Intelligent Design, Biblical Creation, and Darwinism - Russ Miller

[HolyRevelation]

Intelligent: The basic eternal quality of divine Mind.

Design: To devise for a specific function or end.

Intelligent Designer can easily tell the difference between random accidents and specified designs, evolutionists can not tell the difference.

[pplknowDrPhil]

This blesses me in my studies of science and I owe you apologies and thanks for the video.I misunderstood your reason and your audience.

and about God blessing your ministry..., If you do what God has called you to do, you will be blessed.

[slaves4christ]

@pplknowDrPhil Thank you and God bless you

[pplknowDrPhil]

@slave4christ... We must preach Christ and the love of God... We shouldn't try to prove the bible is right and hope that it leads people to Christ... If people know the living word, they will believe the written word... May God bless your ministry

[slaves4christ]

@pplknowDrPhil The main reason I put these videos is to build up & strengthen believers in the faith, so they won't be weakened or turned away from the faith when attacked or presented "evidence" by evolutionists & atheists. Secondarily, it's for seekers with an open mind.

But if I'm doing what I'm not supposed to as u say, why do u want God to bless my ministry?

"always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear" 1 Pet 3:15

[jamesgraul]

Nicely put. Darwinism supports atheism and this has hurt the faith of generations. I glad to see that new discoveries are putting a light on this false religion.

[DeeDemonwitch]

Are you under the impression that atheists are atheists because they believe in evolution?

[slaves4christ]

@Pineconevolved Why? If I'm just going to die and rot in the ground and become food for earthworms, what difference does it make & why would you care?

Learn from history - The atheist Voltaire once said "One hundred years from my day there will not be a Bible in the earth except one that is looked upon by an antiquarian curiosity seeker."

After his death, his house was purchased by Christians who installed a printing press and printed hundreds of thousands of Bibles there.

[DarkBunnyLord]

@slaves4christ Wow well that sure makes a religion that makes up things and is full of countless innacuracies proven wrong by science to be correct. What ever where we thinking.

[PurpleGhost]

@slaves4christ - What difference does it make?! Don't you FEEL?!

Seriously! Have you never lived a day and just thought "man I feel great, this day felt awesome, I think I'd like tomorrow to feel this good too"

If not, your existence is pretty bleak, and you should get some counselling because you're depressed, or apathetic to the point of "joy-robbing" yourself.

Aren't joy, satisfaction, ect. worth it, & worth hoping for other people to experience?

I for one want others to expirence joy & life.

[slaves4christ]

@PurpleGhost If you live your life based on feelings, you're probably going to be disappointed a lot and probably depressed. It sounds like you basically make your feelings your god.

Is that really your purpose in life? Why do you won't other evolved blobs of pond scum to feel good?

[PurpleGhost]

@slaves4christ - You Clearly did Not READ my comment, and your urge to be belligerent is obvious.

I said EXPLICITLY that I wanted other people to be happy, and I implied that I felt wanting other peoples happiness was one of those things which makes life worth while.

Unless you mean why do I /want/ others to be happy, read the above.

Not my "god". My basic guide to enjoying life, yes. Supplemented with calculated observation and measured actions.

Pfft. Faith is an emotion, my friend.

[stinkpuppyohno]

wait oh my god is this a creationist condemning ID. really wow. never thought i would see that.

[moksith]

Slaves4christ indeed.

slave /sleɪv/

–noun

1. a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another; a bond servant.

2. a person entirely under the domination of some influence or person: a slave to a drug [religion].

I bet you claim you have "free" will, and "freedom" of your thoughts. Yet, openly claim you are a slave.

Your mental slavery is the only thing true about your channel.

Now go fetch me a beer, slave!

[slaves4christ]

@moksith In my free will I gladly choose to be a slave of the Most High God!

[FiverBeyond]

At least the speaker breaks from the common false dichotomy between evolution and special creation, but he still misses the most important option:

4. The earth was made by natural, understandable processes that follow understandable laws and patterns.

[slaves4christ]

@FiverBeyond yeah, it just created itself...nice fantasy

[FiverBeyond]

@slaves4christ

"Made by natural, understandable processes" obviously doesn't mean "created itself".

Here's an good example: people used to think that lightning was the spear of Zeus being thrown purposefully. Now we know that lightning is made by natural, understandable processes.

Is this is the same thing as "created itself"?

Do you think that lightning "creates itself"?

[slaves4christ]

@FiverBeyond Where did the earth come from?

[FiverBeyond]

@slaves4christ

"Where did the earth come from?"

You didn't answer my questions. You seem to be changing the topic.

Remember what happened here: I said that the earth was made by "natural, understandable processes". You claimed that this was the same as saying "it just created itself". I pointed out what you said wasn't true.

Then you changed the topic.

I'll ask again: Lightning is made by natural processes. Is this the same thing as lightning "creating itself"? Why or why not?

[slaves4christ]

@FiverBeyond Lightning is made by natural processes. We can watch this happen over and over, and we can test it and repeat it in the lab. Not so with creating or making the earth.

Ok, so where did the earth come from?

[FiverBeyond]

@slaves4christ

You STILL avoid my question: Does lightning create itself?

I'm very happy to go into how the earth was made, as soon as this question is answered.

[jussts]

@slaves4christ "Where did the earth come from?"

Okay, Bill O'Reilly... I'll answer your question and then you answer mine. Planets form out of a young star's protoplanetary disc.

Now my question: Did you even go to high school? Seriously. This is basic cosmology, how the hell did you miss out on it?

PS: Of course I know answering your question will be futile. You're not actually curious, you're just playing stump the chump... trying to find a convenient gap to stick your god in.

[slaves4christ]

@jussts I obviously know where the earth come from, but I'm asking the dude where it came from in his view.

[theshredator]

The difference between creationism and ID is that they simply changed the name of creationism to ID after the US Supreme Court banned it from public schools in the 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard case. ID is how they tried and failed to disguise creationism to dishonestly slip it into public school curriculum and retard the minds of America's youth for the betterment of their mind-fucking religious cult... pieces of shit.

[slaves4christ]

@theshredator From Wikipedia: "The Court ruled that a Louisiana law REQUIRING that CREATION science BE TAUGHT in public schools, along with evolution, was unconstitutional because the law was specifically intended to advance a particular religion. It also held that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction." Can't be required, was not banned

[theshredator]

@slaves4christ Okay. It was ruled unconstitutional because it was designed to advance a particular religion. So then they changed it's name to ID. It's the same bullshit with different labeling.

[slaves4christ]

@theshredator No, because ID could lead you to a billion different other gods or some other bologna. That's why Miller isn't a big supporter of it. All ID does is state the obvious the universe didn't come from nothing exploding, and plants and animals didn't make themselves.

[theshredator]

@slaves4christ "All ID does is state the obvious"

No. That's the problem. Cdesign proponentsists think ID is science because they already think that a god created everything. But in order for it to be science, there has to be evidence. This is what they lack. There is zero evidence for ID. It's just the vague baseless assertion that modern science is wrong despite all the decades of research and evidence that it is built on. You suffer from some combination of ignorance and denial of reality.

[randont]

@theshredator Read the evolution cruncher. Basically the whole thing is quotes to established and accepted scientific publications with the authors biased commentary. Occasionally I disagree with the commentary but the references are solid. The science against evolution is so enormous it's a miracle anyone still believes it. . Why do you think college courses in evolution are 95% microevolution and 5% or less dedicated to origins and macroevolution?Micro is proven the rest is bunk.

[Razorhawk72]

If science could touch the realm of the supernatural it wouldn't be supernatural. It's almost as if the supernatural doesn't exist! *gasp*

[leungchaan]

"Interlocking complexity" (later changed to "irreducible complexity" for obvious reasons by Michael Behe) has been predicted as an expected result of the mechanisms of Evolution by nobel laureate Hermann Muller in 1918 (!). So this phenomenon is a) not a new discovery, b) wasn't actually discovered by cdesign proponentsists, and c) it actually CONFIRMS the theory of evolution. And yeah, cars, arrowheads and clay figures do not reproduce. Unlike living organisms. Analogy fail..

[slaves4christ]

@leungchaan cdesign proponentsists?

Can you please explain how irreducible complexity confirms evolution?

[leungchaan]

@slaves4christ I suggest you READ UP on Muller yourself. Why should I do the hard work and condense his findings down, so you can understand it? I get paid for educating people. Why should I educate you for free, when you're not even interested in doing some basic research about the subject? "cdesign proponentsists" is the ironic "missing link", which unquestionably proved in court, that ID is creationism in a lab coat. Google "dover vs. kitzmiller"..

[Gnug215]

Well, when it's a priest is talking about science, then it MUST be the truth!