not exist without DNA? Presumably you do know that the smallest one celled organisms have hundreds of thousands of lines of DNA that can be in only one position for the cell to form, but that the cell only forms from another cell anyway.

fragments within the pond and their affinity joined them together in time to form a single unit.

- the chemical print formed in the pond separately as the same for the metaphysical components, membrane etc. simultaneously combining in unison to create the first cell.

DNA is a complicated code, you don't just need fragments, you must have all the fragments in the right place. That said if what you say did happen there is also no way for the fragments to make themselves smarter, stronger, better suited to the environment as is happening with humans. Sure evolution does this but how would random fragments joining know that they needed to evolve.

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Because God programed them that way

.

DNA is a complicated code, you don't just need fragments, you must have all the fragments in the right place. That said if what you say did happen there is also no way for the fragments to make themselves smarter, stronger, better suited to the environment as is happening with humans. Sure evolution does this but how would random fragments joining know that they needed to evolve.

but how would random fragments joining know that they needed to evolve ...needed to evolve.

but how would random fragments joining know that they needed to evolve ...

they would first

Yes DNA wrote itself, its evolved from 1 cell organisms.

When computer operating systems grow in ponds, not before

PS. Can you explain how DNA is the result of one celled organisms that can not exist without DNA? Presumably you do know that the smallest one celled organisms have hundreds of thousands of lines of DNA that can be in only one position for the cell to form, but that the cell only forms from another cell anyway.

Nope you can't demonstrate any of this, but have fun dying trying

.

PS. Can you explain how DNA is the result of one celled organisms that can not exist without DNA? Presumably you do know that the smallest one celled organisms have hundreds of thousands of lines of DNA that can be in only one position for the cell to form, but that the cell only forms from another cell anyway.

fragments within the pond and their affinity joined them together in time to form a single unit.

- the chemical print formed in the pond separately as the same for the metaphysical components, membrane etc. simultaneously combining in unison to create the first cell.

DNA is a complicated code, you don't just need fragments, you must have all the fragments in the right place. That said if what you say did happen there is also no way for the fragments to make themselves smarter, stronger, better suited to the environment as is happening with humans. Sure evolution does this but how would random fragments joining know that they needed to evolve.

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Because God programed them that way

.

DNA is a complicated code, you don't just need fragments, you must have all the fragments in the right place. That said if what you say did happen there is also no way for the fragments to make themselves smarter, stronger, better suited to the environment as is happening with humans. Sure evolution does this but how would random fragments joining know that they needed to evolve.

but how would random fragments joining know that they needed to evolve.

after joining together, evolving would be the obvious next step ...

Because God programed them that way

Randomness can never proceede in any particular direction. Randomness is random, thus evolution can not be a random process

 

[Penelope]

Yes DNA wrote itself, its evolved from 1 cell organisms.

When computer operating systems grow in ponds, not before

PS. Can you explain how DNA is the result of one celled organisms that can not exist without DNA? Presumably you do know that the smallest one celled organisms have hundreds of thousands of lines of DNA that can be in only one position for the cell to form, but that the cell only forms from another cell anyway.

Nope you can't demonstrate any of this, but have fun dying trying

No, look it up. The OP question is

If God is all powerful, all knowing, and an all loving God, then why didn't he create us to be perfect?

My answer is : because God does not exist.

What is your answer:

I never once said that God is all powerful, all knowing, and an all loving God, then why didn't he create us to be perfect.

What I did say is that DNA did not write itself in Darwin's warm little pond with all sorts magical elements that have always wanted to write code and that an intelligent being able to direct elements to assemble themselves into living beings by the most complicated and memory dense hard drive that also assembles the working computer was needed.

Ya know by the time this is over you are going to be fully shrink wrapped, you might even be breathing thru a straw.

But I like you because you are fun.

A little warm pond like a cell!
Charles Darwin was reluctant to publish his views on life's origin. His only speculations on the subject are known from a private letter to his friend and colleague Joseph Hooker, in which he speaks of a 'warm little pond' in which the first molecules of life could have formed.

A new and controversial study suggests Darwin's stab in the dark hit close to truth. In the article that was published earlier this week, researchers claim that the first cells evolved in volcanic pools. This new hypothesis brings the origin of life debate back from the depths of the oceans to the surface of the earth - other scientists believe hydrothermal vents in the deep sea are the most conducive environments for nascent life.

The researchers, led by Armen Mulkidjanian, presume that the chemistry of modern cells mirror the original environment in which life first evolved. Since oceans and cells are chemically dissimilar, they think it is unlikely life evolved there. The chemical nature of volcanic pools, or 'warm little ponds', resembles the cell's composition of its cytoplasm much more closely.
snip
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
Did life evolve in a `warm little pond'?

Look dopey the simple fact that you forgot is that Darwin's pond was imaginary. As in he made up what was in it, but hey the electricity worked for Victor Frankenstein. Darwin never once even imagined DNA, but hey you need a God and Darwin is it.

LOL you have just become clueless, like everyone who stays in my game long enough.

But hey you found proof on the internet of Darwin's pond

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

You can believe all you want in God, Jesus is it? I do not. I believe in evolution without a coder. We are not computers with someone coding us, if so, there would be no free will and free thinking.

 

[Frannie]

When computer operating systems grow in ponds, not before

PS. Can you explain how DNA is the result of one celled organisms that can not exist without DNA? Presumably you do know that the smallest one celled organisms have hundreds of thousands of lines of DNA that can be in only one position for the cell to form, but that the cell only forms from another cell anyway.

Nope you can't demonstrate any of this, but have fun dying trying

No, look it up. The OP question is

If God is all powerful, all knowing, and an all loving God, then why didn't he create us to be perfect?

My answer is : because God does not exist.

What is your answer:

I never once said that God is all powerful, all knowing, and an all loving God, then why didn't he create us to be perfect.

What I did say is that DNA did not write itself in Darwin's warm little pond with all sorts magical elements that have always wanted to write code and that an intelligent being able to direct elements to assemble themselves into living beings by the most complicated and memory dense hard drive that also assembles the working computer was needed.

Ya know by the time this is over you are going to be fully shrink wrapped, you might even be breathing thru a straw.

But I like you because you are fun.

A little warm pond like a cell!
Charles Darwin was reluctant to publish his views on life's origin. His only speculations on the subject are known from a private letter to his friend and colleague Joseph Hooker, in which he speaks of a 'warm little pond' in which the first molecules of life could have formed.

A new and controversial study suggests Darwin's stab in the dark hit close to truth. In the article that was published earlier this week, researchers claim that the first cells evolved in volcanic pools. This new hypothesis brings the origin of life debate back from the depths of the oceans to the surface of the earth - other scientists believe hydrothermal vents in the deep sea are the most conducive environments for nascent life.

The researchers, led by Armen Mulkidjanian, presume that the chemistry of modern cells mirror the original environment in which life first evolved. Since oceans and cells are chemically dissimilar, they think it is unlikely life evolved there. The chemical nature of volcanic pools, or 'warm little ponds', resembles the cell's composition of its cytoplasm much more closely.
snip
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
Did life evolve in a `warm little pond'?

Look dopey the simple fact that you forgot is that Darwin's pond was imaginary. As in he made up what was in it, but hey the electricity worked for Victor Frankenstein. Darwin never once even imagined DNA, but hey you need a God and Darwin is it.

LOL you have just become clueless, like everyone who stays in my game long enough.

But hey you found proof on the internet of Darwin's pond

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

You can believe all you want in God, Jesus is it? I do not. I believe in evolution without a coder. We are not computers with someone coding us, if so, there would be no free will and free thinking.

I believe in science not in God as many do. Science shows that complicated codes do not form themselves. Non living molecules form molecular bonds according to charge, DNA does not bond this way and all scientific experiments to show that life is random have failed miserably. There is no way that a random program could go in one direction as evolution does, if evolution were random your mother could have birthed an amoeba but she didn't she birthed an individual more intelligent than her, this is not randomness. You believe in a false God named Darwin

 

[Taz]

If we were perfect, we'd just choose good.

But isn't good what god wants us to choose? And if so, evil is unnecessary.

There's no choice if there's no evil, and choice is meaningless if there's only one. The point is choice, hence agency, otherwise he has only created drones. This is not complicated.

There's no choice if only one pick is valid and the other pick condemns you to a lake of fire for eternity. This is not complicated.

It's not that only one is valid, it's that people only consider one desirable. That doesn't stop you, so how can you claim there's only one choice? You prove he has given you agency in absolutely everything you do.

It's your decision to bathe in the lake of fire or not. If he had created everyone perfect, they would not be able to choose the lake of fire if they wanted to be separated for eternity.

Just because you refuse to acknowledge the existence of a choice, does not mean that one does not exist.

Saying you have 2 choices, get killed or not get killed, isn't a real choice. Because you really only have one way to pick.

But that's god for you, a massive douchebag with bullshit "choices".

 

[Penelope]

No, look it up. The OP question is
My answer is : because God does not exist.

What is your answer:

I never once said that God is all powerful, all knowing, and an all loving God, then why didn't he create us to be perfect.

What I did say is that DNA did not write itself in Darwin's warm little pond with all sorts magical elements that have always wanted to write code and that an intelligent being able to direct elements to assemble themselves into living beings by the most complicated and memory dense hard drive that also assembles the working computer was needed.

Ya know by the time this is over you are going to be fully shrink wrapped, you might even be breathing thru a straw.

But I like you because you are fun.

A little warm pond like a cell!
Charles Darwin was reluctant to publish his views on life's origin. His only speculations on the subject are known from a private letter to his friend and colleague Joseph Hooker, in which he speaks of a 'warm little pond' in which the first molecules of life could have formed.

A new and controversial study suggests Darwin's stab in the dark hit close to truth. In the article that was published earlier this week, researchers claim that the first cells evolved in volcanic pools. This new hypothesis brings the origin of life debate back from the depths of the oceans to the surface of the earth - other scientists believe hydrothermal vents in the deep sea are the most conducive environments for nascent life.

The researchers, led by Armen Mulkidjanian, presume that the chemistry of modern cells mirror the original environment in which life first evolved. Since oceans and cells are chemically dissimilar, they think it is unlikely life evolved there. The chemical nature of volcanic pools, or 'warm little ponds', resembles the cell's composition of its cytoplasm much more closely.
snip
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
Did life evolve in a `warm little pond'?

Look dopey the simple fact that you forgot is that Darwin's pond was imaginary. As in he made up what was in it, but hey the electricity worked for Victor Frankenstein. Darwin never once even imagined DNA, but hey you need a God and Darwin is it.

LOL you have just become clueless, like everyone who stays in my game long enough.

But hey you found proof on the internet of Darwin's pond

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

You can believe all you want in God, Jesus is it? I do not. I believe in evolution without a coder. We are not computers with someone coding us, if so, there would be no free will and free thinking.

I believe in science not in God as many do. Science shows that complicated codes do not form themselves. Non living molecules form molecular bonds according to charge, DNA does not bond this way and all scientific experiments to show that life is random have failed miserably. There is no way that a random program could go in one direction as evolution does, if evolution were random your mother could have birthed an amoeba but she didn't she birthed an individual more intelligent than her, this is not randomness. You believe in a false God named Darwin

I believe DNA evolved from a unicellular organism and didn't need a master coder. Good you believe in Science and not God, as God is not needed.

 

[ding]

I do not accept god created the universe whatever you imagine god to be. Why don't you admit you are agnostic and don't know anything about who created the universe, instead you take the easy road out and believe in God, which God? The Jewish God, the Christian God , the Muslim God, etc. Which God do you believe in?

1. I have never said that I believe that God created the Universe...…………
2. I am a Christian and Jesus is with me, always, unless Jesus is busy and he ask his Father to hang with me.
3. No human, of any religion or atheist knows where the Universe came from or even what it is.
4. DNA is a complicated code that did not form itself in Darwin's mythical pond out of nothing because nothing decided to write complicated matter assembling code. Thus God is a scientific need, unless you believe that nothing decided to write complicated matter assembling code.
5. Nothing does not have the ability to write...………………….Prove otherwise

PS. The densest hard drive material known to man is DNA. It was created by a master creator and there is nothing you can do about it. Have fun trying

A DNA Hard Drive Has Been Built That Can Store Data For 1 MILLION Years

Your future DNA hard drive will use enzymes - SynBioBeta

Why don't you believe God created the universe?

Is it your belief that the universe just happened to exist and God took advantage of it?

Because believing anything about the creation of the universe when nothing is known about this is irrational. One may entertain theories but as said belief is irrational

Tons of things are known about the origin of the universe.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, the creation of the universe and everything in it from nothing and the evolution of space and time from cosmic evolution through the evolution of consciousness.

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation and describes that the universe was created in steps or stage or phases. Scientific evidence tells us that the universe started out as subatomic particles and very quickly formed hydrogen and helium. This is called cosmic evolution. The hydrogen and helium formed stellar structures such as galaxies. This is called stellar evolution. The supernovas of stars created all of the elements and compounds that we see through fusion. This is called chemical evolution. All of these stages or phases had to occur before inanimate matter could make the leap to life. An event we still do not fully understand although the best understanding is that it can only occur in hot, wet conditions with an atmosphere rich in certain chemical compounds. Even with these condition being present we do not know how these chemical compounds could fold themselves in just the correct sequence to create life capable of replicating itself. The amount of information required for life to replicate is staggering. But however life made this leap we know it had to begin from a single celled organism and evolved into evermore increasing complex life forms up to the point that beings that know and create eventually arose.

Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis tells us that space and time had a beginning, that it was created in steps and that life came from inanimate matter.

Dude you can not say that Genesis is allegory (fiction) then use it as fact

Unless

https://www.abilifymaintena.com/sch...lone&msclkid=22d412f2cb341405b07d4fcf1e18e2db

The account of Genesis is an allegorical account of creation. The science that proves the universe had a beginning and that man arose from the creation, isn't allegorical.

 

[RodISHI]

God did create the Son to be perfect. Flesh/son of Man is merely a container that holds both the good and the what we consider to be the bad. It is a cocoon in a sense that contains the Man (male and female types both) that will be eventually birthed into the fullness of what it was originally intended and purposed for. When a child is in the womb it is nourished inside the womb. Humans of flesh are in essence a container for the spiritual fetus that goes through various stages of growth.

Jeremiah 1:5
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. (goy/nations is speaking of those portions/people/hosts within or cattle/herds all those pieces and portions of thoughts and behaviors within one's own mind/lands that has disbelief, is unfinished, portions of the Spirit not yet perfected, or completed yet)

Gen 25:23
And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people (spiritually speaking literally two different types hosts. Jacob the upright 'he grasps the heel' [that which is holding the rear guard] to rule the heavenly and Esau the 'red hairy one' who is Edom to rule over the earthly portions that guide the living soul) shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.

If God created the Son to be perfect, then why wouldn't he create the rest of us to be perfect also?

Are you not content that you have the capability to be formed into the image of the Son? Is a fetus fully form at conception or does it take some time?

You have a soul made of Breath that is perfectly designed to be formed into the image of the Son. Sorry but you do not get the #1 position as a flesh being until you can overcome it/carnal flesh and that which goes with it for that is reserved for that which is pure.

But the question is why? If God is an all loving being, it seems that he could have foregone the suffering, pain, and death of all of us and simply made us to be what he himself is, perfect.

Apparently you are having a tough time or are incapable of separating in your mind that which is spirit and that which is flesh. The spirit of the Son in these current flesh containers was created perfect from the beginning,

There was 'a great war in heaven', 'I saw satan fall from the heavens like lightening fall' and 'satan deceive a third of the angels who followed the deceiver'. Created already in perfection but certain ones made a choice to follow the enmity to God who decided that they could rise above God and take over His/Her throne, Would you prefer total destruction or an opportunity to save what was created in your own image?

The great war in heaven proves that even as spirits, before they were cast to this earth were not perfect. A perfect being would never have rebelled against God but would have had a perfect knowledge that his way was the right way. Why didn't God give these spirits perfection so there would be no war in heaven and a rebellion. Whether it be spirits or the souls of mankind, they lacked perfection. Why didn't God simply create them to be perfect?

Actually it merely shows that Man goes through a process. Perfection is completed in a process of time. Perhaps you can find a clay master to go work with briefly to watch the process of creating a masterpiece. Does the clay like being pulverized, pounded, and fired?

God did create Man to be perfect in its time. Human on the other hand is a piece, a portion of the process and during that process you get to make certain choices.

 

[Frannie]

I never once said that God is all powerful, all knowing, and an all loving God, then why didn't he create us to be perfect.

What I did say is that DNA did not write itself in Darwin's warm little pond with all sorts magical elements that have always wanted to write code and that an intelligent being able to direct elements to assemble themselves into living beings by the most complicated and memory dense hard drive that also assembles the working computer was needed.

Ya know by the time this is over you are going to be fully shrink wrapped, you might even be breathing thru a straw.

But I like you because you are fun.

A little warm pond like a cell!
Charles Darwin was reluctant to publish his views on life's origin. His only speculations on the subject are known from a private letter to his friend and colleague Joseph Hooker, in which he speaks of a 'warm little pond' in which the first molecules of life could have formed.

A new and controversial study suggests Darwin's stab in the dark hit close to truth. In the article that was published earlier this week, researchers claim that the first cells evolved in volcanic pools. This new hypothesis brings the origin of life debate back from the depths of the oceans to the surface of the earth - other scientists believe hydrothermal vents in the deep sea are the most conducive environments for nascent life.

The researchers, led by Armen Mulkidjanian, presume that the chemistry of modern cells mirror the original environment in which life first evolved. Since oceans and cells are chemically dissimilar, they think it is unlikely life evolved there. The chemical nature of volcanic pools, or 'warm little ponds', resembles the cell's composition of its cytoplasm much more closely.
snip
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
Did life evolve in a `warm little pond'?

Look dopey the simple fact that you forgot is that Darwin's pond was imaginary. As in he made up what was in it, but hey the electricity worked for Victor Frankenstein. Darwin never once even imagined DNA, but hey you need a God and Darwin is it.

LOL you have just become clueless, like everyone who stays in my game long enough.

But hey you found proof on the internet of Darwin's pond

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

You can believe all you want in God, Jesus is it? I do not. I believe in evolution without a coder. We are not computers with someone coding us, if so, there would be no free will and free thinking.

I believe in science not in God as many do. Science shows that complicated codes do not form themselves. Non living molecules form molecular bonds according to charge, DNA does not bond this way and all scientific experiments to show that life is random have failed miserably. There is no way that a random program could go in one direction as evolution does, if evolution were random your mother could have birthed an amoeba but she didn't she birthed an individual more intelligent than her, this is not randomness. You believe in a false God named Darwin

I believe DNA evolved from a unicellular organism and didn't need a master coder. Good you believe in Science and not God, as God is not needed.

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

 

[Penelope]

A little warm pond like a cell!
Charles Darwin was reluctant to publish his views on life's origin. His only speculations on the subject are known from a private letter to his friend and colleague Joseph Hooker, in which he speaks of a 'warm little pond' in which the first molecules of life could have formed.

A new and controversial study suggests Darwin's stab in the dark hit close to truth. In the article that was published earlier this week, researchers claim that the first cells evolved in volcanic pools. This new hypothesis brings the origin of life debate back from the depths of the oceans to the surface of the earth - other scientists believe hydrothermal vents in the deep sea are the most conducive environments for nascent life.

The researchers, led by Armen Mulkidjanian, presume that the chemistry of modern cells mirror the original environment in which life first evolved. Since oceans and cells are chemically dissimilar, they think it is unlikely life evolved there. The chemical nature of volcanic pools, or 'warm little ponds', resembles the cell's composition of its cytoplasm much more closely.
snip
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
Did life evolve in a `warm little pond'?

Look dopey the simple fact that you forgot is that Darwin's pond was imaginary. As in he made up what was in it, but hey the electricity worked for Victor Frankenstein. Darwin never once even imagined DNA, but hey you need a God and Darwin is it.

LOL you have just become clueless, like everyone who stays in my game long enough.

But hey you found proof on the internet of Darwin's pond

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

You can believe all you want in God, Jesus is it? I do not. I believe in evolution without a coder. We are not computers with someone coding us, if so, there would be no free will and free thinking.

I believe in science not in God as many do. Science shows that complicated codes do not form themselves. Non living molecules form molecular bonds according to charge, DNA does not bond this way and all scientific experiments to show that life is random have failed miserably. There is no way that a random program could go in one direction as evolution does, if evolution were random your mother could have birthed an amoeba but she didn't she birthed an individual more intelligent than her, this is not randomness. You believe in a false God named Darwin

I believe DNA evolved from a unicellular organism and didn't need a master coder. Good you believe in Science and not God, as God is not needed.

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

DNA evolved. You are a believe in God, I am not, plain and simple. I love talking about God though as I said I thought Jesus was my best friend for many years. Belief in God is not bad, but believing in God to control other people, abortions, SSM, or anything is bad. Also Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are very intrusive in politics and they should not be, and also extreme fundies are crazy like extreme Muslims and Jews.

 

[Frannie]

Look dopey the simple fact that you forgot is that Darwin's pond was imaginary. As in he made up what was in it, but hey the electricity worked for Victor Frankenstein. Darwin never once even imagined DNA, but hey you need a God and Darwin is it.

LOL you have just become clueless, like everyone who stays in my game long enough.

But hey you found proof on the internet of Darwin's pond

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

You can believe all you want in God, Jesus is it? I do not. I believe in evolution without a coder. We are not computers with someone coding us, if so, there would be no free will and free thinking.

I believe in science not in God as many do. Science shows that complicated codes do not form themselves. Non living molecules form molecular bonds according to charge, DNA does not bond this way and all scientific experiments to show that life is random have failed miserably. There is no way that a random program could go in one direction as evolution does, if evolution were random your mother could have birthed an amoeba but she didn't she birthed an individual more intelligent than her, this is not randomness. You believe in a false God named Darwin

I believe DNA evolved from a unicellular organism and didn't need a master coder. Good you believe in Science and not God, as God is not needed.

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

DNA evolved. You are a believe in God, I am not, plain and simple. I love talking about God though as I said I thought Jesus was my best friend for many years. Belief in God is not bad, but believing in God to control other people, abortions, SSM, or anything is bad. Also Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are very intrusive in politics and they should not be, and also extreme fundies are crazy like extreme Muslims and Jews.

There is no scientific basis to support abiogenesis, and no example in nature where either a base 2 binary or base 4 quad codes form randomly. When the base 4 code needed for the simplest life is examined the mathematical probability of this code forming randomly is in the trillions, and even if happening a random code could not go in any direction except a random one. DNA however always produces better suited organisms. You thus believe in Darwins babbles and I choose math which requires a mathematician to code

Enjoy swimming in your magical pond, I swim in a reservoir with my dogs on long hikes and runs.

 

[BreezeWood]

A little warm pond like a cell!
Charles Darwin was reluctant to publish his views on life's origin. His only speculations on the subject are known from a private letter to his friend and colleague Joseph Hooker, in which he speaks of a 'warm little pond' in which the first molecules of life could have formed.

A new and controversial study suggests Darwin's stab in the dark hit close to truth. In the article that was published earlier this week, researchers claim that the first cells evolved in volcanic pools. This new hypothesis brings the origin of life debate back from the depths of the oceans to the surface of the earth - other scientists believe hydrothermal vents in the deep sea are the most conducive environments for nascent life.

The researchers, led by Armen Mulkidjanian, presume that the chemistry of modern cells mirror the original environment in which life first evolved. Since oceans and cells are chemically dissimilar, they think it is unlikely life evolved there. The chemical nature of volcanic pools, or 'warm little ponds', resembles the cell's composition of its cytoplasm much more closely.
snip
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
The backbone of DNA is made of phosphate, many ancient proteins require zinc, and the cell needs potassium ions to solder amino acids together in the manufacture proteins, one of the most important chemical reactions in life.
Did life evolve in a `warm little pond'?

Look dopey the simple fact that you forgot is that Darwin's pond was imaginary. As in he made up what was in it, but hey the electricity worked for Victor Frankenstein. Darwin never once even imagined DNA, but hey you need a God and Darwin is it.

LOL you have just become clueless, like everyone who stays in my game long enough.

But hey you found proof on the internet of Darwin's pond

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

You can believe all you want in God, Jesus is it? I do not. I believe in evolution without a coder. We are not computers with someone coding us, if so, there would be no free will and free thinking.

I believe in science not in God as many do. Science shows that complicated codes do not form themselves. Non living molecules form molecular bonds according to charge, DNA does not bond this way and all scientific experiments to show that life is random have failed miserably. There is no way that a random program could go in one direction as evolution does, if evolution were random your mother could have birthed an amoeba but she didn't she birthed an individual more intelligent than her, this is not randomness. You believe in a false God named Darwin

I believe DNA evolved from a unicellular organism and didn't need a master coder. Good you believe in Science and not God, as God is not needed.

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again

dna is not life, it regulates physiology that is a metaphysical substance that ceases, including its dna to exist when the spiritual content is removed, presently one can not exist without the other on planet Earth. whatever the spiritual is would have to be included with whatever dna physicality you would create to have life. knowing hunger to eat. there is no instance otherwise. physiology as an inert substance.

 

[Penelope]

You can believe all you want in God, Jesus is it? I do not. I believe in evolution without a coder. We are not computers with someone coding us, if so, there would be no free will and free thinking.

I believe in science not in God as many do. Science shows that complicated codes do not form themselves. Non living molecules form molecular bonds according to charge, DNA does not bond this way and all scientific experiments to show that life is random have failed miserably. There is no way that a random program could go in one direction as evolution does, if evolution were random your mother could have birthed an amoeba but she didn't she birthed an individual more intelligent than her, this is not randomness. You believe in a false God named Darwin

I believe DNA evolved from a unicellular organism and didn't need a master coder. Good you believe in Science and not God, as God is not needed.

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

DNA evolved. You are a believe in God, I am not, plain and simple. I love talking about God though as I said I thought Jesus was my best friend for many years. Belief in God is not bad, but believing in God to control other people, abortions, SSM, or anything is bad. Also Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are very intrusive in politics and they should not be, and also extreme fundies are crazy like extreme Muslims and Jews.

There is no scientific basis to support abiogenesis, and no example in nature where either a base 2 binary or base 4 quad codes form randomly. When the base 4 code needed for the simplest life is examined the mathematical probability of this code forming randomly is in the trillions, and even if happening a random code could not go in any direction except a random one. DNA however always produces better suited organisms. You thus believe in Darwins babbles and I choose math which requires a mathematician to code

Enjoy swimming in your magical pond, I swim in a reservoir with my dogs on long hikes and runs.

I think you are an Evangelical and against evolution and believe in creation by some God as the master mind.

 

[Frannie]

I believe in science not in God as many do. Science shows that complicated codes do not form themselves. Non living molecules form molecular bonds according to charge, DNA does not bond this way and all scientific experiments to show that life is random have failed miserably. There is no way that a random program could go in one direction as evolution does, if evolution were random your mother could have birthed an amoeba but she didn't she birthed an individual more intelligent than her, this is not randomness. You believe in a false God named Darwin

I believe DNA evolved from a unicellular organism and didn't need a master coder. Good you believe in Science and not God, as God is not needed.

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

DNA evolved. You are a believe in God, I am not, plain and simple. I love talking about God though as I said I thought Jesus was my best friend for many years. Belief in God is not bad, but believing in God to control other people, abortions, SSM, or anything is bad. Also Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are very intrusive in politics and they should not be, and also extreme fundies are crazy like extreme Muslims and Jews.

There is no scientific basis to support abiogenesis, and no example in nature where either a base 2 binary or base 4 quad codes form randomly. When the base 4 code needed for the simplest life is examined the mathematical probability of this code forming randomly is in the trillions, and even if happening a random code could not go in any direction except a random one. DNA however always produces better suited organisms. You thus believe in Darwins babbles and I choose math which requires a mathematician to code

Enjoy swimming in your magical pond, I swim in a reservoir with my dogs on long hikes and runs.

I think you are an Evangelical and against evolution and believe in creation by some God as the master mind.

Was raised a catholic but my views now are based in the science of code, which needs a programmer. I am not against evolution whatever that means because I have said many times that I see clearly that DNA evolves itself. So you need to wake up, if you do and you can show a quad code writing itself in sterile H2O, I will listen.

Until then you are the religious lunatic claiming that the most sophisticated code in the known universe wrote itself, in a magical code writing pond.

 

[Penelope]

I believe DNA evolved from a unicellular organism and didn't need a master coder. Good you believe in Science and not God, as God is not needed.

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

DNA evolved. You are a believe in God, I am not, plain and simple. I love talking about God though as I said I thought Jesus was my best friend for many years. Belief in God is not bad, but believing in God to control other people, abortions, SSM, or anything is bad. Also Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are very intrusive in politics and they should not be, and also extreme fundies are crazy like extreme Muslims and Jews.

There is no scientific basis to support abiogenesis, and no example in nature where either a base 2 binary or base 4 quad codes form randomly. When the base 4 code needed for the simplest life is examined the mathematical probability of this code forming randomly is in the trillions, and even if happening a random code could not go in any direction except a random one. DNA however always produces better suited organisms. You thus believe in Darwins babbles and I choose math which requires a mathematician to code

Enjoy swimming in your magical pond, I swim in a reservoir with my dogs on long hikes and runs.

I think you are an Evangelical and against evolution and believe in creation by some God as the master mind.

Was raised a catholic but my views now are based in the science of code, which needs a programmer. I am not against evolution whatever that means because I have said many times that I see clearly that DNA evolves itself. So you need to wake up, if you do and you can show a quad code writing itself in sterile H2O, I will listen.

Until then you are the religious lunatic claiming that the most sophisticated code in the known universe wrote itself, in a magical code writing pond.

Yes I was raised RC as well, but I guess all the little coders are becoming Gods as it says in the RC catechism that we will become God, God became man so we might become God.

460 The Word became flesh to make us "partakers of the divine nature":78 "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79 "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80 "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81

 

[ding]

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

DNA evolved. You are a believe in God, I am not, plain and simple. I love talking about God though as I said I thought Jesus was my best friend for many years. Belief in God is not bad, but believing in God to control other people, abortions, SSM, or anything is bad. Also Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are very intrusive in politics and they should not be, and also extreme fundies are crazy like extreme Muslims and Jews.

There is no scientific basis to support abiogenesis, and no example in nature where either a base 2 binary or base 4 quad codes form randomly. When the base 4 code needed for the simplest life is examined the mathematical probability of this code forming randomly is in the trillions, and even if happening a random code could not go in any direction except a random one. DNA however always produces better suited organisms. You thus believe in Darwins babbles and I choose math which requires a mathematician to code

Enjoy swimming in your magical pond, I swim in a reservoir with my dogs on long hikes and runs.

I think you are an Evangelical and against evolution and believe in creation by some God as the master mind.

Was raised a catholic but my views now are based in the science of code, which needs a programmer. I am not against evolution whatever that means because I have said many times that I see clearly that DNA evolves itself. So you need to wake up, if you do and you can show a quad code writing itself in sterile H2O, I will listen.

Until then you are the religious lunatic claiming that the most sophisticated code in the known universe wrote itself, in a magical code writing pond.

Yes I was raised RC as well, but I guess all the little coders are becoming Gods as it says in the RC catechism that we will become God, God became man so we might become God.

460 The Word became flesh to make us "partakers of the divine nature":78 "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79 "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80 "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81

Nope. It effectively means adopted sons.

 

[ding]

I believe DNA evolved from a unicellular organism and didn't need a master coder. Good you believe in Science and not God, as God is not needed.

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

DNA evolved. You are a believe in God, I am not, plain and simple. I love talking about God though as I said I thought Jesus was my best friend for many years. Belief in God is not bad, but believing in God to control other people, abortions, SSM, or anything is bad. Also Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are very intrusive in politics and they should not be, and also extreme fundies are crazy like extreme Muslims and Jews.

There is no scientific basis to support abiogenesis, and no example in nature where either a base 2 binary or base 4 quad codes form randomly. When the base 4 code needed for the simplest life is examined the mathematical probability of this code forming randomly is in the trillions, and even if happening a random code could not go in any direction except a random one. DNA however always produces better suited organisms. You thus believe in Darwins babbles and I choose math which requires a mathematician to code

Enjoy swimming in your magical pond, I swim in a reservoir with my dogs on long hikes and runs.

I think you are an Evangelical and against evolution and believe in creation by some God as the master mind.

Was raised a catholic but my views now are based in the science of code, which needs a programmer. I am not against evolution whatever that means because I have said many times that I see clearly that DNA evolves itself. So you need to wake up, if you do and you can show a quad code writing itself in sterile H2O, I will listen.

Until then you are the religious lunatic claiming that the most sophisticated code in the known universe wrote itself, in a magical code writing pond.

The code didn’t write itself, it existed as potential in the laws of nature which existed before space and time.

 

[Meriweather]

Nope. It effectively means adopted sons.

Agree. The lower case 'g' was not taken into account. A divine nature defines it best.

 

[Frannie]

But science has never shown intelligence as in code like DNA to write itself. What you believe is based on the fact that evolution happens. Since evolution is impossible without the code and science can not produce random DNA writing itself a code writer is needed, God.

Interestingly if science does write DNA and in so create new life, God is proved again but now we will know his or her face.

DNA evolved. You are a believe in God, I am not, plain and simple. I love talking about God though as I said I thought Jesus was my best friend for many years. Belief in God is not bad, but believing in God to control other people, abortions, SSM, or anything is bad. Also Evangelicals and Fundamentalists are very intrusive in politics and they should not be, and also extreme fundies are crazy like extreme Muslims and Jews.

There is no scientific basis to support abiogenesis, and no example in nature where either a base 2 binary or base 4 quad codes form randomly. When the base 4 code needed for the simplest life is examined the mathematical probability of this code forming randomly is in the trillions, and even if happening a random code could not go in any direction except a random one. DNA however always produces better suited organisms. You thus believe in Darwins babbles and I choose math which requires a mathematician to code

Enjoy swimming in your magical pond, I swim in a reservoir with my dogs on long hikes and runs.

I think you are an Evangelical and against evolution and believe in creation by some God as the master mind.

Was raised a catholic but my views now are based in the science of code, which needs a programmer. I am not against evolution whatever that means because I have said many times that I see clearly that DNA evolves itself. So you need to wake up, if you do and you can show a quad code writing itself in sterile H2O, I will listen.

Until then you are the religious lunatic claiming that the most sophisticated code in the known universe wrote itself, in a magical code writing pond.

Yes I was raised RC as well, but I guess all the little coders are becoming Gods as it says in the RC catechism that we will become God, God became man so we might become God.

460 The Word became flesh to make us "partakers of the divine nature":78 "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79 "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80 "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81

Neither religion, science or time, can take sterile H2O and create the quad code needed for the simplest macrophage. This requires believing that inanimate matter can write code. Had Darwin seen the complexity of DNA he never would have speculated that life could form this way. Bye the way Darwin never said that life formed in a pond, he said what if. The pond abiogenesis theory came later formed by atheist who demand that they are just the brightest thing to ever exist.

So did you update your portfolio yet, or will your magical pond do that

 

[norwegen]

If God is all powerful, all knowing, and an all loving God, then why didn't he create us to be perfect?

If God is all powerful and can do all things, surely he would be able to create a perfect being who has all power, all knowledge, and is a perfectly loving being. To say that he cannot create such a being is to admit that God is not all powerful.

If God is all knowing surely he has the knowledge to create a perfect being and to give that perfect being a perfect knowledge.

If God is an all loving being who loves his creations then he would surely want the best for his creations. He would want his creations to be perfect. Thus he would create us to be perfect. Even in a world or universe where free will exists, if God created us to be perfect, then we with our perfect knowledge could surely reason out that we should choose good over evil always and never make a bad decision. We would be created with a heart filled with love for our fellow beings and our own creations. God would spare us the evil we experience in this world as we would have started out from creation as perfect beings never to commit any act that is contrary to what is right and good.

So why didn't God simply create us to be perfect?

If God is all powerful, all knowing, and an all loving God, then why didn't he create us to be perfect?

We were created perfect.

But we chose to die and have free will and the decay of time was inserted.

obviously we were not created perfect if we became imperfect
if ''god'' [ hahahah ] gave us free will, that means he created a flaw

If you consider the choice of having free will being a flaw there’s nothing more I can say.

Free will is not perfection.

God did not create something perfect. He created something good. He walked with His creation; i.e., He had fellowship with His creation. That's what He created.

God created perfection. Adam and Eve could have chosen to live forever. But they chose otherwise.

Mortality is perfection, then. Eternal life is not.

Very well, then.