Debating an Atheist

[TrumanSmith]

(I know this seems to be about the bible now, but about Dawkins pg.12 Aug 27)
In other words you have a “brain, lungs, motor nerves, voice box, coordinating muscles making sounds, breathing and swallowing, this is not an intelligent design this is historical legacy?” (2:24-50 Dawkins video)
Why did not Dawkins say of the ‘whole’ giraffe laying on the table and say “this is not an intelligent design this is historical legacy”(?) The fact that a giraffe, and or its nerves even ‘exist’ at all is design, not to mention the rest of the animals thousands of complex systems. The logic here defies logic.
You cannot ignore rational thought that says everything that reveals design and purpose must have been made with intelligence, then not use this logic when speaking of biological forms, ‘all’ of which reveal design far beyond man made things.

You are missing the obvious.

It would be like if you were an electronics teacher, and your student was to design something that required a 1 inch wire to go from point A to point B. Rather than directly connecting it, you looped it around other wires and the circuit board, and ended-up with a 15 inch wire. It works, but the extra long wire is ridiculous. In the giraffe, the nerve only needs to be a few inches, but it turns into a useless route of something like 15 ft, making a needless trip to the heart and and then returns. With evolution, there's a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why it happened, because the nerve got trapped in evolutionary history, as creatures evolved from fish-based creatures to land-based. With Intelligent Design, there's no answer, unless you want to stay that God is a stupid designer for the extra unneeded routing.

[TrumanSmith]

Paul says that if our present body is destroyed, we have a "building from God", that is, a resurrection body which God Himself prepares for us.

So you are saying as soon as a person dies, the resurrection immediately happens for them?

[TrumanSmith]

FYI- for those in the Portland Oregon area- I'll be doing another debate in a church on 9-22-13. Details here:
http://www.meetup.com/WestsideTalk/events/137273162/

I don't know the Pastor's take on evolution, but his partner Bart Rask is anti-evolution.

[jriccitelli]

You are missing the point. Like in the Toyota, there are two points:
One: the wire 'may' actually do something, connected or not:
Two: The whole rest of the Toyota! The one unknown wire vs. 10 million that run to and from things, in the correct order.

There is no difference in the 'plans' of mechanical, electronic, or biological, if one shows design so must the other.
You cant have two forms of logic.

[john6809]

In the giraffe, the nerve only needs to be a few inches, but it turns into a useless route of something like 15 ft, making a needless trip to the heart and and then returns. With evolution, there's a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why it happened, because the nerve got trapped in evolutionary history, as creatures evolved from fish-based creatures to land-based. With Intelligent Design, there's no answer, unless you want to stay that God is a stupid designer for the extra unneeded routing.

Interesting article in National Geographic News titled, Vestigial Organs Not So Useless After All, Studies Find by Maggie Koerth-Baker
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... rgans.html

A few excerpts follow.

Appendix, tonsils, various redundant veins—they're all vestigial body parts once considered expendable, if not downright useless. But as technology has advanced, researchers have found that, more often than not, some of these "junk parts" are actually hard at work.

None of this is surprising to Jeffrey Laitman, director of anatomy and functional morphology at New York City's Mount Sinai School of Medicine and president-elect of the American Association of Anatomists. History is littered with body parts that were called "useless" simply because medical science had yet to understand them, Laitman said. "People say, You can remove it and still live. But you have to be careful with that logic," he said. "You could remove your left leg and still live. But whenever a body part is moved or changed, there's a price to pay."

Another example of anatomy lagging behind lifestyle, according to Mount Sinai's Laitman, is collateral circulation. Certain systems of veins and arteries ensure blood flow when the main paths are blocked or damaged.

Though the article does not refute evolution, it goes to show that, just because we can't currently see why the nerve in a giraffe takes a "route of something like 15 ft" doesn't mean it is useless. It only means we have not YET figured it out. One could attribute it to lifestyle changes that outpace changes in the body, or one could attribute the useless functions to a Creator who knew what each creature would need, before and after the fall.

[TrumanSmith]

Though the article does not refute evolution, it goes to show that, just because we can't currently see why the nerve in a giraffe takes a "route of something like 15 ft" doesn't mean it is useless. It only means we have not YET figured it out. One could attribute it to lifestyle changes that outpace changes in the body, or one could attribute the useless functions to a Creator who knew what each creature would need, before and after the fall.

You are not understanding the argument. There is absolutely no reason a designer would do such an absurd design; meanwhile, there's a perfect evolutionary answer.

[TrumanSmith]

You are missing the point. Like in the Toyota, there are two points:
One: the wire 'may' actually do something, connected or not:
Two: The whole rest of the Toyota! The one unknown wire vs. 10 million that run to and from things, in the correct order.

There is no difference in the 'plans' of mechanical, electronic, or biological, if one shows design so must the other.
You cant have two forms of logic.

One: The long route really does nothing. The purpose of the nerve is known. Why it is so long is also known (evolutionary reasons in development). These both demonstrate there is not an intelligent mind doing that design, unless it purposely wanted to deceive in looking like common descent really happened when it didn't; it which case, that makes God a deceiver, a liar (an unacceptable conclusion for most theologians).

Two: There's no valid deduction to conclude that God designed the 10 million other things, esp. considering other artifacts of descent, like pseudogenes.

[Paidion]

So you are saying as soon as a person dies, the resurrection immediately happens for them?

I am saying nothing at all except to show that Paul's teaching does not imply disembodied spirits going to heaven after people die.

However, if you are asking my opinion concerning the resurrection, I understand from the New Testament that the resurrection of the overcomers occurs in the future when Christ returns, and that the resurrection of the rest of mankind occurs later still after Christ's earthly reign or "millenium". Prior to Christ's coming, all who die are dead, and stay dead until the time comes when they are raised to life again.

[TrumanSmith]

So you are saying as soon as a person dies, the resurrection immediately happens for them?

I am saying nothing at all except to show that Paul's teaching does not imply disembodied spirits going to heaven after people die.

However, if you are asking my opinion concerning the resurrection, I understand from the New Testament that the resurrection of the overcomers occurs in the future when Christ returns, and that the resurrection of the rest of mankind occurs later still after Christ's earthly reign or "millenium". Prior to Christ's coming, all who die are dead, and stay dead until the time comes when they are raised to life again.

What about this parable, about being immediately with God after physical death (from death to immediately being with God, no resurrection):

Luke 16
19 “There was a certain rich man,” Jesus said, “who was splendidly clothed and lived each day in mirth and luxury. 20 One day Lazarus, a diseased beggar, was laid at his door. 21 As he lay there longing for scraps from the rich man’s table, the dogs would come and lick his open sores. 22 Finally the beggar died and was carried by the angels to be with Abraham in the place of the righteous dead.[c] The rich man also died and was buried, 23 and his soul went into hell.[d] There, in torment, he saw Lazarus in the far distance with Abraham.
24 “‘Father Abraham,’ he shouted, ‘have some pity! Send Lazarus over here if only to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in these flames.’
25 “But Abraham said to him, ‘Son, remember that during your lifetime you had everything you wanted, and Lazarus had nothing. So now he is here being comforted and you are in anguish. 26 And besides, there is a great chasm separating us, and anyone wanting to come to you from here is stopped at its edge; and no one over there can cross to us.’

[backwoodsman]

FYI- for those in the Portland Oregon area- I'll be doing another debate in a church on 9-22-13. Details here:
http://www.meetup.com/WestsideTalk/events/137273162/

Did you read the description of Rask's book on Amazon.com?
http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Affirmi ... 936320606/

I couldn't help but notice this: "There is found to be universally a logical disconnect between the purported evolutionary experiments or observations and their evolutionary conclusion. The most common logical error was the fallacy of affirming the consequent."

A quick explanation of "Affirming the consequent":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

Apparently you don't recognize that most of what you say is based on this logical disconnect and fallacy. You won't listen to us; Rask has some scientific education, so maybe you'll listen to him.