Responses to our Facebook discussion

William wrote: "so,what if there is a god and it is not the same god you warship or how you expect god to be?

Bill . . . Same God I worship?

 Like what? The "god" of Islam? The "god"of the Mormons?

True . . . All of these are different from the God of the Bible. . . do you have a specific question or objection to "God" (generally speaking)?

I can post a synopsis of the God of the Bible later when I get to my computer.

Thermodynamics & Complexity in Creation

Michael . . . You are right in that thermodynamics doesn't address the complexity issue . . . We have to consider all the laws within the context of the other laws. (Causality, thermodynamics, anthropic principles (design&complexity), moral laws, non-contradiction, etc.

If we find a watch on the ground, we don't assume that laws of nature developed just the right conditions for all the watch parts to uniquely evolve and come together to form a watch that works and keeps time.

Over time, water can form the grand canyon, but it cannot produce the engraved images on the side of Mt. Rushmore (by itself).

The question regarding causality - "what caused God?" Is a good one. But . . . God is not an effect. If we want to propose the big bang and or evolution, we must begin with something that isn't an effect.

Dawkins admits that a tiny amoeba is comprised of more information than the thirty volumes of the Encyclopaedia Britannica . . . But suggesting that creation evolved from a big bang, without any intelligent intervention, is equal to a printing press exploding and producing all 30 volumes of the encyclopaedia. Asserting that the printing press exploded and then evolved over billions of years is even more ridiculous.  Matter does not move from disorder to order bur rather order to disorder.
 
The complexity of DNA could not come about without a designer any more than a book without an author.