Do You Believe In God?

I agree with you when you say scientific explanations are more valid than the old myths, but there are questions they do not answer. One I could think of right offhand deals with mutation. While we can see adaptation here and there (e.g. bears, horses, snakes, women), we can also see many instances where evolution suddenly leaps forward, in the "explosion of one group at the expense of another." When something like this happens, it helps to observe how much information has changed, and then consider the probability. Mutative failure is infinitely more likely than mutative success (It doesn't matter how many parallel universes you have; the odds are not simply divided up amongst them. Mutation has not simply happened one time here; it has happened over and over again.). Even though it only makes sense that natural selection will quickly eliminate the "freaks," there is no explanation why we find so few of them in the fossil record, as these individuals could feasibly outnumber entire populations. Here is an article I saved awhile back, just in case the archives changed. You don't have to read the whole thing, just the part where the evolutionist (I am an evolutionist) "appears" to be stumped: http://www.mediafire.com/?z4hioyqlftg There are 3.1 billion letters in the human genome. But more significantly, the words formed by these letters are not jumbled; they actually follow a semantic pattern! And while a shrinking majority of this information (once thought to be more than 97%, now considered by some to be as low as 85%) is often called "junk DNA," biochemists are finding out that it appears to be a sort of reference for proofreading. As it were, an engine has evolved within DNA to correct mutative errors. In the cells of most organisms, including humans, both the active information and the so-called "junk DNA" are contained in the same nucleolus. But in some others, there are actually two separate nucleoli; one active, and the other ROM (Read-Only Memory). When mutation occurs, and prior to cell division, the original information in the active nucleolus is verified against that in the ROM nucleolus. That's pretty fancy. Until I am shown otherwise, I must plainly say that every "will" I have traced yet originated from a conscience. Now you can retort with the familiar "God of the gaps" bit, but I fail to see it that way. I call it "God of purpose," or "God of causation." Just as Darwinian evolutionists assume until further discovery that this universe and the life therein were created by chance acting on matter, I assume until further discovery that this universe, the life therein, and the peculiarities I and some others have seen are effected by a "superior reasoning power." Others concede that the "Quite by chance" theory is obsolete, and turn to Spinoza's God in order to avoid too much responsibility. "Is god real? I don't know nor do I see any way to answer the question so it comes down to the question of; Why bother?" I've answered this for you before...gratitude. P.S.: Thank you for saying, "I don't know." Honesty is the best policy.

BTW, I watched that video, and left another comment in your thread: http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/1791007.aspx

Almost like looking for a reason for life and ending up with God. That's it. Must be him. No other solution. Isnt it ironic that there truely is no evidence of God? Nature has travelled through evolution right back to when our land was one island in the middle of a sea. Fact. To suggest God created such things over a period of time suggests he interferes with his creation, to say he interferes in his creation leads to the idea that he allows and created suffering in the world as much as he created the 'goodness'. Why God? If God is believed to be an invisible almighty substance rather than man, why do we end with him? Why is there no discussion on why does religious questions finish with God? Who created God? It goes against nature to say he just came into existance as much as your idea that the universe is not random either. Why do we not end with time? If you can say God created the universe then it's possible that time is the being that created everything, automatically people are repulsed by this idea... but is itn't it just as logical and illogical as the belief in a God? I suggest that if you believe in a God and are supporting it with evidence of creation that you look towards the Ancient Greeks idea of the demiurge, the idea of a supreme being creating the universe and then disappearing. When your not considering the complexities that surround God it's hard to say God made everything. Our beliefs of God today originate from man's word, in a period of time where not only science was low, but human rights, equality were absent and myths originated from. It was essentially created by more prominant figures of religion that used ancient greek teachings of God and manipulated their words. While it's romantic and idealistic to believe that God is perfection and created perfection, it's naive not to consider the outer areas surrounding the mystery of God.

There are lot of people who believe in evolution and yet believe in God. And can be a Muslim or a Christian or an atheist and believe in evolution. I don't see why evolutionary biology is a problem for religion.

To rely on the bible as an idea of god is scary. God put a tree in a garden and tell you not to eat it. why put it there in the first place. what was the purpose? God tell abramham to kill his son what was the purpose? So call god created us to tell us what not to do and put everything there he don't want us to have and for what? God has the power to creat us, destroy the world, save one family and two of every animal, destroy one city(sodom and gormorah) and continue to let the other bad things go on. God tests our love for him in suffering but still have to die. God would so call kill his own son and not come himself to save the world. Will you sent you child to die. So call god sent so many to die and fight among each other but created a world and have not done anything to prove his exist and explain his reasoning. I don't believe in god I know there a creator because we all our here. but to worship a god and argue with people about whose god responsible(because of the many religions) does not do anything to change the world.