Proof of God in the E. coli Bacteria

Scientific proof that God exists is found in various areas of science. Molecular biology presents almost obvious proof of God’s existence. This should be great news for atheists who profess to be champions of modern science.

Before presenting the proof, however, it is necessary to first define where the proof leads.

Since we are dealing here with scientific proof, a secular definition of God must be provided.

God, by nature, would be the first cause of everything.  It follows then that God would have certain attributes:

  1. All-powerful
  2. All-knowing

For this post we will infer God’s presence using his attribute of all-knowing. If God did create the universe it is reasonable that evidence of God’s intelligence is imbedded throughout the physical world.

That means if we can find examples of intelligence imbedded in the physical world, we can infer that God exists.

But what constitutes an example of intelligence?

Well, say you were out rock hunting and you found a stone tablet with patterns of scribbles on them.  Later it was found that the patterns of scribbles were written in an actual language that told a story from long ago.

British_Museum_Flood_Tablet

Figure 1  The Flood tablet written in ancient Akkadian by Gilgamesh.

That the author is intelligent and real is obvious.

Molecular biology provides the same analogy and this analogy was found in the lab rat of molecular biology, the E. coli bacteria.  It’s called CRISPR/Cas9.

CRISPR/Cas9 is the immune system of the E. coli bacteria that has been modified for human use.  And immune system possesses the means and methods to identify, remember and destroy foreign script written into the bacteria’s genome by invading viruses.

For an atheist it would be like the Hebrew modification to the flood story originally written by Gilgamesh. Today everyone knows the story about Noah and the Flood.  However, Gilgamesh is long forgotten, except by ancient history geeks. In microbiology that’s what’s called a viral assault and take over of the original organism.

And in the case of CRISPR/Cas9, the modification from the original immune system makes it just a little easier to understand. The modification to the bacterial immune system makes CRISPR/Cas9 a premier gene editing tool when put in the hands of molecular biologists.

Here is a diagram of CRISPR/Cas9:

CAS9-Genome-Editing

Figure 2  CRISPR/Cas9

1. Cas9 is a enzyme protein (the light blue figure with the little cutters). Genomic DNA that has been edited by a virus (dark orange seen on the right of the Cas9 enzyme) feeds into the Cas9 enzyme on the left.

2. PAM (light orange) is an essential targeting component which distinguishes bacterial self from non-self DNA. The Cas9 enzyme snips the DNA strand at the PAM.

3. The guide RNA (purple) provides a template to write the viral DNA into memory so that it is immediately rejected the next time the same virus attacks.

4. In the lab the CAS9 snips out errors that are replaced by donor DNA (green).

Hopefully it has become obvious that literature must first exist before it can be edited.

In biology, the literature that defines an organism is called, genome.  Each organism has its own genome, or detailed literature that defines every aspect of the organism. It is from the genome and the power specified by the genome to edit, repair and remember specific parts of itself that we can infer the existence of intelligence.

From the squiggles on the Akkadian tablet we can infer that the author was intelligently expressing himself in a coherent language.

This is equally true of the genome which defines each individual creature.

In the genome we can infer that the author intelligently expresses itself in the coherent language of life on earth.

Modern science has proven that the intelligent author of life is God and the language it used is the genetic code.

111 responses to “Proof of God in the E. coli Bacteria”

  1. Do any actual scientists agree with you?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Violet, that’s why you get yourself into trouble, and hang yourself with your own argument. The definition of science is not left in the hands of the atheist.

      For God’s sake, there is no proof of gravity, but your hero scientists swear by their preposterous suppositions and theories.
      I have never seen the earth move? Have you? I have never seen it spin at an absurd rate of 1,000 mph have you? Careful now, that you don’t answer by faith………

      Science is testable, observable, verifiable, repeatable, and does not argue with common sense.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Storm,

        That’s a great point.

        Gravity and light are the biggies in fields like astronomy and cosmology.

        Scientists inferred almost everything they know about the cosmos by watching and studying gravity and light.

        Dark matter and dark energy make up 95% of the universe and yet its existence can only be inferred from gravity and light.

        Otherwise, nobody has the foggiest idea what that 95% of the universe actually is.

        But God makes things easy.

        His existence blasted me in the face during the first week of basic biology…

        …but only because I knew what to look for and because I was looking.

        For most people today, God goes to church on Sunday and stays there all week.

        And if he ever tries to show up at school, just you wait!

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Referring and accepting scientific views is not at all like faith. The difference is that faith is totally blind. Science is not a set of facts. It is a process. That process is known as the Scientific Method. You DO science, you don’t KNOW science.

        People believe in scientists the same reason they believe in the Bible. The difference is that people understand where science comes from. If they so desire they may conduct the very same experiments (that were replicated). ANYONE may do so.

        Furthermore, if some of the people who do conduct these experiments, might well discover something totally new. As long as they can hypothesize, conduct experiments and so on i.e., follow the Scientific Method, they can rest assure that they are on to something substantial.

        Like

        1. It’s no wonder you cant see straight raj with a comment like this.

          Without ‘facts,’ science is useless.

          So you don’t have ‘faith’ eh that the earth spins at one thousand miles and hour, and orbits at a ridiculous 67,000 mph?

          Your own faith cloaked as science condemns your absurdity. Oh wait, you have ACTUALLY SEEN the earth move one inch………

          Like

    2. Violet,

      I saw a bunch of scientists listed on another blog who stated categorically that science proves the existence of God.

      They were pretty big names, too.

      But unlike you, I have a brain of my own, and I don’t need experts to tell me what to think.

      Like

      1. Ouch. The last line is a killer.

        A very nice killer.

        Like

        1. Storm,

          Rule by experts is one of the fundamental beliefs of Progressivism.

          It was introduced into American society over 100 years ago by John Dewey and Woodrow Wilson.

          America became great because it was a place where people were free to think for themselves.

          Hopefully people have learned by now that my sarcasm isn’t me being totally evil.

          Liked by 2 people

      2. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
        The Isaiah 53:5 Project

        Romans 1:20 tells us we are without excuse. Problem for the atheist is that they don’t like what their brain tells them.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. So, if we accept a creator deity, how do you, James get from this deity to claiming that the character Jesus of Nazareth is the same Creator deity?

          Like

          1. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
            The Isaiah 53:5 Project

            I am not going to follow you down an endless rabbit hole Ark.

            At your judgement you won’t be asked how I got there but why you didn’t. That is what you should be concerned with.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Why do you consider it a rabbit hole?
              Only if you do not trust the veracity of your evidence to demonstrate it, James.

              Are you afraid to offer evidence or are we simply talking faith?

              Oh, and you said I would be allowed to comment on your Catholics are not ”proper Christians” post.
              And I tried but you still had me blocked.

              Like

            2. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              I trust the veracity of my evidence as much as I trust the sun will come up tomorrow, the rabbit hole is a conversation with you that would be illogical and mind numbing.

              Didn’t notice any comments and I even check the spam folder daily to delete KIA’s nonsensical comments.

              Try again. Keep in mind though, I have a limited amount of patience for you.

              Like

            3. I also have a limited amount for you, James.
              And just what the evidence in your possession that you trust that the character, Jesus of Nazareth is the creator of the universe?

              The bible is of no help is it? So what evidence are you referring to Jame?

              Like

            4. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              The Bible is of immense help Ark, it’s how God communicates with man.

              Like

            5. Which god? Yahweh?

              Like

            6. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              I quoted Bible and you asked which God. A silly question I would say and a dodge. Why did you so quickly move away from Jesus being the creator?

              The name of God, as revealed in the Hebrew Scriptures, is YHWH (the closest English equivalents to the Hebrew letters). Ancient Hebrew did not have vowels, so the exact pronunciation of YHWH is uncertain. The vast majority of Hebrew and Christian scholars believe the name to be Yahweh, pronounced /ˈyä-wā/, with Yehowah, pronounced /yi-ˈhō-və/, being the second most popular possibility.

              YHWH is as close to a personal name as God has revealed to us. The Divine Name was revealed to Moses and was unknown before his time: “I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name the LORD [YHWH] I did not make myself fully known to them” (Exodus 6:3). The name YHWH seems to refer to God’s self-existence, being linked to “I AM THAT I AM” in Exodus 3:14. God told Moses that “this is my name forever, the name you shall call me from generation to generation” (Exodus 3:15; cf. Exodus 15:3). All other “names” for God, such as El Shaddai, are probably titles, rather than personal names, strictly speaking—although it is quite proper to address God by His titles. References to “the name of our God” (in Psalm 44:20, for example), are oblique references to God’s personal name, YHWH.

              So, um, yes. Yahweh 🙂

              Like

            7. I quoted Bible and you asked which God. A silly question I would say and a dodge. Why did you so quickly move away from Jesus being the creator?

              Because it is a recognised fact that the Pentateuch is nothing but historical fiction, and you are fully aware of this.

              So, you want to try again….

              Like

            8. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              How long have you been trotting the historical fiction line out Ark? Six years? Longer?

              Yes, some scholars think it is fiction, some don’t, it’s hardly a settled point academically so…

              Anyway, doesn’t matter to me if you think it’s fiction or not, not my problem.

              What’s next, archeology?

              To put it simply, archaeology can’t dig up everything that happened in the past—and it certainly can’t dig up God. Since the Bible is fundamentally about God and his actions to rescue and repair the world, archaeology by nature must remain silent on the most important parts.

              But while it cannot fully prove or disprove the Bible, the more we dig up, the more the truth of the Bible’s account of people, places, and customs becomes clear.

              Like

            9. No, all genuine scholars recognise the Pentateuch is historical fiction.
              Creationists are completely disregarded within the academical field,and even among mainstream Christianity people like yourself are considered objects of ridicule and pity,.
              Science deniers, who do more damage to your religion than ever the average atheist could.

              And for the record, people like Francis Collins have demonstrated through the Human Genome Project that the biblical Adam and Eve as described did not exist.
              There goes your foundation….and with it Original Sin of course.

              The biblical flood is a complete nonsense …. even SOM demonstrates this with this very post.
              Ken Ham is a charlaten and a willfully ignorant liar.
              Geology proves this.

              But while it cannot fully prove or disprove the Bible, the more we dig up, the more the truth of the Bible’s account of people, places, and customs becomes clear.

              The Exodus, as depicted in the bible is complete fiction.

              There is evidence of the settlement pattern of ancient Canaan that refutes the conquest story out of hand, And there is Kenyon’s dating of Jericho, still the standard today , even after goodness knows how many more datings.
              Bryant Wood’s attempt to redate has failed.

              So, exactly what ”more” have ”we” dug up that demnstrates the veracity of the bible?
              Please list …say, half a dozen examples of evidence from the flood and the Exodus to demonstrate your claim.
              Thanks.

              Like

            10. And you are a Catholic, who people like James considers are not true Christians.
              That must suck, as he believes unless you are saved you will be going to Hell.
              ”Ouch, call the burn unit.”

              Like

            11. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Why are you trying to make enemies of SoM and me Ark? I don’t even consider you an enemy and you’re repulsive.

              Like

            12. I’m repulsive?
              Charmed , I’m sure.

              I am not trying to make enemies of you at all.
              Protestants and real Christians have been at each others throats since the Catholic Church invented Christianity. Don’t lay that dead lamb at my feet!

              All I do is point out the fact that you can’t even agree about your own god or the erroneous nonsense in the bible for the god’s sake

              Like

            13. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Funny you should mention Collins Ark.

              “The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. He can be worshipped in the cathedral or in the laboratory. His creation is majestic, awesome, intricate and beautiful – and it cannot be at war with itself. Only we imperfect humans can start such battles. And only we can end them.”

              -Francis Collins The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

              As far as the others go, simply calling them liars and charlatans does not a case make.

              Like

            14. As far as the others go, simply calling them liars and charlatans does not a case make.

              The problem you face here, James is that Collins believes in evolution.
              Strike one.
              That he considers his god to be the creator of the genome does not in anyway make it so … he is simply espousing a theological position.
              It does not diminish the scientific aspects of the work in the least.

              So the work of the HGP flatly refutes the likes of ICR and and every other Creationist.

              Collins would have to ( and more than likely does) regard someone like Ham and all YEC’s as Charlatens and science deniers, otherwise he is simply denying his own work and that of the hundreds of scientist who have striven for years to establish as fact that – for one thing – the biblical Adam and Eve are works of fiction.

              Like

            15. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              He believes in evolution? So, people who believe in evolution are not bitter enemies of people like me, despite what you may think.

              Like

            16. I did not use the term bitter enemies or even allude as such. Don’t try to make a bleeding heart case when there isn’t one James.

              Real Christians by and large consider YECs a bunch of science deniers who do more damage to the Christian faith than ever an atheist could.
              In this day and age, Christians such as SoM and other mainstream genuine Christians cannot understand how YECs can be so idiotic and deny the evidence that is all around them.
              Basically YECs are a serious embarrassment.

              Like

            17. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Real Christians… How is it you know what real Christians think?

              Like

            18. I do not now what they think.
              I have the evidence from the Catholics.
              They were the ones who invented your religion so it stands to reason that one would refer to their position.

              And YECs are simply silly.

              Like

            19. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Carholics invented Christianity? What does that even mean?

              The Roman Catholic Church contends that its origin is the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ in approximately AD 30. The Catholic Church proclaims itself to be the church that Jesus Christ died for, the church that was established and built by the apostles. Is that the true origin of the Catholic Church? On the contrary. Even a cursory reading of the New Testament will reveal that the Catholic Church does not have its origin in the teachings of Jesus or His apostles. In the New Testament, there is no mention of the papacy, worship/adoration of Mary (or the immaculate conception of Mary, the perpetual virginity of Mary, the assumption of Mary, or Mary as co-redemptrix and mediatrix), petitioning saints in heaven for their prayers, apostolic succession, the ordinances of the church functioning as sacraments, infant baptism, confession of sin to a priest, purgatory, indulgences, or the equal authority of church tradition and Scripture.

              Like

            20. Exactly! You got it in one, James.
              There is no Christian church in the bible, or even Christianity. The Catholic Church established it
              after competing sects were eventually put down and later declared heretical and annihilated.

              The Bible and all the doctrine you have originated with the Catholic Church.

              They simply gathered all the known texts, largely because Marcion got the drop on them, refunded his money, declared him a heretic and pushed on from there.

              Oh, and again, there is no evidence for the apostles outside the bible.

              You owe a huge debt to the Catholics.
              Without them you would have nothing. Remember that James. Nothing.

              Liked by 1 person

            21. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              The origin of the Catholic Church is the tragic compromise of Christianity with the pagan religions that surrounded it. Instead of proclaiming the gospel and converting the pagans, the Catholic Church “Christianized” the pagan religions, and “paganized” Christianity. By blurring the differences and erasing the distinctions, yes, the Catholic Church made itself attractive to the people of the Roman Empire. One result was the Catholic Church becoming the supreme religion in the Roman world for centuries. However, another result was the most dominant form of Christianity apostatizing from the true gospel of Jesus Christ and the true proclamation of God’s Word.

              Like

            22. The tragedy of the Catholic church is that it invented the christian religion, then attempted, and in some case succeeded, in liquidating almost all dissent.
              Although this did not prevent millennia of internecine strife which all too often resulted in wars.
              And of course there were a number of pogroms, including quite a few against the Jews.
              And one of the worst legacies of course is Islam, a religion that never would have appeared had it not been for Judaism and to a greater extent, Christianity

              Christianity has always been paganized.
              Look at your own utterly ridiculous fantasy version?
              A 10,000 year old earth, Vegetarian dinosaurs who became carnivorous after the Fall?
              A wooden boat and a global flood?
              I mean seriously!!
              What sort of brain-addled half believes such rubbish?
              Well … someone like you, as a matter of fact.

              However, another result was the most dominant form of Christianity apostatizing from the true gospel of Jesus Christ and the true proclamation of God’s Word.

              Such as the genocides that occurred on the American continent, North and South?
              And Australia as well, of course.
              And the modern day versions as a result of the church’s stance on contraception and HIV/AIDS.

              God’s word? The bible?
              Hilarious ….

              Like

            23. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              You may also find this interesting Ark.

              In 1950, in the encyclical Humani generis, Pope Pius XII gave permission to Catholic scholars to evaluate the pros and cons of human evolution. But this permission in no way abrogated authoritative teachings. Permission to investigate an alternative view is not tantamount to approval! On the contrary, it is often a means to expose an error root and branch. Pope Pius XII also called the German philosopher Dietrich Von Hildebrand a “twentieth century Doctor of the Church.” Commenting on a Catholic catechism that spoke favorably of theistic evolution, Von Hildebrand wrote the following:

              A grave error lies in the notion of “an evolutionary age” – as if it were something positive to which the Church must conform. Does the author consider it progress, an awakening to true reality, that Teilhard de Chardin’s unfortunate ideas about evolution fill the air? Does he not see that the prevailing tendency to submit everything, even truth – even divine truth! – to evolution amounts to a diabolical undermining of revealed truth? Truth is not truth if it is ever changing. The “courageous response” called for is precisely the opposite of yielding to evolutionary mythologies.

              Nowadays many Catholics reject the “traditional” Catholic doctrine with respect to the special creation of man, the creation of Eve from Adam’s side, and other doctrines derived from the literal historical interpretation of Genesis 1-11 on the grounds that the authoritative teaching of the Magisterium in recent decades has “moved beyond” and “corrected” certain errors in its earlier pronouncements on these subjects in the light of scientific advances. However, in the passage quoted above Dr. Von Hildebrand has given the simple reason why the special creation of Adam and the creation of Eve from Adam’s side, among other doctrines derived from Genesis 1-11, are authoritative and unchangeable Catholic doctrine. He reminds his readers that “Truth is not truth if it is ever changing.” Therefore, it is impossible for the Magisterium to have taught these doctrines as authoritatively as it has in the past and then to contradict that authoritative teaching. This would not be a “development of doctrine,” like the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception or Papal Infallibility, but a deformation of doctrine.

              Like

            24. Yes … well a lot has happened since 1950 James and you might want to look up more recent quotes from Pope Paul .

              You cannot demonstrate the veracity of fiction in the face of scientific evidence, James. At best you can simply create a bt more soin to palcate the credulous fr a while and give the nonsense a temporary air of respectability.
              At worse you are just punting more lies and thus , making yourself look a damn fool and a liar.

              Like

            25. @doug

              Are you sure that cement hat hasn’t put pressure on your brain? That may explain why are consistent in your babbling and accusations against good people, in which case, you could be excused.

              Your repetitive spiritual vulgarity is boring.

              Like

            26. Oh look, kiddies, it is the Interwebs’ Number One Dumbfuck!
              Hello Colorstorm, h0w the Gehenna are today, Old Sport?

              Like

            27. Here ya go, as a reminder how far we have fallen from this post:

              —-Scientific proof that God exists is found in various areas of science. Molecular biology presents almost obvious proof of God’s existence. This should be great news for atheists who profess to be champions of modern science.— opening statement, para. 1.

              Maybe you should read it again.

              Like

            28. And which god would this be, Colostorm?

              Like

            29. The ONLY God sir. There is only one. The Creator of water has no competitor with the creator of the dairy cow.

              And of course, the Most High has many names, but is revealed in, to, and through, the Lord Jesus Christ, by whom all things consist, and by whom all things were made.

              As I have said as much in times past, all the collected gods of mens imaginations, nike, kodak, krylon, rayon, crayon, orlon, mercury, silver, science, all of them, collectively can not count to three nor tie their shoes.

              Like

            30. There is no Jesus Christ, Colorstorm, He is a work of fiction.

              Like

            31. You keep thinking that. And I’ll keep believing this relevant truth, written thousands of years ago, and just as relevant on 4.6.17

              — For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.—

              It’s rather clear how alive Christ is, and how true His word is.

              Like

            32. Even the character Saul of Tarsus knew of no earthly creature as Jesus of Nazareth so what makes you so special?

              Like

            33. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Even though there is no record that Paul and Jesus met during Jesus’ three-and-a-half year ministry, Paul most certainly knew of Jesus. To say otherwise is absurd.

              The subject of Jesus Christ and His saving work were at the forefront of the apostle Paul’s ministry. “Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!” he said (1 Corinthians 9:16). This great apostle consistently focused his evangelistic efforts on convincing people that Christ was the promised Messiah of Israel as well as the risen Lord and Savior of the Gentiles. The unique identity of Jesus was at the center of Paul’s theology.

              Liked by 1 person

            34. You are as indoctrinated about the character Saul of Tarsus as you are about every other aspect of your faith and your religion.

              You are as ignorant of the text to gleefully reference as you are about most everything concerningyur religion.
              Being able to parrot what your preacher tells you or being able to quote text at will does not make a person wise or intelligent, merely a parrot.

              Remember, Eusebius considered it was okay to lie to further the causes of Christianity.
              And his immediate boss was Constantine whom the church made a saint.
              Remember who you are dealing with. They were were ruthless, unscrupulous and cared little for the tea and cucumber sandwich on the vicarage lawn type of believer the Church of England eventually produced.

              We already know that a fair portion of Paul’s work is forgery.
              There s an element of doubt over even his ”genuine letters”, some of which are largely pieced together from small missives.
              And we know as sure as eggs are eggs
              Paul said nothing about the life of your Jesus of Nazareth, or his supposed birth etc etc.
              He made up his own gospel …supposedly, revealed by … well you know the story, I’m sure?
              Do you know who was the first person to ” discover” Paul’s epistles?
              Who it was that handed them over to the fledgling church?

              Why on earth would you beleive you haven’t bought the entire farm, James?
              Maybe you should put your blanket blinkred acceptance to one side for a little while and do some balanced research.
              Start on your side of the fence…. maybe NT Wright.

              Like

            35. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              I am aware of what Pope Pual said as well as what the current Pope says and I disagree with them. They are moving away from traditional teaching to make the church more appealing to the world. Not surprising though, Protestant churches do it too.

              Like

            36. There we go!
              So much for the unchanging word of Yahweh.

              Now, you know that it was the Catholics who invented your religion so why not accept this fact and dump all that Young Earth Creationist crap and at least make an effort to join partially normal humanity?

              Like

            37. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              What does the unchanging Word of Yahweh have to do with what the pope and heretical churches think Ark?

              Like

            38. When you say heretical, you mean your interpretation being one of them of course, yes?
              The bible is supposed to be the inerrant word of Yahweh … an obvious falsehood as it has been continuously altered it and changed since it was put together.
              It is as corrupt a piece of writing as one is likely to find.

              Liked by 1 person

            39. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Why are you putting words in my mouth?

              When I speak of heretics, I am speaking of popes and protestant preachers who say what itching ears want to hear.

              The Word of God never changes, interpretations of it by fallible humans do.

              Like

            40. I would not wish to put anything in your mouth James, I assure you.

              Obviously there is no ”Word of God” (sic) only the nonsense claimed to be which is found in the Bible.

              Your version of Christianity is without question heretical, James, and be grateful they don’t burn people at the stake any longer.

              Like

            41. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Old Earth creationists and young Earth creationists get along swimmingly Ark. There’s only trouble between the two in your demented alternate reality.

              Like

            42. Really? You are a complete arse if you truly beleive this.
              Ask SoM if he would fully endorse the teaching of Young Earth Creationism in schools? The fuck he would, as it would undermine his own religion.
              You are the one who is delusional, James.

              Like

            43. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Ark,

              Although my views on creation are delusional to you and many others, they do not differ much from the traditional authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church. Yes many Catholics and some popes have officially endorsed theistic evolution, Catholics are fully justified in holding fast to the traditional doctrine of creation.

              Both the Council of Trent and Vatican Council I taught that no one is permitted to interpret Sacred Scripture “contrary to the unanimous agreement of the Fathers.” (Vatican Council I) In the words of Fr. Victor Warkulwiz:

              The Fathers and Doctors of the Church unanimously agreed that Genesis 1-11 is an inerrant literal historical account of the beginning of the world and the human species as related by the prophet Moses under divine inspiration. This does not mean that they agreed on every point in its interpretation, but their differences were accidental and not essential. Pope Leo XIII, following St. Augustine, affirmed the Catholic rule for interpreting Sacred Scripture, “not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires.”

              For the first five centuries of the Church, all of the Fathers believed and proclaimed:

              that less than 6,000 years had passed from the creation of the world to the birth of Jesus.
              that the creation of the cosmos took place in six 24 hour days or in an instant of time
              that God created the different kinds of living things instantly and immediately
              That Adam was created from the dust of the earth and Eve from his side
              that God ceased to create new kinds of creatures after the creation of Adam
              that the Original Sin of Adam shattered the perfect harmony of the first-created world and brought human death, deformity, and disease into the world.
              Also, this:

              “The earth also God commanded to stand in the midst of the world, rooted in its own foundation, and made the mountains ascend, and the plains descend into the place which he had founded for them. That the waters should not inundate the earth, He set a bound which they shall not pass over; neither shall they return to cover the earth. He next not only clothed and adorned it with trees and every variety of plant and flower, but filled it, as He had already filled the air and water, with innumerable kinds of living creatures” (Catechism of Trent).

              Note that God created all of these creatures by his word, instantly and immediately. During the creation period, He made, specifically, trees, “every variety of plant and flower,” air creatures and water creatures and land animals. There was no evolution. There was no long interval of time.

              Reference:

              Vatican Council I, Dogmatic Constitution concerning the Catholic Faith, Chapter 2 (DS, 1788).

              Like

            44. See above comment about getting a little more up to date.

              Sorry you wasted your time on my behalf,James, but at least you learned a bit more about the church that invented your religion.

              Why not spend your research time on something productive?

              Find me a contemporary account of the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth.

              That would be truly worthwhile research, I assure you.

              Like

            45. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Ark,
              ​To the Romans, the primary gatekeepers of written history at the time, Jesus during His own life would have been no different than thousands of other everyday criminals that were crucified.
              1. Jesus marginalized himself by being occupied as an itinerant preacher. Of course, there was no Palestine News Network, and even if there had been one, there were no televisions to broadcast it. Jesus never used the established “news organs” of the day to spread His message. He travelled about the countryside, avoiding for the most part (and with the exception of Jerusalem) the major urban centers of the day. How would we regard someone who preached only in sites like, say, Hahira, Georgia?

              2. Jesus’ teachings did not always jibe with, and were sometimes offensive to, the established religious order of the day. It has been said that if Jesus appeared on the news today, it would be as a troublemaker. He certainly did not make many friends as a preacher.

              3. Jesus lived an offensive lifestyle and alienated many people. He associated with the despised and rejected: Tax collectors, prostitutes, and the band of fishermen He had as disciples.

              4. Jesus was a poor, rural person in a land run by wealthy urbanites. Yes, class discrimination was alive and well in the first century also!

              A final consideration is that we have very little information from first-century sources to begin with. Not much has survived the test of time from A.D. 1 to today.

              Given all of that, how much contemporary evidence do you want? My guess is there is no set amount and your demand are just a ruse so you can continue in disbelief and maintain somewhat of an air of intellectual honesty.

              Like

            46. Yes, if there was a Jesus as you described – and remember have no evidence – he went completely unnoticed. And why not?
              Who would give a second glance to a smelly little shit of a rabbi wandering around in a dirt poor backwater of the Roman Empire?
              There were numerous such prophets.
              Read Josephus!
              But the biblical character as described; the Lake Tiberius pedestrian who changed water into whine, and hauled arse artound gGalilee curing all and sundry sending demons into piggies and making lepers walk and bringing smelly dead people back to fragrant life once more… etc etc who got himself crucified then came back to life…
              er … no. This character there is not a scrap of evidence for and certainly no contemporary evidence and why not?
              Because he is a narrative construct. A work of fiction.

              Like

            47. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              And with that, I’m out Ark. I’ve wasted enough of my time and SoM’s blog space on this nonsensical discussion.

              Like

            48. Well you are one who thinks the world is only 10,000 years old and dinosaurs were once vegetarian. How do you expect me to have an intellectual conversation with someone who holds to such bloody stupid moronic beliefs, James?
              When you can behave like an adult, and hold adult beliefs and stop behaving like a whiny little indoctrinate Creationist twit then I am sure we can have a truly rip- roaring discussion.
              For now, rather go blow kisses at Wally.

              Like

            49. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              I never said dinosaurs were once vegetarian and I don’t expect to have conversations with you at all. I go to lengths to avoid you, actually. It is you who can’t seem to refrain from roping me and people like me into the exact same conversations over and over and over. Why?

              Now go blow Wally some kisses, I’m sure he will be thrilled.

              Or, and better yet, try to engage an apologist with some credentials and some chops for a change, that I would like to see.

              Like

            50. So you beleive Allosaurus for example was always carnivorous do you?
              And how do you believe humans co existed with 30 ft tall carnivorous eating machines, James? You’ve seen Jurassic Park, I presume?

              Well, you tout yourself as one who is informed and yet you are flat out as ignorant as a potato when it comes to even the history of your own religion.

              I don’t come to your blog as you banned me.
              Unban me and you can demonstrate your theological prowess and intellectual and scientific fortitude to your groupies.

              Like

            51. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              I’ve demonstrated all I need to here as did Mel when he smacked you around on another blog the other day, as have countless others.

              All you do is demonstrate you have no clue what you’re talking about then resort to insults and vulgarity.

              Like

            52. Smile.

              The nkly you continually demonstrate is your abject ignorance of the subject material.
              There is a reason it is called faith, James.
              And there is a reason why the church was forced to give up on YEC a long time ago.
              It is a relatively ”new” comeback in theological terms and only the most indoctrinated or willfully ignorant people accept this.

              Yes, apologists have the market cornered when it comes to religious fiction.
              This is why so many are leaving the faith every year and simply to maintain you have to indoctrinate kids.

              You are an intellectual imbecile.

              Like

            53. Ark,

              Until you can explain how everything just happened all by itself, you are a world champion man of faith.

              Your never ending spew of nonsense issues forth from your atheist creed of faith.

              Like

            54. I have never said everything happened by itself.
              But if you would like to explain how the biblical character, Jesus of Nazareth made it all then maybe I will be convinced.
              The floor is all yours …

              Like

            55. Got to go to bed, James. Sorry, mate. I am bushed and I have a ton of stuff to do tomorrow..

              Read a proper science book, James.
              It’ll do you the world of good.

              Like

            56. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Look Ark. When Peter was preaching at Pentecost, people were cut to the heart and knew what they had to do. No one grilled Peter about Moses or what every Jewish archeologist alive thought. That’s the way it worked back then, that’s the way it works now.

              You have heard preaching and not been moved and that’s that. Maybe you will be someday, maybe not, I don’t and can’t know.

              What I do know is that Christian bloggers answering your endless questions will never get you to embrace Jesus as your Savior.

              Like

            57. Because the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth is a narrative construct for whom there is no evidence whatsoever.

              Like

            58. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              There is a ton of evidence Ark, you just reject it because the Spirit hasn’t moved you.

              Liked by 1 person

            59. Evidence? Feel free to place some out in the open.
              This is as good a place as any.
              You can start with contemporary evidence for the character Jesus of Nazareth.
              Away you go…

              Like

            60. There may well be a creator of some kind.
              What contemporary witnesses/evidence have you for the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth?

              Like

            61. Ark,

              Christian Western Civilization is evidence and proof of the “biblical character” called Jesus of Nazareth.

              The Catholic Church, the oldest institution in the world is also evidence and proof of the existence of Jesus of Nazareth.

              Like

            62. Neither of these examples demonstrates that the biblical character, the god-man Lake Tiberius pedestrian is anything but a work of fiction.

              And according to James and all other self proclaimed Christians, you are destined for Hell, so why should anyone regard a damn thing you write as anything but nonsense?

              Offer me a single contemporary account of the biblical character, Jesus of Nazareth.
              Just one account.
              You can do that can’t you?

              Like

            63. I cannot explain and have never tried to.
              ”I don’t know” is a perfectly acceptable response, and nit is completely honest as well.

              Now, a single contemporary piece of evidence for the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth, if you please. Just one, Som.
              And you can explain why you are a true Christian and James isn’t if you like as well?

              Like

            64. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Contemporary evidence? Well, you’ve got me there Ark. If Jesus was who He claimed to be, there would be a ton of evidence outside of the Bible.

              On the contrary, the fact that we have as much information as we do about Jesus from non-Christian sources is amazing in itself. Meier [Meie.MarJ, 7-9] and Harris [Harr.3Cruc, 24-27] have indicated several reasons why Jesus remained a “marginal Jew” about whom we have so little information:

              1. As far as the historians of the day were concerned, he was just a “blip” on the screen. Jesus was not considered to be historically significant by historians of his time. He did not address the Roman Senate, or write extensive Greek philosophical treatises; He never travelled outside of the regions of Palestine, and was not a member of any known political party. It is only because Christians later made Jesus a “celebrity” that He became known.

              Sanders, comparing Jesus to Alexander, notes that the latter “so greatly altered the political situation in a large part of the world that the main outline of his public life is very well known indeed. Jesus did not change the social, political and economic circumstances in Palestine (Note: It was left for His followers to do that!) ..the superiority of evidence for Jesus is seen when we ask what he thought.” [Sand.HistF, 3]

              Harris adds that “Roman writers could hardly be expected to have foreseen the subsequent influence of Christianity on the Roman Empire and therefore to have carefully documented” Christian origins. How were they to know that this minor Nazarene prophet would cause such a fuss?

              2. Jesus was executed as a criminal, providing him with the ultimate marginality. This was one reason why historians would have ignored Jesus. He suffered the ultimate humiliation, both in the eyes of Jews (Deut. 21:23 – Anyone hung on a tree is cursed!) and the Romans (He died the death of slaves and rebels.).

              On the other hand, Jesus was a minimal threat compared to other proclaimed “Messiahs” of the time. Rome had to call out troops to quell the disturbances caused by the unnamed Egyptian referenced in the Book of Acts [Sand.HistF, 51] . In contrast, no troops were required to suppress Jesus’ followers.

              To the Romans, the primary gatekeepers of written history at the time, Jesus during His own life would have been no different than thousands of other everyday criminals that were crucified.

              3. Jesus marginalized himself by being occupied as an itinerant preacher. Of course, there was no Palestine News Network, and even if there had been one, there were no televisions to broadcast it. Jesus never used the established “news organs” of the day to spread His message. He travelled about the countryside, avoiding for the most part (and with the exception of Jerusalem) the major urban centers of the day. How would we regard someone who preached only in sites like, say, Hahira, Georgia?

              4. Jesus’ teachings did not always jibe with, and were sometimes offensive to, the established religious order of the day. It has been said that if Jesus appeared on the news today, it would be as a troublemaker. He certainly did not make many friends as a preacher.

              5. Jesus lived an offensive lifestyle and alienated many people. He associated with the despised and rejected: Tax collectors, prostitutes, and the band of fishermen He had as disciples.

              6. Jesus was a poor, rural person in a land run by wealthy urbanites. Yes, class discrimination was alive and well in the first century also!

              A final consideration is that we have very little information from first-century sources to begin with. Not much has survived the test of time from A.D. 1 to today. Blaiklock has cataloged the non-Christian writings of the Roman Empire (other than those of Philo) which have survived from the first century and do not mention Jesus. These items are:

              An amateurish history of Rome by Vellius Paterculus, a retired army officer of Tiberius. It was published in 30 A.D., just when Jesus was getting started in His ministry.
              An inscription that mentions Pilate.
              Fables written by Phaedrus, a Macedonian freedman, in the 40s A.D.
              From the 50s and 60s A.D., Blaiklock tells us: “Bookends set a foot apart on this desk where I write would enclose the works from these significant years.” Included are philosophical works and letters by Seneca; a poem by his nephew Lucan; a book on agriculture by Columella, a retired soldier; fragments of the novel Satyricon by Gaius Petronius; a few lines from a Roman satirist, Persius; Pliny the Elder’s Historia Naturalis; fragments of a commentary on Cicero by Asconius Pedianus, and finally, a history of Alexander the Great by Quinus Curtius.
              Of all these writers, only Seneca may have conceivably had reason to refer to Jesus. But considering his personal troubles with Nero, it is doubtful that he would have had the interest or the time to do any work on the subject.
              From the 70s and 80s A.D., we have some poems and epigrams by Martial, and works by Tacitus (a minor work on oratory) and Josephus (Against Apion, Wars of the Jews). None of these would have offered occasion to mention Jesus.
              From the 90s, we have a poetic work by Statius; twelve books by Quintillian on oratory; Tacitus’ biography of his father-in-law Agricola, and his work on Germany. [Blaik.MM, 13-16]
              To this Meier adds [ibid., 23] that in general, knowledge of the vast majority of ancient peoples is “simply not accessible to us today by historical research and never will be.”ReferencesBlaik.MM – Blaiklock, E. M. Jesus Christ: Man or Myth? Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984.Harr.3Cruc – Harris, Murray. 3 Crucial Questions About Jesus. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.Meie.MarJ – Meier, John P. – A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. New York: Doubleday, 1991.Sand.HistF – Sanders, E.P. – The Historical Figure of Jesus. New York: Penguin Press, 1993.

              Like

            65. Thanks for the sermon.
              Now, once again, a single piece of contemporary evidence for the biblical character, Jesus of Nazareth, if you please. Just one.
              You do understand what the term contemporary evidence means I presume?

              Like

            66. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Still ignoring my comment on this Ark?

              Like

            67. Nope. Not ignoring at all, I promise. Simply provide contemporary evidence for the biblical character, Jesus of Nazareth and we can chat.
              Do you have any or not?
              I say you don’t.
              Prove me wrong.
              Off you go

              Like

            68. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              And, for the record, this is the rabbit hole is didn’t want to go down.

              Now, if you don’t mind, I have a class I need to teach at the church. Those people aren’t going to indoctrinate themselves.

              Like

            69. *Smile*.
              You see, James?
              You are a coward and a fraud to the end.
              You champion a cause you know in your brain is false. The evidence screams it.
              Even Som thinks you are a bloody idiot.
              But then I must always remember that you consider he is destined for Hell!
              Creationism is anathema to genuine Christians.

              How does it feel to know that nearly a billion proper Christians regard you as a delusional science denier, James?

              Like

            70. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              SoM thinks I’m an idiot? I would disagree with that.

              Also noticed you ignored my comment on contemporary evidence. Typical.

              Like

            71. Oh, SoM won’t say it to your face, but he will couch his terms.
              He believes in evolution. He is a Catholic. All Catholics believe in evolution as far as I am aware.
              But he cringes every time he has to confront your Young Earth Creationist clap trap, he truly does.
              He works hard to dismiss atheism byt using science and then along comes you and screws it all up for him!
              I laugh. Christians at loggerheads over doctrine is so funny.

              Sorry, James where did I ignore your comment?
              Are you referring to the tome you posted?
              I responded almost immediately.
              Look again, James…

              Like

            72. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              You know him so well don’t you? You ignored my comment about contemporary evidence outright every time I present it to you.

              You claim there should be a metric ton of contemporary evidence while completely ignoring what does exist and without acknowledging the fact that it is an astonishing amount.

              Like

            73. I do not ignore anything. Not a damn thing, I assure.
              This is why I continually ask you to provide a single piece of contemporary evidence for the man god, the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth.
              If you do not understand the word then simply grab a dictionary.

              Like

            74. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Yes you do Ark, you have as long as we’ve been interacting.

              Like

            75. Nope. Never ignore anything.
              Provide contemporary evidence if you have it.
              I say you do not have any and if you state otherwise I consider you are damned liar.
              So ..a s the saying goes… put up or push off.

              Like

            76. Well, all fictional characters are referred to in this or a similar fashion, are they not?

              Like

            77. catch a flight tomorrow and we can have dinner in my dining room if you like? I’ll even pick you up at Oliver Tambo International.
              So, come on now, Som. You understand what Contemporary Evidence is, yes?

              You are the man with all the evidence … give me just one single piece of contemporary evidence for the man-god Jesus of Nazareth.

              Like

            78. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Even Bart Ehrman doesn’t believe this nonsense.

              Like

            79. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
              The Isaiah 53:5 Project

              Genesis 1:1 says that “God created the heavens and the earth.” Then, Colossians 1:16 gives the added detail that God created “all things” through Jesus Christ. The plain teaching of Scripture, therefore, is that Jesus is the Creator of the universe.

              Liked by 1 person

        2. Ark,

          If you were to ever read the Bible you would find out that Saint Paul knew Jesus intimately.

          Jesus spoke to Saul and turned him into an Apostle.

          Saint Paul, a Roman citizen is probably one of the greatest, most credible witnesses to the existence of Jesus Christ.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. @SoM

            It would not hurt to speculate that Saul of Tarsus was in fact in Jerusalem many times; he was certainly there for the feasts, Pentecost, Passover, etc, and since he was in the circle of influence, he no doubt hear of this one ‘Messiah,’ which probably had his ear. It would not be surprising to know that Saul was in the audience many times in public, hearing this word, or being in the synagogue, or even challenging the Lord and His doctrine..

            He had an interest at the death of the first Christian martyr Stephen as he stood by and said ‘amen.’ But indeed, he did in fact encounter Christ, and the idea you mentioned that his conversion is one of the greatest proofs for the reliability of scripture is spot on.

            Liked by 1 person

      3. Oh, good. Your freshman biology class has equipped you to better understand every subject better than the experts. You don’t need to rely on experts, because you are a leader in your field… which happens to be every field…

        Like

  2. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
    The Isaiah 53:5 Project

    I saw a recent conversation between you and pastor Mel Wilde Ark. Is there a single Christian you haven’t annoyed and alienated with your juvenile nonsense?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yeah … Mel. What a fundamentalist halfwit.
      Another delusional twit who think he is Yahweh’s gift to theology.

      Like

      1. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
        The Isaiah 53:5 Project

        Ah, classic Ark 🙂

        Every time you get taken to the woodshed by a Christian (and it happens often) your reponse is “fundamentalist halfwit.”

        Thanks for the chuckle this morning Ark, you never disappoint 🙂 🙂 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Woodshed?
          Coming from someone who thinks dinosaurs ran around with humans this is probably the most hilarious thing I have read in a while!
          You are a sorry excuse for a Christian, you truly are. As far as intellectualism goes, tell me, do you still sit holding your little winky when you type so’s you don’t pee yourself giggling?

          Watch out…. there’s a Stegosaurus creeping up on you , James!

          Like

          1. The Isaiah 53:5 Project Avatar
            The Isaiah 53:5 Project

            🙂

            Like

  3. If you were to ever read the Bible you would find out that Saint Paul knew Jesus intimately.
    Jesus spoke to Saul and turned him into an Apostle.
    Saint Paul, a Roman citizen is probably one of the greatest, most credible witnesses to the existence of Jesus Christ.

    Smile… the delusional Road to Damascus episode I presume?

    You as indoctrinated as that fool, James.
    Go research Marcion.

    Like

    1. Ark,

      Saint Paul was an Apostle.

      That means he was assigned by Jesus to spread the Gospel, which he did just like all the Apostles.

      Like

      1. Don’t preach to me you indoctrinated halfwit.
        There is no evidence that this character ever existed either.not any ”Apostles”.
        You think I am some wet behind the ears rookie who just discovered Moses was make beleive?
        Stick it in your bloody ear!

        We know much of the corpus of epistles supposedly credited to someone called Paul are forgeries, this is a fact, and doubt has been cast on the supposed genuine ones.
        The letters are, in some cases , merely piecemeal missives that were put together to make a longer ”letter”, and even you should know this.

        Outside of the bible there is not a single witness to this character.

        Acts is a veritable joke of historical nonsense.
        The shipwreck on ‘Malta’ is the perfect example.
        But you probably know jack shit about Ophiology, I expect?

        You really need to research Marcion and maybe even do a bit of study of Josephus while you’re at it.
        Maybe it’s time we piss on the cornflakes of your supposed unimpeachable science proves Yahweh bullshit once and for all.
        You need to get your head out your arse once for a change and start behaving like an genuine adult instead of some sort of half brain dead ignoramus who knows stuff all about his own religion.

        Like

        1. Ark,

          Apparently, whatever doesn’t please you, you simply wink out of existence.

          Or, if they are able to defend themselves you call them names.

          Ark, childish irrationality isn’t an argument.

          Evidently, you never got the spankings you needed from your mum and dada.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. The problem with you, Som, is you cannot honestly face reality, thus you find refuge in fantasy and this is why you are, at the core, chronically afraid to venture down that path.
            To make genuine study of your religion will have you deconverting before you know it.
            So the real question is, what are you so scared of?

            Like

            1. hey ark-

              Why don’t you do yourself a favor and the ones with whom you engage, and say WHAT bible verse, truth, book, chapter, anything, that you DO believe is factual?

              Then we can all determine if you are sane enough to have a conversation with.

              Like

            2. Gee wiz, Storm,

              Talk about applying science to the problem at hand!

              And using the Bible to boot!

              Pure genius!

              Liked by 1 person

            3. Ha. I just had my flicker of inspiration! Then again, a mere spark of truth sends a-packin a whole bunch of nonsense.

              You are better man than I for talking to stoneheads. lol

              Like

            4. I have explained numerous times that the bible is primarily historical fiction.
              If you are too damn lazy to Google the meaning or even pick up a dictionary then you are simply taking up space with the vacuous crap you post.
              You want a genuine conversation…. start here … Historical fiction is …..
              Fill the rest in.

              Like

  4. Ah, so this is the post you were alluding to.
    Well, it’s begging the question to assume a genome is literature.
    Everything else is just a description of complexity — which isn’t an argument for intelligence. That’s a nonsequitur.

    Like

    1. Allallt,

      You are a brainless twit.

      I told you, you were a waste of time and you just proved.

      You are a troll who preys on the young.

      Like

      1. Are you young? Must be a shame to have gone senile while being young.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Why are there genetic diseases? Why does your god cause errors in DNA transcription and protein synthesis? After all, god could intimately control every aspect of nature.

    Why DNA encodes for processes like heart disease, lactose intolerance, blue eyes and hallucinations? Why DNA does not encode defenses for every possible disease agent? There is quite a lot of useless and empty “space” in that DNA hard disk made by god.

    Why would humans engineer CRISPR/Cas9 system at all, if not to correct the disastrous mistakes made by your fumbling and bumbling god?

    If god created DNA and if we can god’s work within it, then why are there so many problems with it? This new “holy book” called DNA represents misunderstanding and confusion in the theist.

    You can try and force the analogy of “literature” on DNA. Then you must accept that this piece of literature was written by an illiterate.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment