My view on this subject is that there is a god, if you disagree then lets discuss what you think... the second question is if there is a God, who's God is the right God... and please don't say that everyone's god is the right one, because that statement is contradiction itself.

do you think there is a god?
No

Humans have always wanted someone bigger than they are to blame, to thank, to ask for favors and help, to love, to look up to. Throughout the ages, that someone has usually been called God (or gods).

Is there a God? Yes, I believe there is Someone bigger than us, an inscrutable Mind, a Higher Power, a Great Mover and Doer.

Whose god is the right god? God is unknowable and indefinable. God doesn't belong to any particular religion, and can't be fenced off or put into a box or plugged into a certain set of circumstances. God is too big for that. All a religion does is define God for its own purposes and help people relate to and understand God.

I think that what people perceive as God is the power of human faith manifested in our lives.

my view on this subject is that there is a god,...the second question is if there is a God, whos God is the right God...

Yes, I believe there is a God, and I believe that He is the only God.

1 Corinthians 8:5-6
For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

I do believe in Our Heavenly Father. I also, believe, that those who pray to God, we are all praying to the same Father.

I always try and simplify it by correlating it to something that we all can try and understand.

We all have an earthly Father. In my family there are 5 of us. Each of us had a similar relationship with my Dad, but because of our individualities, the relationship was unique to who we are. But it was still the same Father.

There is no right God, that is where division creeps in. It is my belief, that we are all loved by Our Heavenly Father, known as God.

my view on this subject is that there is a god, if you disagree then lets discuss what you think...the second question is if there is a God, whos God is the right God...and please dont say that everyones god is the right one, because that statement is contradiction itself.
My response to question 1 is : NO.
.
Reasoning :
.
- WHY should there be a God?
- WHAT makes YOU think that there is a God?
- WHERE is the objective supporting evidence for the existence of that God?
.
My response to question 2 is : NONE OF THEM.
.
Reasoning :
.
Does that contradiction on itself not confirms, that the assumption that God/Gods exist is purely metaphysical instead of realistic?
:rolleyes:

my view on this subject is that there is a god, if you disagree then lets discuss what you think...the second question is if there is a God, whos God is the right God...and please dont say that everyones god is the right one, because that statement is contradiction itself.
There is only one good guy as I prefer to call him each religious following just calls him something different therefore we all have the right "GOD"

The difference is within the laws that you have to abide by if you wish to remain with in your chosen following often laid down by the elders or another -not the word of GOD- which no book dictates or any man for it will come from the heart you will not need a book to tell you what's right or wrong or good from bad we all of us know the difference which is what we should live by- in my opinion

I Believe there's is a God, The Almighty Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. You are right Not all religion have a true God. There is only one true Chruch which is in the Bible. That God Is true. There Many religion claiming they are Christian but they just pretending.

my view on this subject is that there is a god, if you disagree then lets discuss what you think...the second question is if there is a God, whos God is the right God...and please dont say that everyones god is the right one, because that statement is contradiction itself.
I agree with your statement regarding the thought that "Don't say that everyones God is the right God", because this is just not realistic regardless of the faith it would take to believe it. There is only one God. He is the Father, Son & Holy Spirit as one being. He is the alpha and omega. In him we live and breathe and have our being. We are made in his image, and our sin separates us from Him physically. We are the only beings made on this earth that have a spirit. The spirit is a part of us given by God that we may commune with Him if we call upon Jesus to forgive our sins so that we may be alive (Born Again) in spirit. This is considered to be a second birth, as all are "dead" in spirit until the renewal that can only come through Grace by forgiveness of sins. To begin to understand God means to understand what it is to be Holy. This can only be understood once the Spirit has been renewed. The Bible says that No one has seen God, No one has seen His face. We cannot comprehend what it must be to be that Holy, because People by nature are born sinful. There can be NO SIN in the presence of God. Something MUST be done to eradicate this sin. If our sin is not forgiven, it simply stays with us, therefore separating & keeping us from enjoying God's future physical relationship with Mankind. Of course there is one catch. One must acknowledge the validity of the Bible and make a conscience decision to believe in faith. This is a personal decision and will never be pushed by God, because he wants people to accept it freely. Be careful though, there are frauds out there. 1John4 says that Only Spirits that acknowledge Jesus is God in the Flesh... is of God. Many false religions claim Jesus as a prophet and do not give His the status of God in the flesh. This is how you divide the deceiving churches.

Well I strongly believe that there is a GOD.I believe that because my life tells a story to long to explain and my experience is a testimony in it self.GOD is not only real but he is good and mercy full and forgiving and there when ever you need him. If you don't believe me and want proof id say when you wake up in the morning while you are still laying down in your bed think,who was created first the egg or the chicken?so who created the chicken and the egg that created the chicken and so forth?a higher power>that same higher power that created the whole intier univers.stay in faith ,knock and he will answer, seek and he will show you the answers your looking for.remain in prayer and faith...

I grew up in a catholic family, went to church and attended catholic school for 11 years. I also read the bible 3 times. Last time a couple of years ago. I've always thought the bible was a fiction book written by racists and sexists men. Most of it has no logic whatsoever. I've looked for God, I tried to believe and have faith or find a reason for all the pain and injustice in this world. Where is God when we most need him? Why did he think that women were less than men or despised homosexuality? Why every time I asked a priest, theologian or simple christians about this "incredible" bible facts their answer was "YOU JUST DONT HAVE FAITH". So, basically, I DO NOT believe in God, heaven, hell, angels, adam and eve in paradise, the virginity of Mary or magical resurrections.

I'm so sorry for what you must have went threw to make you feel this way but sweety the worst thing you could possibly do to you self if not believe... GOD LOVES you and wants you to believe so that he can show you his love in every way possible. Just relax sweety and pray that the truth about his love be revealed to you and you'll be just fine...
I promise!GOD is to good for me to have all to myself... stay in faith... :D

I've always thought the bible was a fiction book written by racists and sexists men. Most of it has no logic whatsoever.

You are right to think that, and it's true.

All that shows though is that God didn't have anything to do with writing the Bible, it really doesn't prove there is no God.

What is god ?

I grew up in a catholic family, went to church and attended catholic school for 11 years. I also read the bible 3 times. Last time a couple of years ago. I've always thought the bible was a fiction book written by racists and sexists men. Most of it has no logic whatsoever. I've looked for God, I tried to believe and have faith or find a reason for all the pain and injustice in this world. Where is God when we most need him? why did he think that women were less than men or despised homosexuality? why everytime I asked a priest, theologian or simple christians about this "incredible" bible facts their answer was "YOU JUST DONT HAVE FAITH". So, basically, I DO NOT believe in God, heaven, hell, angels, adam and eve in paradise, the virginity of Mary or magical resurrections.

I am sorry if someone within the church has caused you pain. And of course it is not fiction, since it was first written over 1000's of years by dozens of writers and all of these were formed into a book form and divided into chapters and verse by man. And of course the bible does not always give us the answer we want, man wants to do things his way, but there is no racism in the bible at all, in fact it the old testement even has marriage of people of different races. As for as women, women were highly respected and men and women each had their place. As for as homosexuality, yes of course that is a sin and is not acceptable as a natural way for man. And there is a reason for all of the pain, it is in this world and it is because of sin and the evil nature of man. So man is the cause of the evil in this world. God is there when we need him, to help us and give us strengh to make it though

GOD AND SLAVERY
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 20:

If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

Leviticus Chapter 25, verse 44:

Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

GOD AND WOMEN
We find this in 1 Corinthians chapter 14:

As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

Then there is this section from 1 Timothy chapter 2:

Also that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly attire but by good deeds, as befits women who profess religion. Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.

GOD ANSWERING PRAYERS
In Matthew 7:7 Jesus says:

Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

The message is reiterated Mark 11:24:

Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.

If "every one who asks receives", then if we ask for cancer to be cured, it should be cured. If "our Father who is in heaven gives good things to those who ask him", then if we ask him to stop AIDS, he should do it. Right? And yet nothing happens.

If you would like additional proof, gather a million faithful believers together into a giant prayer circle. Have them all pray together in Jesus' name that God cures every case of cancer on the planet tomorrow. Pray sincerely, knowing that when God answers this completely heartfelt, unselfish, non-materialistic prayer, it will glorify God and help millions of people in remarkable ways. Now, we certainly have two or more people gathered together, and they have asked in Jesus' name, and we have not one but a million faithful believers who, by definition, have faith and believe. We have fulfilled every one of Jesus' requirements.
Will Jesus answer the prayer now? Of course not. Your prayer will go unanswered, in direct defiance to Jesus' promises in the Bible. In fact, if you pray for anything that is impossible, your prayer will always go unanswered. How weird, because NOTHING is impossible for God.

And finally, one of Christian's all time favorites:

ALL THE EVIL IN THE WORLD IS MEN'S FAULT

Because God made you for a reason, he also decided when you would be born and how long you would live. He planned the days of your life in advance, choosing the exact time of your birth and death. The Bible says, "You saw me before I was born and scheduled each day of my life before I began to breathe. Every day was recorded in your book!" [Psalm 139:16]

If God has a divine plan for each of us, then he had a divine plan for Hitler too. It is when you stop to think about it deeply and the contradictions hit you.

Now let's imagine that you say a prayer . What difference does it make? God has his plan, and that plan is running down its track like a freight train. If God has a plan, then everyone who died in the Holocaust died for a reason. They had to die, and each death had meaning. Therefore, Holocaust victims could pray all day, and they would still die. The idea of a "plan" makes the idea of a "prayer-answering relationship with God" a contradiction, doesn't it? Yet Christians seem to attach themselves to both ideas, despite the irresolvable problem the two ideas create.

my view on this subject is that there is a god, if you disagree then lets discuss what you think...the second question is if there is a God, whos God is the right God...and please dont say that everyones god is the right one, because that statement is contradiction itself.
Christians serve the right GOD. All these other "gods" were created by the devil to distract and decieve people.

there is no racism in the bible at all, in fact it the old testement even has marriage of people of different races. As for as women, women were highly respected and men and women each had thier place.

I know you're a preacher/priest/father(not sure which one) and I respect that, but when you make statements like this you come off looking like you have never read the Bible. It's true there were some mixed marriages but there was a lot said against it in the OT. Even the NT crucifixion story is antisemitic and the cause of a lot of hate towards the Jews throughout the years.

Women were not respected at all in the Bible, and they still aren't throughout the middle east.

GOD AND SLAVERY
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 20:

If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

Leviticus Chapter 25, verse 44:

Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

GOD AND WOMEN
We find this in 1 Corinthians chapter 14:

As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

Then there is this section from 1 Timothy chapter 2:

Also that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly attire but by good deeds, as befits women who profess religion. Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.

GOD ANSWERING PRAYERS
In Matthew 7:7 Jesus says:

Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

The message is reiterated Mark 11:24:

Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.

If "every one who asks receives", then if we ask for cancer to be cured, it should be cured. If "our Father who is in heaven gives good things to those who ask him", then if we ask him to stop AIDS, he should do it. Right? And yet nothing happens.

If you would like additional proof, gather a million faithful believers together into a giant prayer circle. Have them all pray together in Jesus' name that God cures every case of cancer on the planet tomorrow. Pray sincerely, knowing that when God answers this completely heartfelt, unselfish, non-materialistic prayer, it will glorify God and help millions of people in remarkable ways. Now, we certainly have two or more people gathered together, and they have asked in Jesus' name, and we have not one but a million faithful believers who, by definition, have faith and believe. We have fulfilled every one of Jesus' requirements.
Will Jesus answer the prayer now? Of course not. Your prayer will go unanswered, in direct defiance to Jesus' promises in the Bible. In fact, if you pray for anything that is impossible, your prayer will always go unanswered. How weird, because NOTHING is impossible for God.

And finally, one of Christian's all time favorites:

ALL THE EVIL IN THE WORLD IS MEN'S FAULT

Because God made you for a reason, he also decided when you would be born and how long you would live. He planned the days of your life in advance, choosing the exact time of your birth and death. The Bible says, "You saw me before I was born and scheduled each day of my life before I began to breathe. Every day was recorded in your book!" [Psalm 139:16]

If God has a divine plan for each of us, then he had a divine plan for Hitler too. It is when you stop to think about it deeply and the contradictions hit you.

Now let's imagine that you say a prayer . What difference does it make? God has his plan, and that plan is running down its track like a freight train. If God has a plan, then everyone who died in the Holocaust died for a reason. They had to die, and each death had meaning. Therefore, Holocaust victims could pray all day, and they would still die. The idea of a "plan" makes the idea of a "prayer-answering relationship with God" a contradiction, doesn't it? Yet Christians seem to attach themselves to both ideas, despite the irresolvable problem the two ideas create.

GOD knows our future but everyone has free will... HE knows the choices we will make before we make them. If you knew what would happen before it happened wouldn't you plan for it!! He doesn't make anyone do wrong or right. GOD loves us and it is his will that no man perish but have eternal life in Heaven.

A favorite Christian rationalization for why God does not answer our prayer to eliminate cancer is because "it would take away free will." The logic: If you pray and God answers your prayer, then God would have revealed himself to you, and you would know that God exists. That would take away your free will to believe in him. Of course, if this is true, then by default all of Jesus' statements about prayer in the Bible are false. It means that God cannot answer any prayer. Also, why is a God who must remain hidden like this incarnating himself and writing the Bible?

If Jesus is God, and if God is perfect, why aren't all of Jesus's verses about prayer true? Was Jesus exaggerating? If Jesus is perfect, why wouldn't he speak the truth? Why doesn't a prayer to cure cancer worldwide tomorrow work?

Believers have many different ways to explain why all these verses in the Bible do not work, even if you are praying sincerely, unselfishly and non-materialistically, and even if the answer to your prayer would help millions of people and glorify God in the process. They will say things like this:

"You need to understand what Jesus was saying in the context the first century civilization in which he was speaking..."

Or:

"When Jesus talked about 'moving a mountain', he was speaking metaphorically. When someone says, 'it is raining cats and dogs,' no one takes him literally. Jesus was using a figure of speech rather than speaking literally..."

Or:

God is not a thing. He is a being. He has a will. He has desires. He relates to people. He has personality traits. Prayer is a fancy word for talking to God. God, who knows everything, even before we say it, knows the difference between our thoughts and wishes, and when we are actually addressing him. He hears our prayers and responds. His responses are based on his personal decisions. We cannot predict how he will respond to our prayers...

The problem is, all of these rationalizations miss two important points:

1. God is supposed to be an all-powerful, all-knowing, perfect being.

2. The statement, "Nothing will be impossible for you", along with the other Bible verses quoted above, are false. The fact is, lots of things are impossible for you.

If a perfect being is going to make statements about how prayer works in the Bible, then three things are certain: 1) He would speak clearly, 2) he would say what he means, and 3) he would speak the truth. That is what "being perfect" is all about. A perfect, all-knowing God would know that people would be reading the Bible 2,000 years later, and therefore he would not use first-century idioms (he would say what he means). He would know that normal people will be reading the Bible and interpreting it in normal ways, so he would speak in such a way as to avoid mis-interpretation (he would speak clearly). He would know that when you say, "Nothing will be impossible for you", that what it means is, "Nothing will be impossible for you" and he would make sure that the statement "Nothing will be impossible for you" is accurate (he would speak the truth). If God says it, it should be true -- otherwise he is not perfect.

Unfortunately, the fact is that thousands of things are impossible for you no matter how much you pray, and no one (including Jesus) has ever moved a mountain.

In order to see the truth, you need to accept the fact that all of the above verses are wrong. The fact is, God does not answer prayers. The reason why God does not answer your prayers is simple: God does not exist.

Christians serve the right GOD. All these other "gods" were created by the devil to distract and decieve people.

And what makes your god better that the other gods?

Yes as long as you believe things are impossibe for you, they will be, that is why there is much more healing among those who are not as "educated" in to what God can't do. There are of course restrictions, we can not bring on the end of the world, that is God the Fathers that has that knowledge alone. We can not make something happen that isnot within Gods will, or that is against Gods law.

As one who has saw instant healing of many things, and other miricles, no, all things are possible, if they are first God's will and second if there is faith for it. With this we also know that all evil in the world is here because of man and his nature. The earth is not the home for the chistian, we are stangers here merely passing though. The earth is not christian and has not been since the fall of man,

So the reason God does not answer pray, the reason is he does, but often you don't want to hear the answer. First it is a season for all to live, we are born to die, so we though prayer can not stop death.

I am sorry you have not the faith to believe and see the wonders God has for you and for all beleivers.

Christians serve the right GOD.

Believers of other Gods and religions say and believe the same thing.

A favorite Christian rationalization for why God does not answer our prayer to eliminate cancer is because "it would take away free will." The logic: If you pray and God answers your prayer, then God would have revealed himself to you, and you would know that God exists. That would take away your free will to believe in him. Of course, if this is true, then by default all of Jesus' statements about prayer in the Bible are false. It means that God cannot answer any prayer. Also, why is a God who must remain hidden like this incarnating himself and writing the Bible?

If Jesus is God, and if God is perfect, why aren't all of Jesus's verses about prayer true? Was Jesus exagerating? If Jesus is perfect, why wouldn't he speak the truth? Why doesn't a prayer to cure cancer worldwide tomorrow work?

Believers have many different ways to explain why all these verses in the Bible do not work, even if you are praying sincerely, unselfishly and non-materialistically, and even if the answer to your prayer would help millions of people and glorify God in the process. They will say things like this:

"You need to understand what Jesus was saying in the context the first century civilization in which he was speaking..."

or:

"When Jesus talked about 'moving a mountain', he was speaking metaphorically. When someone says, 'it is raining cats and dogs,' no one takes him literally. Jesus was using a figure of speech rather than speaking literally..."

or:

God is not a thing. He is a being. He has a will. He has desires. He relates to people. He has personality traits. Prayer is a fancy word for talking to God. God, who knows everything, even before we say it, knows the difference between our thoughts and wishes, and when we are actually addressing him. He hears our prayers and responds. His responses are based on his personal decisions. We cannot predict how he will respond to our prayers...

The problem is, all of these rationalizations miss two important points:

1. God is supposed to be an all-powerful, all-knowing, perfect being.

2. The statement, "Nothing will be impossible for you", along with the other Bible verses quoted above, are false. The fact is, lots of things are impossible for you.

If a perfect being is going to make statements about how prayer works in the Bible, then three things are certain: 1) He would speak clearly, 2) he would say what he means, and 3) he would speak the truth. That is what "being perfect" is all about. A perfect, all-knowing God would know that people would be reading the Bible 2,000 years later, and therefore he would not use first-century idioms (he would say what he means). He would know that normal people will be reading the Bible and interpreting it in normal ways, so he would speak in such a way as to avoid mis-interpretation (he would speak clearly). He would know that when you say, "Nothing will be impossible for you", that what it means is, "Nothing will be impossible for you" and he would make sure that the statement "Nothing will be impossible for you" is accurate (he would speak the truth). If God says it, it should be true -- otherwise he is not perfect.

Unfortunately, the fact is that thousands of things are impossible for you no matter how much you pray, and no one (including Jesus) has ever moved a mountain.

In order to see the truth, you need to accept the fact that all of the above verses are wrong. The fact is, God does not answer prayers. The reason why God does not answer your prayers is simple: God does not exist.

The day we begin to understand that there are bigger things than ourselves and our individual selfish needs is the day we can begin to understand the concept behind prayer. We are to pray according to God's will, and not ours. There is a reason for unanswered prayer that is beyond human comprehension. No one but God can know the "Domino affect" that a selfish prayer could cause, even if prayed with the best intentions. No one on this earth is that wise. Take for instance the concept of spraying pesticides on food with the intention of having greater harvests. Take for instance the injection of steroids in traditional poultry and cows. These are but a couple of examples of how man's decisions are the cause of disease in today's society. Ultimately the root of all evil revolves around money in one way shape or form. You just have to find the path that leads to its cause and you'll find it. People pray for cures to a disease at the very same time we are contributing to the sin. It is quite ironic actually. There are things that need to come to pass in this world for a greater reason than most can begin to understand. It is this reason that we as Christians are called to find those root causes and give our sin over to God as we realize it in our lives. The only way that one can begin to understand this Wisdom is to ask for that Wisdom which ultimately belongs to God. This happens when you ask God/Jesus/Holy Spirit to live in your heart by admitting that you are a sinner and repenting from our sin to allow our bodily vessel to become a "Temple of this Spirit". No one can begin to understand Wisdom until you are spiritually awakened (Born Again). It is then that your spiritual blindness will be lifted to understand unanswered prayer. The problem with this is how do you accept a Savior in your life unless you acknowledge and recognize that you need one. Until this happens in a person's life, they are doomed to walk through life without hope and complete emptiness. Life is not without hope, unless you choose it to be so.

I do not understand the immediate correlation between the belief in God, spirituality and plain old good humanity and the Bible. If humankind were eradicated tomorrow and 2000 years from now the new inhabitants( be it humanform or other) found a large collection of Stephen King books would they base their entire belief system on a Clown called 'IT' that only comes to life when you bury it in the 'Pet cemetery ? I consider myself spiritual because I am not egotistical enough to think humans are the best there is. Do you? Anyone here a Star Trek fan? I am not but I do recall the Borg and the premise to their race. Is it not possible that God is the collective conscience of every living creature on Earth? I do not know if I believe that but the point is until you can prove it wrong then who are you to tell me different? Even if you do prove it wrong then (more emphatically) who are you try to change anything about the way I think as long as it doesn't affect you. Here is an idea World... stop pushing your own beliefs on others regardless of what they might be. I can think of at least one war that may stop.

... stop pushing your own beliefs on others regardless of what they might be. I can think of at least one war that may stop.[/QUOTE]
I totally agree

We are to pray according to God's will, and not ours.

What's the point then?

This debate is really not my cup of tea, but I was just wondering why people would have to make excuses for God not answering prayers when the Bible clearly says "ask and you shall receive"

Whats the point then??

This debate is really not my cup of tea, but I was just wondering why people would have to make excuses for God not answering prayers when the Bible clearly says "ask and you shall receive"

God always answers prayer (sometimes not the way the pray-er would like the answer to be).

God always answers prayer (sometimes not the way the pray-er would like the answer to be).


How do you know that god always answer prayers? Just curious...

For me I cannot believe in a god(s) as any god(s) which would create this world are at best disinterested and at worst evil. Why would a loving god create a creature that's sole purpose in life is to bury itself into a child's eye?

Also what have suffers of genetic diseases such as Epidermolysis bullosa simplex (EBS) skin blistering they are in pain fro the moment they are born, Xeroderma pigmentosa another painful one ultra sensitivity to light and Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva bone grows in place of normal tissue upon injury and the child (they don't live much longer) is imprisoned and suffocated.

That's just three horrendous genetic diseases that exist off the top of my head there are many more. Now what has that got to do with free will. If it about testing believers why do they happen equally to people able to hear 'god's word' and those who can never?

That is pretty much the crux of my atheism.

I haven't posted links to the picture but a quick Google image search will show the horror of these conditions.

There is only one GOD who has created everything and this life is a test for the hereafter, if we follow almighty God's commands and we pass the test then we are rewarded with eternity in heaven where we will get anything that we ask for, if you compare this to illnesses some people have to suffer in this life, then this is nothing compared to eternal bliss, it may be that the person who suffers with patience in this life with illnesses/health probs/financial problems and puts all hi strust in ALMIGHTY GOD will go to paradise without any reckoning whereas other people may have to go to hellfire for a short time to be cleansed, before ebntering heaven, this is what we believe as muslims, our instruction manual in this life is the QURAN, the words of our cREATOR, read it and save yourselves, any questions email me at [email protected]

Gods are created by the people who need them.

So who created the people?

so who created the people?
Nobody? Yeah, Nobody.

Gods are created by the people who need them.

Exactly!!

Originally Posted by readnow1978
So who created the people?


EVOLUTION has created us

my view on this subject is that there is a god, if you disagree then lets discuss what you think...the second question is if there is a God, whos God is the right God...and please dont say that everyones god is the right one, because that statement is contradiction itself.

My answer to your first question, is no. Which means I have no need for an answer your 2nd question, right?

I Believe theres is a God, The Almighty Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. You are right Not all religion have a true God. There is only one true Chruch which is in the Bible. That God Is true. There Many religion claiming they are Christian but they just pretending.

How fortunate for you that you happened to have been born into the Christian religion and not Islam, Hinduism, or some other. Seriously, good job!

exactly!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by readnow1978
so who created the people?


EVOLUTION has created us

Who created evolution? Where did it begin?

Gods are created by the people who need them.
Quite the contarary. God Created you. You just don't need Him.. . for now at least.

who created evolution? where did it begin?

Why do you think it has to be created?

Why do you think it has to be created?

Well I would think if you are going to take a "scientific" approach to explaining origins one would need to apply all laws of science. According to science there has to be a beginning so if the universe was not created by someone did it just appeared and create itself?

The Universe could not have just appeared and created itself because that is contrary to the First Law of Thermodynamics that says energy is not being created or destroyed. It is called the "Law of Conservation." Energy is being directed, used, etc. but not created or destroyed.
So before we stand on the bank of the mythical little pond to discuss man's origins,
What is the origin of the matter? What are the origins of the Universe?

Well i would think if you are going to take a "scientific" approach to explaining origins one would need to apply all laws of science. According to science there has to be a beggining so if the universe was not created by someone did it just appeared and create itself?

The Universe could not have just appeared and created itself because that is contrary to the First Law of Thermodynamics that says energy is not being created or destroyed. It is called the "Law of Conservation." Energy is being directed, used, etc. but not created or destroyed.
So before we stand on the bank of the mythical little pond to discuss man's origins,
what is the origin of the matter? what are the origins of the Universe?

The most intellectually honest answer to who or what created the universe is, 'I don't know'. Postulating a supreme being gets us nowhere, because we now have to answer where this supreme being came from. This is an even bigger problem than we started with. Occam's Razor prevails here.

The most intellectually honest answer to who or what created the universe is, 'I don't know'. Postulating a supreme being gets us nowhere, because we now have to answer where this supreme being came from. This is an even bigger problem than we started out with. Occam's Razor prevails here.


Actually a supreme being who created everything is the most intellegent answer there is. It is evident in the obvious design and mechanism of the universe that something or someone intelligent created this universe.

I liken it to if a man was able to go to Jupitor and he found, when he landed on the planet, a machine that resembles a car but nothing like we have ever seen on earth. It has a tires and steering wheel to direct it, it has seats doors, an engine etc. Basically the machine appears to be for mobility.
So if this man finds this machine and concludes that it just appeared on the planet and evolved over time, would that be a logical conclution?

I think it would be more logical to conclude that there must be some kind of intelligent life on the planet because of the obvious purposeful design and machinery.
Now compared to a car, the Universe desplays a much more grand and purposeful design of elements and inticate machinery. So why would anyone conclude that there is no intellegent designer behind it? It seems very unreasonable to me.

Actually a supreme being who created everthing is the most intellegent answer there is. It is evident in the obvious design and mechanism of the universe that something or someone intelligent created this universe.

i liken it to if a man was able to go to Jupitor and he found, when he landed on the planet, a machine that resembles a car but nothing like we have ever seen on earth. It has a tires and steering wheel to direct it, it has seats doors, an engine etc. Basically the machine appears to be for mobility.
So if this man finds this machine and concludes that it just appeared on the planet and evolved over time, would that be a logical conclution?

I think it would be more logical to conclude that there must be some kind of inteligent life on the planet because of the obvious purposeful design and machinery.
Now compared to a car, the Universe desplays a much more grand and purposeful design of elements and inticate machinery. So why would anyone conclude that there is no intellegent designer behind it? it seems very unreasonable to me.

William Paley's "Watchmaker' argument. I'm very familiar with it. Still doesn't explain what created the creator though. Such a designer would have to be many orders of magnitude more complex than that which it designed. So you're STILL left with an even bigger question than the one you think you've answered, sorry to say.

The problem with the watchmaker argument is that the watch doesn't self replicate and doesn't change over time with each replication. If life were static like the watch then it would mean something but since life is ever changing comparing life to a watch is an argument that has no logic behind it. I would think someone who studied biology would know the blindingly obvious flaw in that argument

Now compared to a car, the Universe desplays a much more grand and purposeful design of elements and inticate machinery.

Where? Just curious... All I see in the universe is chaos and hostility.

William Paley's "Watchmaker' argument. I'm very familiar with it. Still doesn't explain what created the creator though. .

It make sense that thing.. lol You can't deny that it is logical. How can you say such a complex universe just appeared from no where and evolved. All the intricasies of how things work. The earth perfectly possitioned orbiting around the sun all the way down down to how a small plant converts carbon dioxide into oxygen or how blood carries nutrients from food to animal cell. All the mechanisms that make life possible, Doesn't that all seem like intelligent to you? I think it takes a lot more FAITH to believe all we see just appeared from no where and perfectly and inteligently aligned itself. My faith is not that strong that I am willing to forgo logic.




Such a creator would have to be many orders of magnitude more complex than that which it created. So you're STILL left with a bigger question than the one you think you've answered, sorry to say

God is has greater magnitude than his creation. I don't see why that is a problem. I think it is a given that a creator of anything is going to be more complex and of greater magnitude than his creation so I don't understand what point you are trying to make here.
What bigger question is left unanswered. God's origin? Well, He has no beginning and no end. Of course that is too hard for you to wrap around your human head because all you know of this life is 18-70years you have experienced on this earth where time is the main a factor however God lives beyond time, you have to think outside the box to even begin to comprehend it.

It make sense that thing..lol You can't deny that it is logical. How can you say such a complex universe just appeared from no where and evolved. All the intricasies of how things work. the earth perfectly possitioned orbiting around the sun all the way down down to how a small plant converts carbon dioxide into oxygen or how blood carries nutrients from food to animal cell. All the mechanisms that make life possible, Doesnt that all seem like intelligent to you? I think it takes a lot more FAITH to believe all we see just appeared from no where and perfectly and inteligently aligned itself. My faith is not that strong that i am willing to forgo logic.




God is has greater magnitude than his creation. I dont see why that is a problem. I think it is a given that a creator of anything is going to be more complex and of greater magnitude than his creation so i dont understand what point you are trying to make here.
What bigger question is left unanswered. God's origin? Well, He has no beginning and no end. ofcourse that is too hard for you to wrap around your human head because all you know of this life is 18-70years you have experienced on this earth where time is the main a factor however God lives beyond time, you have to think outside the box to even begin to comprehend it.

If you can accept a creator that has no beginning and no end, then why can't you accept that the universe has no beginning and no end, and just skip out the creator?

Why is it illogical for the universe to have no creator, but perfectly logical for the creator to have no creator?
Surely what applies to one applies to the other?

Where? Just curious... All I see in the universe is chaos and hostility.

Yes chaos and hostility created by man, but what does that have to do with nature of the Universe?
You ask where? Every where you look is where! The plants trees animals...
Let look at just your body. Right now as you sit at your computer gallons of blood being pumped in your body by an organ known as a heart. In your blood is millions of white blood cells that are fighting infection while your red blood cells are delivering oxygen from the lungs your to body tissues via the blood. Your stomach is digesting the food you ate breaking it down into tiny particles that are small enough to enter the blood stream to deliver nutrients to body cells that would otherwise die without it. Your kidneys are maintaining the homeostatic balance of bodily fluids by filtering and secreting metabolites while your liver detoxifying your body and creating bile to aid the digestive process. Need I go on? I think you get the point here. There is, definitely purposeful design of elements and inticate machinery in this universe

Yes chaos and hostility created by man, but what does that have to do with nature of the Universe?
You ask where? every where you look is where! The plants trees animals...
Let look at just your body. right now as you sit at your computer gallons of blood being pumped in your body by an organ known as a heart. In your blood is millions of white blood cells that are fighting infection while your red blood cells are delivering oxygen from the lungs your to body tissues via the blood. Your stomach is digesting the food you ate breaking it down into tiny particles that are small enough to enter the blood stream to deliver nutrients to body cells that would otherwise die without it. Your kidneys are maintaining the homeostatic balance of bodily fluids by filtering and secreting metabolites while your liver detoxifying your body and creating bile to aid the digestive process. Need i go on? I think you get the point here. There is, definately purposeful design of elements and inticate machinery in this universe

Well I mean these weren't here when the universe was created. The chaos and hostility I'm referring to was not created by man. There is only one place in the billions of light years of space that we know of where we have found that these "intricate machines" exist. Why is the rest of it so barren, chaotic and hostile? That's not good design.

Saying the earth is perfect for life is like saying a wall is perfect for holding water. Is there life on earth? Sure. Can you get a wall to hold water? Sure. You are but a single drop of water clinging to the side of the wall forgetting all of the drops that came before you and claiming that because you are holding on, a wall is a perfect container for you. If earth was perfect all that came before you would still be here. It's not though, we cling to life and have to fight for it everyday.

[QUOTE=Capuchin]If you can accept a creator that has no beginning and no end, then why can't you accept that the universe has no beginning and no end, and just skip out the creator?

Whether the universe has a beginning and an end or not, it still warrents an intelligent designer regardless. If is possible that the creater and the universe have always existed. But unfortunately for you can not use that as explanation because you would be going outside of science and delving into the supernatural. Science tells us that there is a beginning and an end.


Why is it illogical for the universe to have no creator, but perfectly logical for the creator to have no creator?
Surely what applies to one applies to the other?

No, because what we are battle here are two sides here. "science" vs supernaturalism.
It is not logical (based on "science" and general human knowledge) that the creator has no beginning and no end. It is supernatural.

Just a warning,

Remember merely state YOUR beliefs, or feelings, or rants. No more name calling, and if there is, don't respond with the same, report it.
Several name calling reports ( and responses to them have been deleted)

I don't want to have to close another post but will not let these things go down hill.

No, because what we are battle here are two sides here. "science" vs supernaturalism.
It is not logical (based on "science" and general human knowledge) that the creator has no beginning and no end. It is supernatural.

If you think that the supernatural is allowed, why is the universe not supernatural itself, without need for a creator?

Well I mean these weren't here when the universe was created. The chaos and hostility i'm referring to was not created by man. There is only one place in the billions of lightyears of space that we know of where we have found that these "intricate machines" exist. Why is the rest of it so barren, chaotic and hostile? That's not good design.

Barren chaotic and hostile to who?
It is still design, whether you think it is not "good" or not, is purely subjective on your part.

The Bible definitely alludes to a chaotic void and barren place when God began to create life. The bible also says the universe is in gradual degradation and is dying like everything else. So your point dies right there.

God exists... period. This is not faith... not belief... it is fact. The real question is "what is your definition of God?"

The Bible definately alludes to a chaotic void and barren place when God began to create life. The bible also says the universe is in gradual degredation and is dying like everything else. so your point dies right there.

It does? Lol Ive never read that. But hey, the Bible "alludes" to a lot

Science tells us that there is a beginning and an end.

Umm... no. Human logic tells us there is a beginning and an end which is why you insert all powerful creator to fill in the gaps where you don't understand. Answers based on observation and experimentation (Science) doesn't depend on a beginning or an end, it often finds these things but isn't required. For things like energy we found that it can't be created or destroyed so energy has no beginning and no end.

You admit though that belief in a god is illogical so why would you believe in something that is illogical? You don't believe in all things illogical, do you? Why not just admit like the rest of us and say you don't know how the universe was formed or if it was formed and instead of saying god did it. Why not help look for answers?

Science tells us that there is a beginning and an end.

I don't agree with you here. It tells us that there is a beginning and an end to our universe. It does not tell us what was before our universe. Most scientists a few years ago would have said that there was nothing before the big bang, but I believe that is becoming a less solidly held viewpoint, we certainly have no evidence either way.

I know there is a God. There might even be many gods. But I do know that not one is more powerful than the other. Now, I did not say they are all good just they are all equal.

If you think that the supernatural is allowed, why is the universe not supernatural itself, without need for a creator??

Sure anything is possible. But you are all trying to argue logical science to explain origins so I am just saying if you want to use logic and science, to say the universe just created itself or it has always existed, is not logical and goes against science.

I don't agree with you here. It tells us that there is a beginning and an end to our universe. It does not tell us what was before our universe. Most scientists a few years ago would have said that there was nothing before the big bang, but I believe that is becoming a less solidly held viewpoint, we certainly have no evidence either way.

Of course science is just an tool used to explain elements around us.

A child may think that a car moves because invisible fairies push it, but when he/she grows up science will explain that there is an engine with pistons etc that make it move.

Scientists trying to explain the origin of the universe.. lol pure guess work.

A child may think that a car moves because invisible fairies push it, but when he/she grows up science will explain that there is an engine with pistons etc that make it move.

Wow, you just hit the nail on the head.

All the intricasies of how things work. the earth perfectly possitioned orbiting around the sun all the way down down to how a small plant converts carbon dioxide into oxygen or how blood carries nutrients from food to animal cell. All the mechanisms that make life possible, Doesnt that all seem like intelligent to you?

We're running into the anthropic principle here. If the earth didn't stay in orbit, or plants did not convert carbon dioxide into oxygen, we wouldn't be here having this discussion! :) Let me give you an example:


Suppose I were to deal out a complete deck of 52 cards between you and I. We would now each have 26 cards apiece. Now the odds of you being dealt those 'exact' 26 cards which you happened to have received, and in the exact order you received them, are utterly astronomical! Yet, it just happened! And we would breach these long odds again and again for as long as I continued dealing out 52 cards. In other words, they'd have to come out in some order, and each of those orders would be an astronomical long shot by itself.

So according to your logic, if my deal to you were the only deal in the history of the universe, we should be absolutely amazed! What are the chances that the first card would be the 2 of clubs, the second card the queen of hearts, the third card the ace of diamonds... It must be a miracle, right? Yet the cards HAD to have come out in some order, so we shouldn't be at all surprised even though the odds they would come in that particular order are stupendous. Does that make sense Sassy?

Also, you have been conveniently ignoring the problem of infinite regress, which I keep asking you about... Just because you don't understand how the universe got here, you are asserting that god did it, yet you don't say what created god. To get around this by simply decreeing that god stands outside of time and therefore doesn't have to follow the same rules that we would expect of everything else, is just TOO EASY! -lol

No offense Sassy. I know you think you're being rational. But the logic you're using would get laughed out of any philosophy 101 course in a heartbeat. You need to find a better argument or presentation.

[QUOTE][QUOTE=lobrobster]We're running into the anthropic principle here. If the earth didn't stay in orbit, or plants did not convert carbon dioxide into oxygen, we wouldn't be here having this discussion! :) Let me give you an example:


Suppose I were to deal out a complete deck of 52 cards between you and I. We would now each have 26 cards apiece. Now the odds of you being dealt those 'exact' 26 cards which you happened to have received, and in the exact order you received them, are utterly astronomical! Yet, it just happened! And we would breach these long odds again and again for as long as I continued dealing out 52 cards. In other words, they'd have to come out in some order, and each of those orders would be an astronomical long shot by itself.


So according to your logic, if my deal to you were the only deal in the history of the universe, we should be absolutely amazed! What are the chances that the first card would be the 2 of clubs, the second card the queen of hearts, the third card the ace of diamonds... It must be a miracle, right? Yet the cards HAD to have come out in some order, so we shouldn't be at all surprised even though the odds they would come in that particular order are stupendous. Does that make sense Sassy?

Lol.. Lobro, that is a good attempt at a well thought out argument but unfortunately your analogy still says nothing of origin. In your analogy we have a "card dealer" so who is the card dealler when it comes to the Universe? How dished the universe cards?

I think what we need to establish is what is to YOU the most logical explation of the origin of the universe? Big bang? Just appeared from now where? What?


Also, you have been conveniently ignoring the problem of infinite regress, which I keep asking you about... Just because you don't understand how the universe got here, you are asserting that god did it, yet you don't say what created god. To get around this by simply decreeing that god stands outside of time and therefore doesn't have to follow the same rules that we would expect of everything else, is just TOO EASY! -lol

I addressed this with capuchin, but in case you missed it I will explain it again:
One of the most overlooked assumptions in most arguments against the God as the creator is the assumption of naturalism. Naturalism is the belief that nature is “all that there is.” Basically you assume that all phenomena can be explained in terms of natural laws. This I must say is a very blind and closed minded assumption. The Bible makes it clear that God is not bound by natural laws and if you just imagine for a moment that God really did create the Universe, then I don't think it would be a stretch to say He is an all powerful being not bound by the laws that naturally bind us as human beings so my argument still stands.
If hypothetically speaking (for your sake) God did really exists, what makes you think that a being as God, of such power and supernatural intelligence would be limited by his own creation? If He created all thinks including the laws of nature & time then why would you assume that he is bound by it?

So bottom line is I am not trying to use science to explain or origin. You are. I am arguing for the supernatural so I am by any means obligated to validate my claims in terms of science. You however are obligated to validate your claims against science since you are arguing for naturalism.
Science is about explaining things that are observed. History is not observable.
I must say that not even in a trillion years will science ever figure out origin of the universe they can only continue to guess, suppose, assume, theorise and hypothesise. :rolleyes:

So bottom line is i am not trying to use science to explain or origin.

Science is necessary in a discussion like this. Science is an explanation of things that we have observed. If you aren't using science, then you are just making things up.

Science is necessary in a discussion like this. Science is an explanation of things that we have observed. If you aren't using science, then you are just making things up.

Again the assuption of naturalism. It is an assuption not a fact. Why should I use science to explain origin when science has not observed the origin of the universe? A Scientist's guess is as good as a homeless guy's on the street.

Again the assuption of naturalism. It is an assuption not a fact. Why should i use science to explain origin when science has not observed the origin of the universe? A Scientist's guess is as good as a homeless guy's on the street.

You're talking poop. You see a tree covered in leaves, and some leaves underneath the tree, you can infer that the leaves fell from the tree, especially if the leaves on the ground are of the same type as those on the tree.

You don't need to be there in order to make inferences.

Science does not assume naturalism, but since there is no evidence for the supernatural, then naturalism is all that we've got to go with.

The big bang is a theory, not a guess, and there are many evidences which point to it being correct.

Science is necessary in a discussion like this. Science is an explanation of things that we have observed. If you aren't using science, then you are just making things up.

You observed the Big Bang?

You're talking poop.

Lol!! What an intelligent and well reasoned answer!!

And what, pray tell, is the scientific definition of "poop"?


You see a tree covered in leaves, and some leaves underneath the tree, you can infer that the leaves fell from the tree, especially if the leaves on the ground are of the same type as those on the tree.

Exactly!! And you see life, you see the intricate nerves and blood vessels in living beings and you can infer that an intelligent being designed them.


You don't need to be there in order to make inferences.

You don't need to observe them? Yet you said:

Science is necessary in a discussion like this. Science is an explanation of things that we have observed. If you aren't using science, then you are just making things up.



Science does not assume naturalism, but since there is no evidence for the supernatural, then naturalism is all that we've got to go with.

No. Science does not assume naturalism. You do.

True science is the search for understanding the laws of God's universe.


The big bang is a theory, not a guess, and there are many evidences which point to it being correct.

But it was not observed, was it. So it is not a fact either.

Sincerely,

De Maria

You observed the Big Bang?No one was there in the same vein that no one was there at your god's creation. What we do see however is the evidence that is the basis of the Big Bang theory.

No one was there in the same vein that no one was there at your god's creation. What we do see however is the evidence that is the basis of the Big Bang theory.

Correction. You see something which you don't understand and ascribe to it the explanation that it is from the Big Bang. That is not proof. That is speculation.

[
QUOTE=Capuchin]You're talking poop.

:rolleyes:


You see a tree covered in leaves, and some leaves underneath the tree, you can infer that the leaves fell from the tree, especially if the leaves on the ground are of the same type as those on the tree.

You don't need to be there in order to make inferences.


Question for you... has man ever observed a leaf falling from a tree? Yes.
Another question... has man ever observed the origin of the earth? No.

We are not comparing apples to apples here, you are going to have to do better than that. Yes, we can make inferences based on premises and assuptions that are unknown or uknowable.. beter known as guess work. I study science so I know there is a lot guess work. Believe me.




Science does not assume naturalism, but since there is no evidence for the supernatural, then naturalism is all that we've got to go with.

You assume naturalism. You just made an absolutely false statement. There is an overwhelming amount of both testimonial and empirical evidence to prove the supernatural. Just because you do not consider the evidence as suffient does not mean the evidence is not there.

One could even argue that the fact that the universe exists (thus far) is supernatural because we have not found a "natural" explanation of its existence.

There have even been double-blind scientific studdies done on the supernatural read this below.
Scientific Evidence for Answered Prayer (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prayer.html)

The big bang is a theory, not a guess, and there are many evidences which point to it being correct.

The big bang theory should be re-named the big joke theory. Your belief in it despite overwhelming evidence that it is a hoax is merely faith. So I don't share the same blind faith in that theory.

The problem is that saying god did doesn't expand human knowledge. What if Edward Jenner had just said small pox is the will of god instead of developing a vaccine for it? What if all of our great thinkers had just stopped and said god did lets go got get a beer? Do you really want to live in the dark ages again?

Your right a lot of science is assumed. So what? That is why things that are theory are still theory. A theory is better than guessing though and if you had ever attended a science class you would know that. In order for a theory to be a theory it has to fit the existing evidence it also can not have contradicting evidence. All it takes for a theory to no longer be theory is one piece of evidence that proves it wrong. Of course this whole paragraph is irrelevant because since you don't like the definition of scientific theory, you simply ignore it and use the common definition because it fits your argument better.

The problem is that saying god did doesn't expand human knowledge. What if Edward Jenner had just said small pox is the will of god instead of developing a vaccine for it? What if all of our great thinkers had just stopped and said god did lets go got get a beer? Do you really want to live in the dark ages again?

The problem is that you are attributing a characteristic to believers, which we hardly own.
Jews and Christians, for instance, believe we have a mandate from God to learn about and conquer the problems of the world.

Genesis 1 28 And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.

That is why the majority of the world's great thinkers have been Jewish or Christian.
Religion of History's 100 Most Influential People (http://www.adherents.com/adh_influ.html)

Edward Jenner himself was a Christian:

Edward Jenner 1749-1823 Anglican
100 Scientists Who Shaped World History (http://www.adherents.com/people/100_scientists.html)


Your right a lot of science is assumed.

Thanks for admitting that.


So what?

Very simple. Since "a lot of science is assumed", then it should be made clear that it is assumed rather than being taught as being factual.


That is why things that are theory are still theory.

Amen!! That is exactly what we've been saying. But many here insist that theories are facts.

Thanks for being honest.


A theory is better than guessing though

Did any Christian here claim that a scientific theory was not better than a blind guess? If and until the best theory is disproven, it remains the best educated guess we can make. But being the best educated guess does not make it a fact until it is proven a fact.


and if you had ever attended a science class you would know that.

Twelve years of Public School and 4 years of college. What makes you think I never attended a science class?

Oh, I know. Since I disagreed with you and you have now admitted you were wrong, you feel the need for the obligatory put down in order to lift your ego.

Ok. Have at it.


In order for a theory to be a theory it has to fit the existing evidence it also can not have contradicting evidence.

The reason it's a theory and not a fact is because it fits some of the existing evidence but not all of the existing evidence.


All it takes for a theory to no longer be theory is one piece of evidence that proves it wrong.

Not so. There are many theories which remain viable under certain circumstances but not others. The attraction of bodies or gravity for instance, works with larger bodies but not with microscopic particles.


Of course this whole paragraph is irrelevant because since you don't like the definition of scientific theory, you simply ignore it and use the common definition because it fits your argument better.

Lol!! There you go again. Ok, if it makes you feel better.

Bottom line though, you've already admitted you were wrong and that we were right. A scientific theory is still a theory and not a fact AND much of what is passed on as science today is assumed. That is all we were proving.

Sincerely,

De Maria

I don't believe there is a god, I just can't see any factual reason to believe there is one that's all.

I believere there is a god, but I don't believe any religion is truly that accurate

Correction. You see something which you don't understand and ascribe to it the explanation that it is from the Big Bang. That is not proof. That is speculation.Correction, you don't understand about red shift or doppler effect so you ascribe it to a god in the same way the ancient didn't understand where thunder came from and ascribed it to a god.

That is why the majority of the world's great thinkers have been Jewish or Christian.

I really hope you see the flaw in this point.

Oh, I know. Since I disagreed with you and you have now admitted you were wrong
I never said I was wrong. There is nothing wrong with assumptions. We use assumptions everyday, we see something behave one way and we assume that it will happen the same way or close to the same way again. If you try to grab the second bar of the monkey bars and fail. Isn't it safe to assume that if you try to grab the third bar you would fail as well? I don't see anything wrong with that kind assumptions.

The reason it's a theory and not a fact is because it fits some of the existing evidence but not all of the existing evidence.
A layman understanding of most scientific theory maybe but all existing theories fit all evidence that why they are still theory. Again you are confusing the common use of theory with the scientific version. Until you get the difference between the two the only reason to respond to you is so young person reading this doesn't think you are right and we slip a little farther into the dark ages.


Edward Jenner himself was a Christian
So were most of the criminals. What is your point? It still stands that saying god did it gets us no where.

Correction, you don't understand about red shift or doppler effect so you ascribe it to a god in the same way the ancient didn't understand where thunder came from and ascribed it to a god.

Lol!!

OK, my turn. Correction, YOU don't understand them AND you've never observed them and yet you consider them absolute proof of another phenomenon which you've never observed and is still a theory. That is the epitome of what is generally considered blind faith.

Oh and just because something is ancient doesn't mean its wrong. And we do believe God created thunder, just as we believe He created everything else. Including the red shift and the doppler effect.

Sincerely,

De Maria

I really hope you see the flaw in this point.

I really hope you see the flaw in the point I was countering.

Lol!!!

OK, my turn. Correction, YOU don't understand them AND you've never observed them and yet you consider them absolute proof of another phenomenon which you've never observed and is still a theory. That is the epitome of what is generally considered blind faith.

Oh and just because something is ancient doesn't mean its wrong. And we do believe God created thunder, just as we believe He created everything else. Including the red shift and the doppler effect.

Sincerely,

De MariaTwo points here:
- it appears that you trust no one but yourself and your own observations. That leaves a very narrow view of the world, which is actually in keeping with your faith. When people get an education they trust that the studies done by others have been subjected to debate and verification.
- you've fallen into circular and contradictory reasoning. One the one hand you say that since I didn't observe the red shift and the doppler effect then they most likely do not exist; then you turn around and say that God made them. What proof is there that god made them... because god made everything!

You obviously trust the work of scientists or you would not be using this computer or the internet or your car or your phone, etc ad nauseum.

Two points here:
- it appears that you trust no one but yourself and your own observations. That leaves a very narrow view of the world, which is actually in keeping with your faith. When people get an education they trust that the studies done by others have been subjected to debate and verification.
- you've fallen into circular and contradictory reasoning. One the one hand you say that since I didn't observe the red shift and the doppler effect then they most likely do not exist; then you turn around and say that God made them. What proof is there that god made them...because god made everything!

You obviously trust the work of scientists or you would not be using this computer or the internet or your car or your phone, etc ad nauseum.

Two of my house mates have actually been performing analyses of red shift data for planetary nebulae this year. Interesting stuff! :)

I never said I was wrong.

But when you said,
Your right a lot of science is assumed. You admitted we were right. And since two opposite and contradictory statements can't be true at the same time, then ipso facto, you admitted you were wrong.


There is nothing wrong with assumptions.

I never said we didn't.


We use assumptions everyday, we see something behave one way and we assume that it will happen the same way or close to the same way again. If you try to grab the second bar of the monkey bars and fail. Isn't it safe to assume that if you try to grab the third bar you would fail as well? I don't see anything wrong with that kind assumptions.

I don't see anything wrong with distinguishing between assumption and fact either. But that wasn't your argument previous. You are now distinguishing between assumption and fact. Something you weren't doing before.

Now, lets take your monkey bar assumption above. If you try to grab the second bar of the monkey bars and fail. Isn't it safe to assume that if you try to grab the third bar you would fail as well?

Sure. At the same velocity, acceleration and trajectory. But if you increase your velocity, acceleration and trajectory, is it theoretically possible that you might be able to reach the third bar?

I'd try the theory out on the second bar first. Then if it succeeded, I'd test it on the third bar.

And what happens if you can reach that third bar upon further testing of the theory? Well, you're first assumption should be discarded. You can make a new assumption. If you increase the velocity, acceleration and trajectory, you travel farther.

Now you can modify your theory. If you increase your v, a and t, sufficiently, you can reach any bar.

Now, care to test the theory on the fourth bar?


A layman understanding of most scientific theory maybe but all existing theories fit all evidence that why they are still theory.

Any theory that fits ALL the evidence becomes a fact.

Although Newton's theory has been superseded, most modern non-relativistic gravitational calculations are still made using Newton's theory because it is a much simpler theory to work with than General Relativity, and gives sufficiently accurate results for most applications.Gravity and quantum mechanics...

Main articles: Graviton and Quantum gravity

Several decades after the discovery of general relativity it was realized that general relativity is incompatible with quantum mechanics.[12]
Gravitation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity#Gravity_and_quantum_mechanics)

So, even though Newton's theory has been superseded and even the new improved theory does not fit all the evidence, it remains a theory.


Again you are confusing the common use of theory with the scientific version. Until you get the difference between the two the only reason to respond to you is so young person reading this doesn't think you are right and we slip a little farther into the dark ages.

Neh. The only reason you are responding is because you have decided to deny your previous admission. But its on the record. You have admitted you were wrong.

Oh and your continued reference to the dark ages is misplaced. Please read your history. The Church was the major player in providing education and educational institutions in the world during and many years after the period commonly known as the dark ages.

That is historical fact. Anytime you want to discuss that, be my guest.


So were most of the criminals.

Perhaps. I'm not aware of any study on the matter. But it stands to reason since Judaism and Christianity were outlawed in many countries for many centuries. As they are in some parts of the world even today.


What is your point?

Your point, which I was countering and which you are now trying to deny was that those who believe in God have no incentive to scientific inquiry. However, that is far from true. Jews and Christians believe we have a mandate from God to learn about our world.


It still stands that saying god did it gets us no where.

You are wrong. Believing in God gives us incentive to understand the world He created for us.

Sincerely,

De Maria

I'll leave mike to answer most of this, but I need to correct you on some of this, or it will irk me.


Any theory that fits ALL the evidence becomes a fact.

Rubbish, a piece of evidence is a fact, like "leaves fall off trees in winter" or "Galaxy X shows a redshift of Y", these are facts. A theory explains a framework of facts. A theory can then go on to make predictions for which experiments can be designed or observations can be made to test the theory. There is nothing in science more concrete than theory, it's the highest tier.


So, even though Newton's theory has been superseded and even the new improved theory does not fit all the evidence, it remains a theory.

Rubbish again. Newton's theory is still a theory because it is correct for all evidence. Newton's theory includes conditions over which it is not applicable, in this case, speeds approaching c (and others). This makes it correct and thus still a theory.

You are wrong. Believing in God gives us incentive to understand the world He created for us.
If you want to understand, why do you not want to build on the work of others. Surely even you can understand that the next great scientific discovery is going to come from someone who has studied theories. Even if you want to prove a theory wrong it has to be understood. If you really think evolution or the big bang theory is wrong you should demand it be taught in school because no one is going to prove it wrong if they don't understand it in the first place. Teaching god did it and then stopping isn't going to get us anywhere. If we are to understand this world we have to use our observations and assumptions, otherwise we say god did it go get a beer.

Yes the church was a the major source of learning during the Dark Ages, hence why it was the Dark Ages.

Also I don't think I ever said that science doesn't use assumptions. Of course we use assumptions otherwise we would have to make every calculation in to infinity because how could we know a higher number won't work unless we assume that since the lower onces didn't the higher number won't work either or something to that effect.

Two points here:
- it appears that you trust no one but yourself and your own observations.

Where did you get that impression? It is precisely a Christian trait that we believe what has been taught by our forefathers.

On the other hand, it is an atheist trait to believe only what you see.


That leaves a very narrow view of the world, which is actually in keeping with your faith.

Again, it is my faith, my Church which is renowned for its educational institutions.
The Catholic Church: Impacting History (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2005/05/23/DI2005052300939.html)


When people get an education they trust that the studies done by others have been subjected to debate and verification.

A procedure long used by Christians.


- you've fallen into circular and contradictory reasoning. One the one hand you say that since I didn't observe the red shift and the doppler effect then they most likely do not exist;

Did I? When? Please quote me.


then you turn around and say that God made them.

That is true.


What proof is there that god made them... because god made everything!

You're learning.


You obviously trust the work of scientists or you would not be using this computer or the internet or your car or your phone, etc ad nauseum.

Wow!! You've made a breakthrough.

Here's my two points. 1. To justify that you don't believe in God, you claim that you don't believe anything that you can't see. 2. Yet you contradict yourself by believing many scientific assumptions and theories which you have never seen.

Sincerely,

De Maria

I'll leave mike to answer most of this, but I need to correct you on some of this, or it will irk me.

It tends to irk you when you are proven wrong.


Rubbish

What an impressive vocabulary. When you disagree with someone, all you seem capable of doing is insulting them. What do you think that because you insult me you will be able to cow me into agreeing with you?


, a piece of evidence is a fact,

Did I say that a piece of evidence wasn't a fact? Please show me when I said that.

Otherwise, I will have to say that you are trying an old, old fallacious argument technique known as "building a straw man".
Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)

In other words, if you can't win the real argument, make up an argument and pretend your opponent is using it. Then trounce that argument and pretend you have won the debate.

Unfortunately for you, I never said that a piece of evidence wasn't a fact.


like "leaves fall off trees in winter" or "Galaxy X shows a redshift of Y", these are facts.

Ok.


A theory explains a framework of facts.

Wrong. A theory purports to explain a network of facts. If the theory successfully explained the facts, then it would no longer be a theory but a fact.

We can look at the theory of gravitation again and see that portions of that theory are in fact, facts. What goes up must come down, on earth. But not in space where there is no up or down.

So, the theory of gravitation, the theory that objects fall, is proven on earth.

But there is no way to ever prove the theory of the Big Bang and there is not enough evidence yet to say that the theory of evolution is a fact.


A theory can then go on to make predictions

Based on assumptions derived from the facts. But the assumptions are not facts and neither are the theories.


for which experiments can be designed or observations can be made to test the theory.

To see if the predictions based on those theories will pass the test.


There is nothing in science more concrete than theory, it's the highest tier.

Ok. Question. Are scientific theories always tentative, and subject to corrections or inclusion in a yet wider theory? Yes?

Another question. What are scientific facts. Are scientific facts always tentative and subject to correction? No?

Since scientific facts are not tentative nor subject to correction and the theories which purport to explain those facts are always tentative and subject to correction, by what stretch of the imagination do you deduce that theories are a higher tier than facts?


Rubbish again.

That seems to be the only thing coming out of your mind.


Newton's theory is still a theory because it is correct for all evidence.

Wrong. Oh wait. I want to use your fancy word. Rubbish! Newton's theory is still a theory because there are things which it still doesn't prove. Since it does not explain all the facts, it is not itself true in all instances.


Newton's theory includes conditions over which it is not applicable, in this case, speeds approaching c (and others). This makes it correct and thus still a theory.

Newton's theory explains the speed of light?

Ok that bears explanation. Since I've always heard that Newton's theory fails to explain the speed of light.


This makes it correct and thus still a theory.

As I understand it, Newton's theory does not explain the behavior of light beams. Therefore it remains a theory because it is incorrect in some cases such as this one.

So, please, I invite you to explain how Newton's theory explains the behavior of light beams.

This property of light is very different from, say, the properties of peas as described by the mechanics of Newton: if a person rides on a scooter and shoots peas, these move faster than the peas shot by a person standing by (see Sect. 5.4.1). In contrast if the person on the scooter turns on a laser and the person standing by does the same when they coincide on the street, these two laser beams will reach Pluto at the same time (Fig. 6.5); this happens even if the scooter moves at 99% of the speed of light.

Newton would be horrified by this behavior of light beams: according to his mechanics velocities add, so that the laser beam from the scooter should reach Pluto sooner.
The first prediction: the speed of light and the demise of Newton's mechanics (http://phyun5.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node74.html)

Sincerely,

De Maria

If you want to understand, why do you not want to build on the work of others.

When did I say that I did not want to build on the work of others? What has that even to do with our discussion?

Like your counterpart, you are now trying desperately to win an argument by changing the subject and attributing to me something which I never said.


Surely even you can understand that the next great scientific discovery is going to come from someone who has studied theories.

What has that to do with whether theories are facts?


Even if you want to prove a theory wrong it has to be understood.

Still not the subject of our discussion.


If you really think evolution or the big bang theory is wrong you should demand it be taught in school because no one is going to prove it wrong if they don't understand it in the first place.

?? Its you and people like you who don't want God, Creationism, Intelligent Design and many other things taught in school.

When did I say I didn't want the Big Bang theory taught in school? Is that even a part of this discussion?


Teaching god did it and then stopping isn't going to get us anywhere.

Again, when did I say to stop at teaching that God did it?


If we are to understand this world we have to use our observations and assumptions, otherwise we say god did it go get a beer.

I think its time for you to go get a beer. All you've done in this message is attribute to me, things I never said.


Yes the church was a the major source of learning during the Dark Ages, hence why it was the Dark Ages.

Actually that is only true for anti-Christians who want to attribute all evils to Christianity. But that is not the case with educated historians:

When the term "Dark Ages" is used by historians today, it is intended to be neutral, namely, to express the idea that the events of the period often seem "dark" to us only because of the paucity of historical records compared with later times. The darkness is ours, not theirs.[3]
Dark Ages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_ages)


Also I don't think I ever said that science doesn't use assumptions.

Not in so many words. But you did characterize scientific answers as:

Answers based on observation and experimentation (Science)

And you didn't admit that science based many of its answers on assumption until recently.


Of course we use assumptions otherwise we would have to make every calculation in to infinity because how could we know a higher number won't work unless we assume that since the lower onces didn't the higher number won't work either or something to that effect.

OK. Now go get your beer.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Here's my two points. 1. To justify that you don't believe in God, you claim that you don't believe anything that you can't see. 2. Yet you contradict yourself by believing many scientific assumptions and theories which you have never seen.

Apparently your style of debate is to twist others words into a meaning that matches the point you wish to make. That is unfortunate. I have never said that I don't believe anything that I can't see. I believe in things of which there is evidence of their existence. Do you get the not-so-subtle difference? So it follows that there is no evidence of a god therefore your faith is simply that - blind faith.

Like your counterpart, you are now trying desperately to win an argument by changing the subject and attributing to me something which I never said. Actually you did that very thing to me.

my view on this subject is that there is a god, if you disagree then lets discuss what you think...the second question is if there is a God, whos God is the right God...and please dont say that everyones god is the right one, because that statement is contradiction itself.
Back to the OP:

I don't think so. I'd like to believe that there's something bigger than just life here, but without a manifestation, I'll just assume we're it.

Apparently your style of debate is to twist others words into a meaning that matches the point you wish to make.

Oh, it must be rubbing off from you. Sorry.


That is unfortunate. I have never said that I don't believe anything that I can't see. I believe in things of which there is evidence of their existence. Do you get the not-so-subtle difference?

I understand quite well.

Applying this to the Big Bang, the Doppler effect and the Red Shift for instance,
If a scientist claims to discover a phenomenon which you don't understand, you believe it immediately, you then attribute to it attributes which you can't prove and ascribe to it a reason which you have never seen and which can't be duplicated. And then you expect everyone to believe that your theory is fact rather than speculation based on far fetched assumptions.

And, if they don't believe you, you get indignant and respond with insulting and belittling comments.

Got it.


So it follows that there is no evidence of a god therefore your faith is simply that - .

That is a non-sequitir. Just because you can't see the evidence doesn't mean that the evidence doesn't exist. Absence of evidence does not constitute evidence of absence.


blind faith

Actually, blind faith describes your gullible attitude towards every new so called scientific theory which comes down the pike.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Applying this to the Big Bang, the Doppler effect and the Red Shift for instance,
If a scientist claims to discover a phenomenon which you don't understand, Who says I don't understand it?

you believe it immediately, you then attribute to it attributes which you can't prove What the hell does that mean??

And ascribe to it a reason which you have never seen and which can't be duplicated. And then you expect everyone to believe that your theory is fact rather than speculation based on far fetched assumptions.Red shift is duplicated/verified everyday in space observation and in regular daily activities. Here is some basic info for you:
THE EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE (http://astro.berkeley.edu/%7Emwhite/darkmatter/dopplershift.html)
Light - Doppler Effect (http://library.thinkquest.org/C006027/html-ver/op-dop.html)
06: Red Shift (http://www.arachnoid.com/sky/redshift.html)
Unless you believe there is a worldwide conspiracy among scientists to create fake data.



And, if they don't believe you, you get indignant and respond with insulting and belittling comments. Nah, I see that more from the fundies that from anyone else.



That is a non-sequitir. Just because you can't see the evidence doesn't mean that the evidence doesn't exist. Absence of evidence does not constitute evidence of absence.Yet that's the same argument you are using against me. :rolleyes:



Actually, blind faith describes your gullible attitude towards every new so called scientific theory which comes down the pike.Example?

Actually you did that very thing to me.

You are correct. I apologize. There is no excuse.

Who says I don't understand it?

I do.


What the hell does that mean??

It means that scientiests tell you they see phenomenon which they call the Red Shift and the Doppler Effect and claim that this is evidence of the Big Bang and instead of saying to yourself, "ok, that makes sense. Its a reasonable ASSUMPTION." you immediately jump to the conclusion that assumed connection between the phenomenon and the theory are facts.


Red shift is duplicated/verified everyday in space observation and in regular daily activities.

Did I say that the Red Shift was not observed everyday?


Here is some basic info for you:
THE EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE (http://astro.berkeley.edu/%7Emwhite/darkmatter/dopplershift.html)
Light - Doppler Effect (http://library.thinkquest.org/C006027/html-ver/op-dop.html)
06: Red Shift (http://www.arachnoid.com/sky/redshift.html)
Unless you believe there is a worldwide conspiracy among scientists to create fake data.

No. I believe the phenomenon exist. I just know the difference between assumption, speculation, theory and proven fact.


Nah, I see that more from the fundies that from anyone else.

I'm not a fundie.


Yet that's the same argument you are using against me. :rolleyes:

Example?

The idea that the Red Shift and the Doppler Effect prove the Big Bang actually occurred.

Sincerely,

De Maria

i dont believe there is a god, i just can't see any factual reason to believe there is one thats all.

Do you have factual reasons to believe he doesn't exit?

Do you have factual reasons to belive he doesnt exit?
Negative proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof)

I never said I was wrong. There is nothing wrong with assumptions. We use assumptions everyday, we see something behave one way and we assume that it will happen the same way or close to the same way again. If you try to grab the second bar of the monkey bars and fail. Isn't it safe to assume that if you try to grab the third bar you would fail as well? I don't see anything wrong with that kind assumptions.

A layman understanding of most scientific theory maybe but all existing theories fit all evidence that why they are still theory. Again you are confusing the common use of theory with the scientific version. Until you get the difference between the two the only reason to respond to you is so young person reading this doesn't think you are right and we slip a little farther into the dark ages.


So were most of the criminals. What is your point? It still stands that saying god did it gets us no where.

I think someone needs to remind michealb the meanings of assuption and theory

As·sump·tion (ə-sŭmp'shən)
n.


The act of taking for granted: assumption of a false theory.
Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof; a supposition: a valid assumption.
Presumption; arrogance.
Logic. A minor premise.

The·o·ry (thē'ə-rē, thîr'ē)
n. pl. -ries.

The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice:
A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture

So if you believe science as fact to explain origins despite the fact that we all know there is nothing factual about it, then your beliefs are as good as religious person because it all faith. Your FAITH is in man and science and Christian's faith is in God. Bottom line it is all FAITH.

If you want to understand, why do you not want to build on the work of others. Surely even you can understand that the next great scientific discovery is going to come from someone who has studied theories. Even if you want to prove a theory wrong it has to be understood. If you really think evolution or the big bang theory is wrong you should demand it be taught in school because no one is going to prove it wrong if they don't understand it in the first place. Teaching god did it and then stopping isn't going to get us anywhere. If we are to understand this world we have to use our observations and assumptions, otherwise we say god did it go get a beer.

Yes the church was a the major source of learning during the Dark Ages, hence why it was the Dark Ages.

Also I don't think I ever said that science doesn't use assumptions. Of course we use assumptions otherwise we would have to make every calculation in to infinity because how could we know a higher number won't work unless we assume that since the lower onces didn't the higher number won't work either or something to that effect.

I know this is a cliché but its so fitting here. "Assume" makes an as* out of u & me.. :D

Science is just man's attempt at making sense of what God ALREADY created thousands of years ago. So God is the altermate scientist. He created it all. He is a Genius!

So it follows that there is no evidence of a god therefore your faith is simply that - .

There is no evidence for God? You are joking right?. lol who told you that?

There is an insurmountable amount of evidence for God. A lot more evidence for God than there is for that Hoax evolution and the Big bang.
The evidence is there, the only difference is whether you see the evidence as sufficient or not. I see the evidence as more than sufficient while you don't.
So the evidence is there but whether one accepts it as sufficient or not, is a purely subjective opinion

Negative proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof)

You should have read that article a little closer. It is a logical fallacy which you committed before. In essence, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence:

Negative proof, the fallacy of appealing to lack of proof of the negative, is a logical fallacy of the following form:

"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."

It is asserted that a proposition is true, only because it has not been proven false. The negative proof fallacy often occurs in the debate of the existence of supernatural phenomena, in the following form:

"A supernatural force must exist, because there is no proof that it does not exist".

However, the fallacy can also occur when the predicate of a subject is denied:

"A supernatural force does not exist, because there is no proof that it does exist."

"Scientists don't know for sure what natural forces caused the first single-cell life, so it must be intelligent design."

"Creationists don't have proof that there was an intelligent designer, therefore there must not have been intelligent design."


Sincerely,

De Maria

Correct, it applies to both sides.

Your still using the wrong definitions.
Noun 1. scientific theory - a theory that explains scientific observations; "scientific theories must be falsifiable"
Theory - a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

If you are going to ignore facts and not learn I don't know what to tell you because it really doesn't matter what I tell you. You aren't interested in learning your interested pushing your belief on people without regard to fact or reality.

“The recipe for perpetual ignorance is: Be satisfied with your opinions and content with your knowledge.” ~Elbert Hubbard

[QUOTE=michealb]Your still using the wrong definitions.
Noun 1. scientific theory - a theory that explains scientific observations; "scientific theories must be falsifiable"
Theory - a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

You don't need to explain what a theory is to me. How ever you want to slice it, a thoery is not a fact.


If you are going to ignore facts and not learn I don't know what to tell you because it really doesn't matter what I tell you. You aren't interested in learning your interested pushing your belief on people without regard to fact or reality.

I don't need to learn anything from you because you don't seem to even understand the fundamental principles of science. I am currently doing a graduate degree in Biology and I have an undergrad in Biology (minor in Chemistry) graduated magna laude, so if anyone is going to learn anything from the other, it going to be you.

The misunderstanding you seem to have is that you think just because scientific theories may use facts as a premise/basis for a theory, you conclude that the theory is in it self a fact. This can not be further from the truth. Most theories are based on assuptions more often than not. It seems you are the one who is trying to avoid the reality of this fact.

Oh and by the way, if anyone is "pushing their beliefs" on anyone, its YOU. Need I remind you that this is the religous forum not a science forum... lol So you are the one who needs to stop waisting your time preaching your beliefs in the big bang and all that rubbish to Christians/theists. I think I speak for all/most theists when I say we are not interested in your athiestic beliefs. Sorry..

my view on this subject is that there is a god, if you disagree then lets discuss what you think...the second question is if there is a God, whos God is the right God...and please dont say that everyones god is the right one, because that statement is contradiction itself.
HI! What a WONDERFUL topic! So many don't like to discuss religion, but when you have true faith, it's always a blessing to share the Word and the Gospel. Yes, I believe in God (The One & ONLY being my belief) who's story's told in The Holy Bible including Jesus Christ as Our Lord and Saviour (God's Son sent to earth in the Flesh to save and forgive us our sins by sacrificing His life), "Son" not in the sense we use the word, He was actually God in the flesh/human form, the only way he could come to Earth and we could handle it. They are One and the Same, The Father, Son, & Holy Spirit.

**IF THIS IS TOO LONG OR YOU DON'T CARE TO READ ALL THIS, PLEASE JUST SCROLL DOWN AND READ THE LAST PARAGRAPH!! THX. :-)

I've been a Christian all my life yet it's still difficult to explain, when you are touched by the Holy Spirit/God, you don't have to know all of the Bible to have faith and a relationship with God, it's felt spiritually (in my experience). I'm fairly young and still working on reading the entire Bible so I won't pretend to tell you I know it all, just my own feelings and experiences.

I agree it's contradictory to claim that everyone's "God" is right, or the right one for them, etc... The response from "Buzzman" who mentions God as the Alpha and Omega seems to know what they are talking about, have good knowledge of the Bible, and understand what it is to be a dedicated follower of Christ. I agree fully with what they said.

However, if you are not a Christian or are new to Christianity it can be very trying on the mind (the enemy/devil constantly fights God within our mind through fear, doubt, & negativity) in the sense that we simply don't have ALL the answers, but really no one does, therein lies the need for faith. That's why God is the creator and we are his children, just as no one will ever be perfect or free of sin on Earth, we'll also never fully understand until we meet in Heaven or the 2nd coming of Christ. God teaches us individually what we need to know and that personal relationship is very special, unique for all who seek Him.

Those who say they're Christian and believe that all God's are OK are wrong (whether they realize it or not, even if their intentions are good), it clearly says in the Bible there is only One True God and changing God's words to suit your own needs or wants due to selfishness, or what YOU feel safe or comfortable in believing is blasphemy or like trying to be God in a sense yourself, making up your own rules so to speak. It's considered lukewarm or in-between and God basically says he'd prefer someone to not believe at all than believe what they pick.

My interpretation of some parts of the Bible explain that the innocent aren't held accountable, but those who know of God/Jesus and decide to ignore this will be damned. To me, this means if a person lives their whole life taught ONLY a Non-Christian religion with truly no proper teaching or knowledge of God/Jesus Christ, they may still go to Heaven because they are "innocent" in God's eyes, this also true for children who die before they're old enough to understand. It seems harsh to believe those who know of Christianity and choose to ignore it won't be saved, but again, we can't possibly know ALL of God's plan, we just have to trust it. I know if I was raised believing one thing and told I wouldn't be saved if I didn't change and also would be punished if I abandoned my native religion, I probably wouldn't change due to loyalty & faith in what I was raised to believe, then again if I listened God could show me what was really right. It is made clear that there are a certain number of people/souls on Earth that won't follow Christ and be saved no matter what, it's what is written.

Christianity is the most factual and documented religion, a book I like to recommend is "The Case For Christ" by Lee Strobel. He's a lawyer who was an atheist for many years, set out to find facts to disprove Christianity, found it impossible and ended up doing the opposite, convinced himself of the facts, and became saved and a follower of Christ!

A one world/unified religion will only happen if we see the End of Days, the Anti-Christ takes over as a one world leader, proceeds to lawfully force his new religion naming himself as god over everyone (Satan in the flesh). I feel this is part of the reason why there isn't a 100% worldly following of any one belief system.

The Bible is written to each of us individually, our own personal interpretation being how God communicates with us directly, it's really amazing. Of course there are areas with only one direct meaning, but there is much that can speak differently to each of us and always provide what you need to know, how and when you need to know it. All true Christians know what I mean here, it's not wordly but spiritual.

I feel I am sending you this response because God wants me to, I never talk to people online, just signed up here today to ask a question about my dog, randomly saw your question, and felt completely compelled to send you my thoughts. That to me is the hand of God.

Anyway, I hope at least some of this helps and you weren't bored or offended by anything I've said. Your name being "I need help fast" makes me concerned for you, and with love in my heart I will pray that Our Lord is with you and that you're well mind, body, and soul. If you would like to talk any further let me know, God Bless!

[QUOTE]
Oh and by the way, if anyone is "pushing their beliefs" on anyone, its YOU. Need I remind you that this is the religous forum not a science forum... lol So you are the one who needs to stop waisting your time preaching your beliefs in the big bang and all that rubbish to Christians/theists. I think I speak for all/most theists when I say we are not interested in your athiestic beliefs. Sorry..

So let me get this straight a question is posed of "Do you think there is a god?" the only answer that is allowed is the Christian/theist answer because it's posted in the religious forum. Wow.. talk about suppressing information.
The big bang and evolution theories aren't atheistic beliefs. They in no way disprove a god. Why would a god that is all powerful make a natural and explainable solution for everything up until this point, suddenly go I think I'll just poof humans into existence rather make it explainable like I have everything else. I would say if anything, if evolution is not true and a god did poof humans into existence than it would prove the limited power of that god since he couldn't keep continuity of design. Does a god of limited power deserve worship and if so where do we drawn the line at how much power? I have more power than some people should those with less power than me worship me? Does the fact that there is no perfect design rule out the possibility of a perfect designer? If the designer is perfect then everything he designs by extension has to be perfect for everyone otherwise he isn't perfect. Since everything isn't perfect that means no perfect designer that mean either a flawed designer or things came about some other way. So is god flawed/limited or is evolution true?

Also your personal credentials don't mean anything on the internet unless your willing to prove them. I know I'm not willing to prove who I am here, mainly because I'm afraid of religious people finding out who I am. So I suggest you use your posts(answer some biology questions) to prove you know what your talking about instead of claiming it with unprovable claims.

[QUOTE=michealb][QUOTE=sassyT]

So let me get this straight a question is posed of "Do you think there is a god?" the only answer that is allowed is the Christian/theist answer because it's posted in the religious forum. Wow.. talk about suppressing information.

For you to have found this question it means you were snooping around the religious forum. So don't come on a religious forum and accuse people of forcing their beliefs on you. If you have no interest in hearing what Christians/thiest believe then don't come on a religious forum. It seems only logical to me.




The big bang and evolution theories aren't atheistic beliefs. They in no way disprove a god. Why would a god that is all powerful make a natural and explainable solution for everything up until this point, suddenly go I think I'll just poof humans into existence rather make it explainable like I have everything else.

This your reasoning and it is not making any sense to me, but what makes you think your reasoning is anything like God's


I would say if anything, if evolution is not true and a god did poof humans into existence than it would prove the limited power of that god since he couldn't keep continuity of design. Does a god of limited power deserve worship and if so where do we drawn the line at how much power? I have more power than some people should those with less power than me worship me? Does the fact that there is no perfect design rule out the possibility of a perfect designer? If the designer is perfect then everything he designs by extension has to be perfect for everyone otherwise he isn't perfect. Since everything isn't perfect that means no perfect designer that mean either a flawed designer or things came about some other way. So is god flawed/limited or is evolution true?

This is a circular argument... lol You are drawing your own subjective conclusions that have no factual basis. The premises of your arguments are as questionable as the conclusions.
First of all there is no solid evidence for evolution. Where are all those half man/half ape fossils which should be abundant in the earth's soil layers? They don't exist.
Second of all the Bible clearly states that God created everything perfect until man rebelled against Him and a curse of death was upon the earth. So your perfect creator/ perfect designer argument falls apart right there because God is perfect and his creation was perfect until man messed up and man is still contuing to mess it up.



Also your personal credentials don't mean anything on the internet unless your willing to prove them. I know I'm not willing to prove who I am here, mainly because I'm afraid of religious people finding out who I am. So I suggest you use your posts(answer some biology questions) to prove you know what your talking about instead of claiming it with unprovable claims.

I don't need to prove anything to anyone because at the end of the day I know who I am & what I have achieved, and whether anyone here believes me or not, it does not make a material difference to my life.
I was just giving to an FYi so you can quit with the condescending remarks about scientific knowledge because given that I have studied science on an advanced level for many years, it makes your remarks poignantly contrary to reality.

For you to have found this question it means you were snooping around the religous forum. So dont come on a religous forum and accuse people of forcing their beliefs on you. If you have no interest in hearing what Christians/thiest believe then dont come on a religious forum. It seems only logical to me.

This isn't a religious forum, it's a forum for discussing religion.

There is no evidence for God? you are joking right?.... lol who told you that?

There is an insurmountable amount of evidence for God. A lot more evidence for God than there is for that Hoax evolution and the Big bang.
The evidence is there, the only difference is whether you see the evidence as sufficient or not. I see the evidence as more than sufficient while you don't.
So the evidence is there but whether one accepts it as sufficient or not, is a purely subjective opinion

Oh, Sassy. PLEASE don't tell me you think that evolution is a hoax! I can respect much of what you've said in this thread (whether I agree or not). The fact is, no one understands 'first cause' yet, so you're certainly entitled to your beliefs about it. But there's no excuse for making such an ignorant comment about the Theory of Evolution. The evidence that the Theory of Evolution is true is overwhelming! Tell me... How old do you think the earth is Sassy?

I briefly read another of your posts where you try to downplay ToE, because it's just a theory. Scientific theories are strong. They are not in any way like my 'theory' that if I leave 5 minutes later for work, my drive time will be shorter because I run into less traffic. Science doesn't use the word theory like the common populace does. When science proposes a theory, it means it is the 'best' explanation we have. ToE is most definitely the best explanation of how complicated organisms came to be. Evolution is a FACT like gravity is a FACT. Please don't fool yourself or worse, try to fool others. It's a tragedy that so many people (mostly Americans) are totally ignorant about evolution and what scientific theories actually mean.

[QUOTE=lobrobster]Oh, Sassy. PLEASE don't tell me you think that evolution is a hoax! I can respect much of what you've said in this thread (whether I agree or not). The fact is, no one understands 'first cause' yet, so you're certainly entitled to your beliefs about it. But there's no excuse for making such an ignorant comment about the Theory of Evolution. The evidence that the Theory of Evolution is true is overwhelming!

Evidence for evolution is overwhelmingly missing is what you should say. If man really evolve from an ape, then where are all those half man/half ape fossils which should be abundant in the earth's soil layers? They don't exist.
Furthermore, if we evolved from a lower species, then why is it that the apes didn't evolve in the evolutionary process? Come on lobrobster you don't need a PHD (post hole digger) to figure this out.

Evolutionists even admit to the lack of fossil evidence to prove the their THEORY and yet people still blindly follow the myth in the name of "scientific progress" I am even amazed at the at the convoluted and contradictory claptrap that often passes as science.

Here is what scientist have admitted about evidence for evolution:

Dr. David Kitts, professor of geology at the University of Oklahoma said, "Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them...."

Even Stephen J. Gould of Harvard admitted, "The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual change."


Famous fossil expert, Niles Eldredge confessed, "...geologists have found rock layers of all divisions of the last 500 million years and no transitional forms were contained in them." Dr. Eldredge further said, "...no one has yet found any evidence of such transitional creatures."

So show me fossil evidence for evolution and I will believe in it. If you believe it as truth despite a lack of evidence then it is by faith that you believe. Evolutionist do not KNOW of man's origins. They can only make assumptions, speculate, theorise and hypothesise.

I know of a scienitist who has been is offering $250K to anyone who can prove evolution beyond a shodow of a doubt. Its been 6 years and no one has been able to do so. So if you think you have 100% evidence for evolution, I will be happy to give you the site where you can submit the proof.




Tell me... How old do you think the earth is Sassy?

The age of the earth is unknowable. If YOU believe it is billions of years old it is by faith because carbon dating uses a number of unvarifiable assuptions as a premise making it subject to inaccuracy.


I briefly read another of your posts where you try to downplay ToE, because it's just a theory. Scientific theories are strong. They are not in any way like my 'theory' that if I leave 5 minutes later for work, my drive time will be shorter because I run into less traffic. Science doesn't use the word theory like the common populace does. When science proposes a theory, it means it is the 'best' explanation we have. ToE is most definitely the best explanation of how complicated organisms came to be. Evolution is a FACT like gravity is a FACT. Please don't fool yourself or worse, try to fool others. It's a tragedy that so many people (mostly Americans) are totally ignorant about evolution and what scientific theories actually. .

Like I said, don't just make empty claims. If you say evolution is fact like gravity prove it to me beyond a shodow of a doubt. I want 100% evidence to qualify evolution as a fact. Otherwise your claims are nothing but declarations of faith.

Even Stephen J. Gould of Harvard admitted, "The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual change."

Really, we're resorting to quote mining now?

[QUOTE]

Evidence for evolution is overwhelmingly missing is what you should say. If man really evolve from an ape, then where are all those half man/half ape fossils which should be abundant in the earth's soil layers? They don't exist.
Furthermore, if we evolved from a lower species, then why is it that the apes didn't evolve in the evolutionary process? Come on lobrobster you don't need a PHD (post hole digger) to figure this out.

Evolutionists even admit to the lack of fossil evidence to prove the their THEORY and yet people still blindly follow the myth in the name of "scientific progress" I am even amazed at the at the convoluted and contradictory claptrap that often passes as science.

Here is what scientist have admitted about evidence for evolution:

Dr. David Kitts, professor of geology at the University of Oklahoma said, "Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them...."

Even Stephen J. Gould of Harvard admitted, "The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual change."


Famous fossil expert, Niles Eldredge confessed, "...geologists have found rock layers of all divisions of the last 500 million years and no transitional forms were contained in them." Dr. Eldredge further said, "...no one has yet found any evidence of such transitional creatures."

So show me fossil evidence for evolution and I will believe in it. If you believe it as truth despite a lack of evidence then it is by faith that you believe. Evolutionist do not KNOW of man's origins. They can only make assumptions, speculate, theorise and hypothesise.

I know of a scienitist who has been is offering $250K to anyone who can prove evolution beyond a shodow of a doubt. Its been 6 years and no one has been able to do so. So if you think you have 100% evidence for evolution, I will be happy to give you the site where you can submit the proof.





The age of the earth is unknowable. If YOU believe it is billions of years old it is by faith because carbon dating uses a number of unvarifiable assuptions as a premise making it subject to inaccuracy.



Like I said, don't just make empty claims. If you say evolution is fact like gravity prove it to me beyond a shodow of a doubt. I want 100% evidence to qualify evolution as a fact. Otherwise your claims are nothing but declarations of faith.

Everything you just said... I could say the same about the THEORY of creationism. Where is the proof?

[QUOTE=sassyT]

Everything you just said...I could say the same about the THEORY of creationism. Where is the proof?


I am not the one who is claiming FACT here.

I believe creationism makes a more logical conclution given the complexity and intricacy of the universe. There is more evidence for a intelligent designer than there is for a big explosion that came from no where and magically bacame the vast and complex universe we see today. It just sounds like a bunch of hocus pocus to me.
Despite my strong beliefs I am not going to claim it is Fact. So I would appreciate it if those who believe in evolution were to be reasonable enough to admit the same.

Darwin

Sassy there are tons of transitional fossils, click the link below for a brief summary. Go to your local natural history museum if you want to see them yourself.

Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html)

Here is a link explaining what a transitional fossil is so we don't have to rehash a similar what is a scientific theory argument except for tranitional fossil.
Transitional fossil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil)

Please don't use that tired old argument. Say God put transitional fossils in the relevant order of the rocks to test our faith if you want.

For you to have found this question it means you were snooping around the religious forum. So don't come on a religious forum and accuse people of forcing their beliefs on you. If you have no interest in hearing what Christians/thiest believe then don't come on a religious forum. It seems only logical to me.

I am interested in hearing what Christians/ thiests believe. I've said many times that it is important for me as an atheist to know what is going on in the heads of the majority. What I said about you is that your not interested in learning anything because no matter how many times your told that your using the wrong definitions for something you still come back with the wrong definition. If you continue to use the wrong definition for a word and use the wrong definition as part of your answer. What am I to think other than you have an agenda?



This your reasoning and it is not making any sense to me, but what makes you think your reasoning is anything like God's. This is a circular argument... lol You are drawing your own subjective conclusions that have no factual basis.
Second of all the Bible clearly states that God created everything perfect until man rebelled against Him and a curse of death was upon the earth. So your perfect creator/ perfect designer argument falls apart right there because God is perfect and his creation was perfect until man messed up and man is still contuing to mess it up.

My reasoning doesn't have to be like God's. If a being is perfect all must think so otherwise he isn't perfect. That is the problem with perfection. You have to resort to logic and logic would state that everything a perfect designer designs has to be perfect otherwise he isn't perfect. Even if the system was perfect at one point if it breaks down to a point where it is not longer perfect it means that the design wasn't perfect regardless of whose fault it is that the system broke down because a perfect designer would have foreseen the breakdown so regardless of whose logic you use an imperfect design means an imperfect designer or in this case no designer. Also I can't give you a factual argument when talking about something that doesn't exist.
[QUOTE]
First of all there is no solid evidence for evolution. Where are all those half man/half ape fossils which should be abundant in the earth's soil layers? They don't exist.
[QUOTE]

Really?! Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo georgicus, Homo ergaster, Homo erectus, Homo cepranensis, Homo antecessor, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo rhodesiensis, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis, and Homo sapiens idaltu to name a few transitional fossils. Fossils are never abundant. Why would you think that? If every creature that died formed a fossil you would be right but fossils take a very specific circumstances to form. You know that fossils aren't actually the bones of the animal but are minerals from the ground that slowly replaced the bones. This doesn't happen to the majority of the animals that die because they didn't die in a location that allows it. Disproving evolution should be very easy if it was wrong all it would take would be to find one fossil out of place in the soil layers but every fossil found has supported evolution. I have millions of fossils that support my point of view where is one that supports yours?

[QUOTE=retsoksirhc]


I am not the one who is claiming FACT here.

I believe creationism makes a more logical conclution given the complexity and intricacy of the universe. There is more evidence for a inteligent designer than there is for a big explosion that came from no where and magically bacame the vast and complex universe we see today. it just sounds like a bunch of hocus pocus to me.
Despite my strong beliefs i am not going to claim it is Fact. So i would appreciate it if those who believe in evolution were to be reasonable enough to admit the same.
Nor was I.

Like you, I also haven't claimed anything as fact.

Some (most) creationists use the bible as absolute proof of the existence of god and creationism, even though (most) atheists disagree.
Some (most) evolutionists use evolution and scientific study as proof of the existence of evolution, even though (most) creationists disagree.

That THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS. Individually, one opinion on a help desk site really isn't going to matter.

I've got an idea... how about everyone stop trying to "win" this argument. It's been going on for centuries. I'm pretty sure a series of bits on a server somewhere isn't going to end it.

Can we get back to the original post?

Evidence for evolution is overwhelmingly missing is what you should say. If man really evolve from an ape, then where are all those half man/half ape fossils which should be abundant in the earth's soil layers? They don't exist.

But they DO exist Sassy. Ever hear of Homo Erectus, or Homo neanderthalensis?



Furthermore, if we evolved from a lower species, then why is it that the apes didn't evolve in the evolutionary process?

I feel bad, because you are only showing your ignorance of the evolutionary process. We didn't evolve from apes! We simply shared a common ancestor with them. Apes evolved from this same common ancestor just as we have. We shouldn't expect to see a half-ape/half-man like animal. Please try and learn a little about evolution before making a fool of yourself with questions like this.


Evolutionists even admit to the lack of fossil evidence to prove the their THEORY...

Not a single one of them does! What they DO admit is the truth. There are distinct gaps in the fossil record, most notably the 'Cambrian explosion'. During this time complicated organisms appeared to have arrived on the scene in an unexplained burst of evolution. More than one would expect. There are several 'guesses' for how this might be accounted for. One is called 'Punctuated Equilibrium' which leads us to Gould...

You do yourself no favors by quoting Stephen Gould who was himself (if I'm not mistaken), an atheist. If I'm wrong about that, whatever else he was, he most certainly was NOT a theist who believed in a Creator! Gould very much accepted the Theory of Evolution! There are disagreements over something called, 'punctuated equilibrium' that continue to this day. This is NOT a denial of evolution! There's a reason that just about every respectable biologist (indeed, just about every respected scientist), alive today FULLY accepts evolution.


So show me fossil evidence for evolution and I will believe in it.

The evidence is positively overwhelming and undeniable Sassy. You just need to put away all that creationist propaganda for a sec, and start reading from credible sources.


I know of a scienitist who has been is offering $250K to anyone who can prove evolution beyond a shodow of a doubt. Its been 6 years and no one has been able to do so. So if you think you have 100% evidence for evolution, I will be happy to give you the site where you can submit the proof.

I doubt this person is an accredited scientist. No scientist would be so ignorant of how science works. You don't ever prove things in science! You can only make predictions. So far, not a single prediction that The Theory of Evolution makes has been falsified. If anything, its predictions right down to molecular biology have been shown to be more accurate than Darwin himself could have imagined!




The age of the earth is unknowable. If YOU believe it is billions of years old it is by faith because carbon dating uses a number of unvarifiable assuptions as a premise making it subject to inaccuracy.

Seriously... I'm not sure why, but I kind of like you from your posts. You seem like a nice person who is very sincere. But you should stop talking about this stuff, because you are making an incredible fool of yourself. We don't just use carbon dating, but many, many, different methods. All these methods use different clocks, each independently calibrated to an entirely different set of principles. And ALL OF THEM point to the earth being around 4 BILLION years old! Again, you are reading from creationist propaganda. Stick with things you know about before making asinine assertions like this.


If you say evolution is fact like gravity prove it to me beyond a shodow of a doubt. I want 100% evidence to qualify evolution as a fact. Otherwise your claims are nothing but declarations of faith.

You'll have a long wait, because once again, nothing is ever 'proven' in science. You simply don't understand science and I can only suggest again that you read up a little about these subjects from credible sources. Good luck to you!

I've got an idea...how about everyone stop trying to "win" this argument. It's been going on for centuries. I'm pretty sure a series of bits on a server somewhere isn't going to end it.

Can we get back to the original post?
I think that is part of the problem. For some reason some theists out there have gotten in their head that evolution and the big bangs goal is to disprove god. When really all that is going to happen is 100 years from now the churches will say it supported evolution and the big bang theories all along and we will look at people that didn't understand evolution the same way we look at people who thought the earth was flat. I personally have no delusions of grandeur that one day the whole world is going to wake up and see that there never was a god.

Sassy there are tons of transitional fossils, click the link below for a brief summary. Go to your local natural history museum if you want to see them yourself.

Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html)

Here is a link explaining what a transitional fossil is so we don't have to rehash a similar what is a scientific theory argument except for tranitional fossil.
Transitional fossil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil)

Please don't use that tired old argument. Say God put transitional fossils in the relevent order of the rocks to test our faith if you want.



I can find bones in my back yard a create a story around it an claim it is a transitional of a fish to an elephant but that does not mean anyone should take me seriously. For example the so called famous transitional fossil Archaeopteryx which has the same skeletal structure as birds we see today.
Each of the “reptilian characteristics” in Archaeopteryx is either found to exist in true birds, or is absent in many reptiles. For example, one of the characteristics of Archaeopteryx that make it reptilian are hooks on its wings. Today, both the young Hoatzin bird and the young Ostrich have a hook on their wings similar to that of Archaeopteryx.
Furthermore feathers develop from a different part of the bird’s embryo than scales do from a reptile’s embryo. Therefore, a person who supports the theory of evolution would have to show how one could have replaced the other in an evolutionary manner—without violating the rules of biology. That is, the feathers were not an evolutionary modification of scales, but rather had to appear all on their own. This would be like seeing a human baby born with feathers or scales.

The problem with "transitional fossils" is that they do not distinguish between the evolution and creation models. The Archeopteryx does nothing to distinguish between the two models because it could just as well be just another created species.
The only way one can jump to the conclution that Archeopteryx is a transition between a reptile and a bird, is if you ASSUME evolution is true. It does nothing to prove that one group is related by descent to the other. To do that requires a series of fossils that show the development of a new adaptation.

So that just one example of the assumptions and preconceptions made by evolutionist when presenting these "transitional fossils". Unfortunately I don't have faith in those assumptions.

QUOTE [quote=SassyT] For you to have found this question it means you were snooping around the religious forum. So don't come on a religious forum and accuse people of forcing their beliefs on you. If you have no interest in hearing what Christians/thiest believe then don't come on a religious forum. It seems only logical to me.

Seriously, your attitude is destroying any credibility that you might have here.

Such accusations are childish and immature.

No one has to "snoop" to find any question here, they all show up at the same time on the main answer board.

If you would just stick to your topic, and lay off the personal attacks, your position will be much more credible.

I think that is part of the problem. For some reason some theists out there have gotten in their head that evolution and the big bangs goal is to disprove god. When really all that is going to happen is 100 years from now the churchs will say it supported evolution and the big bang theories all along and we will look at people that didn't understand evolution the same way we look at people who thought the earth was flat. I personally have no delusions of grandeur that one day the whole world is going to wake up and see that there never was a god.

Hmm. What happened to the agree/disagree button? I 100% agree with you.

Evolution and science have nothing to say about gods or religion. It is only a factor because some religious people feel threatened as science continues to hammer out answers to questions, which were once only answerable by religion.

So you do admit there are transitional-appearing fossils?



Each of the “reptilian characteristics” in Archaeopteryx is either found to exist in true birds, or is absent in many reptiles.


A few (but not all)reptilian characteristics not found in birds but found in Archaeopteryx
No bill, all birds have bills, reptiles do not
Neck attaches to skull from the rear like with theropod dinosaurs and not from below like in birds
Long bony tail that has vertebrate to the tip like reptiles they are not fused like birds.
It has teeth which no birds have.
It's metacarples are not fused like in birds but the wrist hand joint is flexible, as with the metatarsals being free and not fused, this is typical of reptiles.
I could go on those were just the easiest ones to describe.

The hooks on the wings you can have for bird like if you want although it is common to get ancestral throwbacks- like people with six fingers.

Your other points were good, it is easy to make the evidence fit the what you want it to. Thankfully transitional fossils (as convincing as they are) are not the only evidence for evolution.


The only way one can jump to the conclution that Archeopteryx is a transition between a reptile and a bird, is if you ASSUME evolution is true. it does nothing to prove that one group is related by descent to the other.

Except molecular biology, genomics and profiling.

To feathers and developmental biology...

Furthermore feathers develop from a different part of the bird’s embryo than scales do from a reptile’s embryo.

What exactly do you mean by 'a different part' a different part of the dermis or the body or something else? Can I see a peer reviewed scientific source please?



In development, both feathers and scales are formed by interactions between the epithelium and mesenchyme. Classic experiments showed that feather/scale location and size are defined by the mesenchyme, whereas the orientation is defined by the epithelium

A multi-level complexity model of scale/feather morphogenesis is presented that is consistent with the developmental stages observed in embryonic chicken skin and in the different protofeathers/feather precursors recently found in fossils. As we learn more about how molecular cascades contribute to various morphogenetic processes and how developmental pathways interact to build novel and more complex forms , we can begin to appreciate how the pressure of adaptation may act on the mechanics of signaling and development during evolution.


Evo-Devo of feathers and scales: building complex epithelial appendages : Commentary
Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, Volume 10, Issue 4, 1 August 2000, Pages 449-456
Cheng-Ming Chuong, Rajas Chodankar, Randall B Widelitz and Ting-Xin Jiang

It is a very interesting paper which goes into details of the biochemistry involved in the differentiation of scales to feathers and experiments inducing scales to form feathers in chicken epidermis.

[QUOTE=lobrobster]But they DO exist Sassy. Ever hear of Homo Erectus, or Homo neanderthalensis?




Homo sapiens neanderthalensis (Neandertal man) - . It is now admitted that the supposedly stooped posture was due to disease and that Neandertal is just simply a man with rickets and arthritis, not the much desired "ape man

Ramapithecus - once widely regarded as the ancestor of humans, it has now been realized that it is merely an extinct type of orangutan (an ape).

Eoanthropus (Piltdown man) - a hoax FRAUD, based on a human skull cap and an orangutan's jaw. It was widely publicized as the missing link for 40 years.

Hesperopithecus (Nebraska man) - based on a single tooth of a type of pig now only living in Paraguay.

Pithecanthropus (Java man) - It is no longer considered to be on the line from apes to humans. It is very ape-like. Was based on sketchy evidence of a femur, skull cap and three teeth found within a wide area over a one year period. It turns out the bones were found in an area of human remains, and now the femur is considered human and the skull cap from a large ape

Sinanthropus (Peking man) was once presented as an ape-man but has now been reclassified as Homo erectus

Homo erectus -the brain size is within the range of people today and studies of the middle ear have shown that Homo erectus is human. Remains have been found in the same strata and in proximity to ordinary Homo sapiens, suggesting that they lived together.


I can go on but I won't because I think you get the picture. All these so called "transitional ape men" are very questionable. Sorry not Fact.

Thanks Progunr but I've been jabbin him a bit too so it's okay. I actually like it when they resort to that argument.


But sassyT your information is out of date look up what scutes are in relation to bird feathers and reptiles.
The Archaeopteryx doesn't disprove evolution though, in fact it adds to it's evidence because scienctists assumed they would find one sooner or later. I'm just asking for one fossil that disproves evolution all it would take would be for human tool marks on the bones of a T-rex or a bunny in the same fossil layer as the t-rex. It would only take one fossil for evolution to be completely disproven. Only one. Where is it that one fossil?

This was quite a straight forward question... or so I thought until I've just read the answers back.

Each and everyone of you trying to score points from the other... none of you believing that you are wrong and rightly so,your faith in what ever you believe to be true is all powerful... whether it be the.. descended from ape story or the scientific story, evolution and all of that, then of coarse top of the list my own personal favourite, winner by a country mile... THE GOOD GUY UPSTAIRS.

You can all argue until the cows come home, you'll never prove it one way or another cause that's how it's meant to be, why bother to pull each other apart why not just accept are differences and move on.

As I've said before there can only be one creator,various religious followings just call him something different.

I'll leave you now to pick the bones out of this post as I'm sure you will... and your entitled

Homo sapiens neanderthalensis (Neandertal man) - . It is now admitted that the supposedly stooped posture was due to disease and that Neandertal is just simply a man with rickets and arthritis, not the much desired "ape man



Oh my! I don't know what else to say, or how to help. I can only suggest again that you read from credible sources.

What about DNA... Do you believe in THAT? Or is DNA just another phony story made up by scientists to deceive us?

[QUOTE]I feel bad, because you are only showing your ignorance of the evolutionary process. We didn't evolve from apes! We simply shared a common ancestor with them. Apes evolved from this same common ancestor just as we have.

Aww don't feel bad, you don't need to because I probaby know more than you. If an ape and a human share a common ancestor that means the ancestor must have had ape like charactoristics, hence we evolved from an ape like ancestor. So I suppose the apes just forgot to evolve with the rest of us.



We shouldn't expect to see a half-ape/half-man like animal. Please try and learn a little about evolution before making a fool of yourself with questions like this.

I think you have just desplayed more foolishness with this statement. We should definitely expect a transitional form of an ape becoming a man if evolution holds true.



Not a single one of them does!

What are you talking about? I just quoted 4 eminent scientists admitting the lack of fosil evidence.



What they DO admit is the truth. There are distinct gaps in the fossil record most notably the 'Cambrian explosion'. During this time complicated organisms appeared to have arrived on the scene in an unexplained burst of evolution. More than one would expect. There are several 'guesses' for how this might be accounted for. One is called 'Punctuated Equilibrium' which leads us to Gould

And yet you claim evolution is fact.




You do yourself no favors by quoting Stephen Gould who was himself (if I'm not mistaken), an atheist. If I'm wrong about that, whatever else he was, he most certainly was NOT a theist who believed in a Creator! Gould very much accepted the Theory of Evolution! There are disagreements over something called, 'punctuated equilibrium' that continue to this day.

.. lol well duh! That is what I was trying to prove. That even Evolutionists themselves (Gould) have admitted to the lacking fossil evidence.


There's a reason that just about every respectable biologist (indeed, just about every respected scientist), alive today FULLY accepts evolution

Yes evolution is generally accepted but that does not make it fact. It was generally accepted at one point that the earth was flat. So..
There are so many biologists (soon I will be one of them) who don't buy into evolution, at least not the ones who don't have an agenda to further propagate the non scienitific claims of Darwin. Darwin was not even a scientist.. lol He was a trained minister who decided to find an alternative to God and thus many athiestic scientists have held fast to the theory to aviod the alternative.




The evidence is positively overwhelming and undeniable Sassy. You just need to put away all that creationist propaganda for a sec, and start reading from credible sources.


You need to stop relying on evolution propaganda yourself and just use your brain and you will see what a joke it is. Undeniable.. Gravity is undenaible, evolution is every deniable.
According to evolution I share a common ancestor with a fruit fly.. lol it takes way more faith to believe that. Even my five year old niece would laugh at that.



I doubt this person is an accredited scientist. No scientist would be so ignorant of how science works. You don't ever prove things in science! You can only make predictions. So far, not a single prediction that The Theory of Evolution makes has been falsified. If anything, its predictions right down to molecular biology have been shown to be more accurate than Darwin himself could have imagined!

Gravity is proven fact. You can prove gravity beyond a shadow of a doubt so it is a FACT. The fact that I am sitting on my chair right now is proof of gravity, I can not deny it.
Evolution is not a proven fact. I just wish you would be reasonable and rational enough to admitt and accept this.





Seriously... I'm not sure why, but I kind of like you from your posts. You seem like a nice person who is very sincere. But you should stop talking about this stuff, because you are making an incredible fool of yourself. We don't just use carbon dating, but many, many, different methods. All these methods use different clocks, each independently calibrated to an entirely different set of principles. And ALL OF THEM point to the earth being around 4 BILLION years old! Again, you are reading from creationist propaganda. Stick with things you know about before making asinine assertions like this.

Quote form encyclopedia Age of the Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth)

Modern geologists consider the age of the Earth to be around 4.54 billion years (4.54×109 years).[1] This age has been determined by radiometric age dating of meteorite material[2] and is consistent with the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples.

Le
Of course convieniently the same people who want to sell the 4billions year old planet create other models of dating that suit their argument. At one point scientists claimed the earth was 70 million years old until they realised that evolution needed far more years to make it even nearly plausible. How convenient.
It would be nice for you to just admitt that you possess an incredible amount of faith in the premises and asssuptions used in science. The assuptions used are unverifiable so why should I believe them? Why should I believe the earth is 4 billion years old? It is not a fact.




You'll have a long wait, because once again, nothing is ever 'proven' in science. You simply don't understand science and I can only suggest again that you read up a little about these subjects from credible sources. Good luck to you!

I don't know what kind of science you've studied then.:cool:

So i suppose the apes just forgot to evolve with the rest of us.

Ahahahaha? Really? And you claim to have studied biology... sheeeeesh.

Apes that we see today are just as "well evolved" as humans are. So are all the fish and the insects and the microbes. Apes we see today are just as distant from that shared ancestor as we are. Just a different set of evolutionary pressures were put on them, so they evolved differently.

If an ape and a human share a common ancestor that means the ancestor must have had ape like charactoristics,.

I'm not your biology teacher, but I'd give you an 'F' for this statement. Do you see what's wrong with it? It contains a glaring error! I'm not going to keep giving you answers, since you obviously don't trust what I've got to say anyway. But you should try to figure it out if you want to have any chance of actually becoming a biologist.



So I suppose the apes just forgot to evolve with the rest of us.

Another 'F'!


We should definitely expect a transitional form of an ape becoming a man if evolution holds true.

I don't think you appreciate just how lucky we are to have any fossils at all. And for the last time... Ape DID NOT BECOME MAN!! It's not my job to educate you, Sassy. If you're truly studying to become a biologist, hopefully you'll understand evolution one day and look back at how silly your views about it once were.

Ahahahaha? Really? And you claim to have studied biology... sheeeeesh.

Apes that we see today are just as "well evolved" as humans are. So are all the fish and the insects and the microbes. Apes we see today are just as distant from that shared ancestor as we are. Just a different set of evolutionary pressures were put on them, so they evolved differently.


So the myth goes...

so the myth goes...Apparently you believe there exists a vast conspiracy involving millions of scientists from different countries and races over centuries of time. Interesting take on the matter.

I'm not your biology teacher, but I'd give you an 'F' for this statement. Do you see what's wrong with it? It contains a glaring error! I'm not going to keep giving you answers, since you obviously don't trust what I've got to say anyway. But you should try to figure it out if you want to have any chance of actually becoming a biologist. Another 'F'!! I don't think you appreciate just how lucky we are to have any fossils at all. And for the last time... Ape DID NOT BECOME MAN!!! It's not my job to educate you, Sassy. If you're truly studying to become a biologist, hopefully you'll understand evolution one day and look back at how silly your views about it once were.


Really.. That first guy looks like an ape to me.

mmm.. really .... That first guy looks like an ape to me.

Oh noes, popularised science is not totally accurate, whatever shall we do?

Oh noes, popularised science is not totally accurate, whatever shall we do?
What are you talking about? ALL of popular science is COMPLETELY accurate, ALL the time.
That's why string theory is still in it's original form, and explains how the universe works at a quantum level.

So if evolution is a myth what are the alternatives? If you think it's creationism where is the evidence? Where is the one fossil that supports creationism over evolution? How can a perfect all knowning being design an imperfect world? Even if it was humans that messed it up, if he designed us he should have known we were going to mess it up and designed us so that we wouldn't mess it up.

The bottom line is I respect all people's faith. But please don't make such claims that evolution is scientific fact when there is hardly any solid evidence for it. The scientific problems and inconsistancies of this theory are so overwhelmly obvious that it is facing collapse on all fronts. The only thing holding the tattered theory together is the powerful desire of millions of people to hold on to the notion of evolution, regardless of its scientific weakness, because the alternative is unthinkable to its practitioners.
There is a clear agenda here, evident from some of the quotes we have heard from evolutionists.

Professor LT More University of Cincinati said " Our Faith in the doctrine of evolution depends upon our reluctance to accept the antagonistic doctrine of special creation."

"Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly impossible." said by D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University

The bottom line is i respect all people's faith. But plse dont make such claims that evolution is scientific fact when there is hardly any solid evidence for it. The scientific problems and inconsistancies of this theory are so overwhelmly obvious that it is facing collapse on all fronts. The only thing holding the tattered theory together is the powerful desire of millions of people to hold on to the notion of evolution, regardless of its scientific weakness, because the alternative is unthinkable to its practitioners.
There is a clear agenda here, evident from some of the quotes we have heard from evolutionists.

Professor LT More University of Cincinati said " Our Faith in the doctrine of evolution depends upon our reluctance to accept the antagonistic doctrine of special creation."

"Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly impossible." said by D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University

Why do you consider evolution an alternative for creation? There are lots of people that believe both... I hardly think it fair to say that they only support evolution because it's the alternative to creation.

really..? That first guy looks like an ape to me.

I'm more than willing to answer your questions if you genuinely care about truth. But if your goal is to simply dispute science for the sake of creationism, then you don't really care about what is true and I'm not going to waste any more time.

Think of a tree with multiple branches. Now one branch (branch A) sprouts two new branches (branch B, and branch C). Branch B are humans and Branch C are apes. The common ancestor we share is branch A. But branch B does not come from branch C or visa versa. Branch C is simply the closest ancestor to branch B. In addition, branch A has descended from branch X. So branch A is the transitional species that gave rise to branches B and C.

One reason evolution is so hard to grasp is that it takes place over hundreds of millions of years! We are not used to dealing with such large time scales. But you can see evolution is progress right now! You're becoming a biologist. Have you learned anything about bacteria and antibiotics yet? Why do you think some bacteria will become immune to an antibiotic over time? The answer is because they are evolving. New generations of the bacteria reproduce to create new a strain which becomes immune to a particular antibiotic.

There is tons of other evidence. You didn't answer my question... Do you believe in DNA? Or is that just another scientifically created 'myth'? I honestly don't see how you're going to become a biologist (or any type of scientist) without accepting very concrete evidence.

I have provided you with a legitimate answer to every one of your questions or claims. If you want to completely dismiss them without thinking further about it, there is nothing left for me to say.

I'll play along. Let's assume evolution is wrong for the moment so we can focus on something else. Where is the one fossil that supports creationism? What is the evidence that supports creationism? Why the inconsistency in design plan? If there is a natural knowable solution for everything else why did god change his design for the beginning? Is it not within his power to make a knowable natural design for the beginning and the journey? If it is not within his power doesn't that mean he is limited? If he is limited, does he deserve worship? If he is limited does the disprove the bible version of god?

[
QUOTE=michealb]So if evolution is a myth what are the alternatives? If you think it's creationism where is the evidence? Where is the one fossil that supports creationism over evolution?


Lol.. are you serious right now? Every fossil that exists in the world is in support of creation because all the different kinds of plants and animals appear abruptly and fully functional in the strata with zero proof of ancestors. Bats, for example, appear suddenly in the fossil record with no evidence of "pre-bat"ancestors.
If all these transitionals exist then why did Richard Goldschmidt have to come up with his hopeful monster theory and the paleontologist Stephen Gould come up with punctuated equilibrium in order to explain the absence of transitional forms in the fossil record?
The absence of even a single example of a continuous fossil sequence showing the progressive stages of evolution of any plant or animal is a huge problem for evolutionism. So thus far all fossils found are very much in support of Creation.




How can a perfect all knowning being design an imperfect world? Even if it was humans that messed it up, if he designed us he should have known we were going to mess it up and designed us so that we wouldn't mess it up.

Is this the only argument you can come up with agaists Creation? Lol This is a philosophical argument against creation not a scientific one. But to answer your question all that God creatd was perfect. One of the perfect things that God made was creatures who had the free will to choose good or evil. Man decidided to choose evil and thus bore the concequense. Simple.

[
QUOTE=lobrobster]I'm more than willing to answer your questions if you genuinely care about truth. But if your goal is to simply dispute science for the sake of creationism, then you don't really care about what is true and I'm not going to waste any more time.

Lobro, don't get me wrong, I am not deputing science I am disputing a the myth of a one cell creature that crawls out of a prehistoric mythical soup and magically starts to transform into fish, birds, elephants, monkey, humans, trees, flowers, plants, fuits, grass etc , better known as evolution.

Think of a tree with multiple branches. Now one branch (branch A) sprouts two new branches (branch B, and branch C). Branch B are humans and Branch C are apes. The common ancestor we share is branch A. But branch B does not come from branch C or visa versa. Branch C is simply the closest ancestor to branch B. In addition, branch A has descended from branch X. So branch A is the transitional species that gave rise to branches B and C.

Lobro you don't need to explain this, I already know, I have studied evolution. How ever you want to slice it, the proposition upon which human evlolution is based is we came from an ape like creature at one point or another.

this is a represtation of Lucy, a supposed ansestor to humans.
I don't about you but that looks like an ape to me. So you can argue all you want..

Sassy why does the thought that we came for an ape-like ancestor upset you so much? In your beliefs women can from a rib*. How is that an improvement on an ape?

EDIT *and man from dust
I had to go check in the bible, it's been a while...

Bats, for example, appear suddenly in the fossil record with no evidence of "pre-bat"ancestors. Didn't god create all the animals at once? Or did he create more as needed? If so then where is that mentioned in the bible?

Evolution is rubbish. That's why there is no genetic diversity in the world. African people aren't black, europeans aren't white, and hispanics aren't brown. Asian people aren't short. We're all exactly the same because evolution doesn't exist.

i have studied evolution.

You need to study it again.

So you are denying that a dog is more closely related to a wolf than a bat, right? I would assume so, since you don't accept that species are derived from other species.

Tell me... How do you explain the fact that humans have an appendix and a tail bone? Or that I (a male) have nipples? Or that there are birds that no longer fly? Or that snakes have remnants of hips and legs? Also more importantly...

How do you account for the fact that over 99% of all species that have ever existed on the planet earth ARE NOW EXTINCT!!? What was the Creator thinking?

How do you account for AIDS and all new strains of virus? Do you think God just whips them up one after the other in order to kill man? Does God say, "Darn! Man invented a cure for that one, let's see if he can come up with something to beat THIS!".

You've got a LOT more studying to do!

One reason evolution is so hard to grasp is that it takes place over hundreds of millions of years!

yes, how convenient, its no wonder scientist changed the age of the earth from 70million to 4.5 billion to facilitate for evolution. Anything can happen given billions of years right? Yeah, based on your logic, given a billions of years a monkey might just fly out of my ***.



We are not used to dealing with such large time scales. But you can see evolution is progress right now! You're becoming a biologist. Have you learned anything about bacteria and antibiotics yet? Why do you think some bacteria will become immune to an antibiotic over time? The answer is because they are evolving. New generations of the bacteria reproduce to create new a strain which becomes immune to a particular antibiotic.

The relationship between bacteria and antibiotics ays nothing for evolution. Antibiotics interfere with a number of everyday cellular processes that bacteria rely on for growth and survival. Antibiotics stop working because bacteria come up with various ways of countering these actions not because it evolves into a something else. It is still a bacteria.
If anything this only demonstates microevoltion (a fact) which is small mutation and variations which occur within spicies. It says nothing for macro. So the bacteria may mutate and become a variation (resistant straint) of the bacteria but it does not cease to be a bacteria. So according to you theory given a billion years a bacteria will evolve into a virus, a totally different species. That is just taking a leap i am not willing to make.





There is tons of other evidence. You didn't answer my question... Do you believe in DNA? Or is that just another scientifically created 'myth'? I honestly don't see how you're going to become a biologist (or any type of scientist) without accepting very concrete evidence.

Of course i believe in DNA, but the question is what does dna say for evolution? Nothing.
If anything it makes a strong case for an intelligent designer who created a marvelously complex, efficient ‘information system’ for encoding life. Because evolutionist have seen that fossil record does nothing for their theory, they are desperate to find other ways to resuscitate their dying theory.
Similarly in DNA just shows a common creator. If God created animals,humans and plants that are going to inhabit the same environment, is it not logical that he would create them with similar matter? It is not enough to explain how DNA might have gathered into strands by random chance; you must also explain the machinery to interpret DNA. In other words, it’s not enough to explain how random letters could eventually fall into the order S-E-E-T-H-E-D-O-G-B-A-R-K. These letters still don’t mean anything unless you have a pre-existing language system for interpreting those letters! ‘See the dog BARK’ has meaning, but only to a modern English-speaker.



I have provided you with a legitimate answer to every one of your questions or claims. If you want to completely dismiss them without thinking further about it, there is nothing left for me to say.

Just because i don't find your explantions satisfactory does not mean i am dismissing them with out thinking about it. I think i have addressed everything you have said and have challenged your beliefs and ideas. The false ideas that are being propagated by athiestic evolutionists who are on a quest to promote humanism. Sadly people don't do any research and they just believe what these people say because they come in the name of "science". I do a bit of digging before i just believe in stuff. ;)

I officially pronounce this thread a lost cause.

Sassy why does the thought that we came for an ape-like ancestor upset you so much? In your beliefs women can from a rib*. How is that an improvement on an ape?

EDIT *and man from dust
I had to go check in the bible, it's been a while...

Lol it doesn't upset me I don't know why you got that impression. I just find it comical.

Do you think god created all the creatures at once or as species die out does he create new ones to fill their place? If he created them all at once wouldn't we get to a point when there was no life on earth? Why are bunny rabbits and t-rexs never found together. Why are there never any human tool marks on dinosaurs fossils. Surely our ancestors would have had to defend themselves against a T-rex. What about junk DNA/ancestral DNA why would a perfect designer leave junk and DNA from completely different animals in it system? Was god high when he made the platypus or was he not perfect and had left over parts?

[QUOTE=lobrobster]You need to study it again.

So you are denying that a dog is more closely related to a wolf than a bat, right? I would assume so, since you don't accept that species are derived from other species.



Tell me... How do you explain the fact that humans have an appendix and a tail bone? Or that I (a male) have nipples? Or that there are birds that no longer fly? Or that snakes have remnants of hips and legs? Also more importantly...

How do i explain it? An intelligent designer made them like that. Why should i assume that just because a dog and a wolf are similar that evolution is true. Where is the connection here?
The vertebral column is a linear row of bones that supports the head at its
beginning and it must end somewhere. Wherever it ends, evolutionists will be sure to call it a tail. In case you didn't know the coccyx is more than the end of the spinal column, it is the attachment point of nine muscles that allow for a number of movements.
Tell Ashley Murry of Wilmington, who has to wear a diaper for the rest of her life because was born without a coccyx, that a coccyx is not necessary.

So the myth goes that we lost the tail because we did need it anymore.. i disagree because i think that a tail would still come in handy. Like right now i sure would like to have a tail to be able to take a sip from my tea cup without interrupting my typing.. lol

FYi Nipple are not just for feeding babies. Whether on a man or a woman, nipples are especially sensitive and are a source of sexual stimuli. So what's your point?



How do you account for the fact that over 99% of all species that have ever existed on the planet earth ARE NOW EXTINCT!!? What was the Creator thinking?
What does extintion say about evolution? Nothing. What does extinction say about a an intelligent designer? Nothing. So i don't know why you keep making these points that contribute nothing to this debate.


How do you account for AIDS and all new strains of virus? Do you think God just whips them up one after the other in order to kill man? Does God say, "Darn! Man invented a cure for that one, let's see if he can come up with something to beat THIS!".

You've got a LOT more studying to do!

So Aids proves evolution and disproves and intelligent designer. I am seeing a great logical fallacy in your arguments. This sort of argument (‘Why would God have done X?’) is really a cheap rhetorical device rather than a real argument for evolution. This appeal to pseudo-theology is a poor substitute for actually demonstrating that an organ arose by time, chance and natural selection.
So please if you still want to continue to have an intelligent debate with me about origins as explained by evolution, don't keep asking me why God did this or that. If you really want to know why the world is messed up like it is today, and what part God played in it, read the Bible.

We keep asking why god did something because the point of this thread isn't whether evolution is true or not. It's whether there is a god or not? So since the bible says that the creator is perfect, so by extension everything the creator makes must also be perfect. Our imperfect world makes it illogical that we have a perfect creator. So if the bible is wrong about the creator being perfect what else is the bible wrong about?

I Believe theres is a God, The Almighty Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. You are right Not all religion have a true God. There is only one true Chruch which is in the Bible. That God Is true. There Many religion claiming they are Christian but they just pretending.

In this case, God must be schizophrenic, because each faith has conflicting beliefs and practices.

What is God?

What is God?

God - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God)

We keep asking why god did something because the point of this thread isn't whether evolution is true or not. It's whether there is a god or not? So since the bible says that the creator is perfect, so by extension everything the creator makes must also be perfect. Our imperfect world makes it illogical that we have a perfect creator. So if the bible is wrong about the creator being perfect what else is the bible wrong about?


This is your "logical" conlusion. The bible also says that since the fall of man the universe has been cursed and is running down and decaying, which is consistent with science. However evolution requires that every thing run up. They tell us everything is evolving and getting better and yet that is not consistent with what is observed. Your claim that the bible is wrong about a perfect Creator is merely based on your convienient refusal to acknowlege why the bible says the universe is imperfect, NOT because it is a fact. So there is no argument here, just a subjective opinion on your part.

However evolution requires that every thing run up. They tell us everything is evolving and getting better and yet that is not consistant with what is observed. I don't believe I've ever met someone so confused about the tenets of a subject they say that have researched.

I know the bible says that god gave us free will and we ate from the tree of knowledge and god threw us out of the garden of eden.

No refusal, I'm just using basic logic that is easy to follow. The bible claims god is an all powerful and all knowing perfect being. The problem with perfection is that its matter of opinion. If everyone on earth but you thought I was a perfect being, I wouldn't be a perfect being because I didn't have perfect score of being perfect. The problem with being all knowing is that you know every outcome of your actions. If he is all knowing he could not make man without knowning that he was going to eat from the tree of knowledge. If he knew when he made us that we were going to eat from the tree of knowledge, it wouldn't be our fault. In fact if god was a all knowing being that created everyone. It would mean you weren't in control of your own destiny because god would know what you were going to do before you did it, which means you were predestined to do it. If everything is predetermind, it is not your choice to do anything but you are merely following the design plan laid out for you. Which means it doesn't matter how you live your life because you were going to live it that way anyway and god already knows if your going to heaven or hell. That is of course if you believe in an all knowning, all powerful, perfect being.

I think there is a God. The theory of the Big Bang is confusing cause no matter how you explain it how can nothing form something? Also now the craziest thing scientist are saying now are that we came from stars? Also stuff like evolution, they think they have it down but they can't find the missing link.

First, I do not believe it is at all necessary to quote scripture OR rely on Jesus Christ to say that there is or is not a God. The concept of God is within us. It is a higher power that we draw upon in our times of need. That is my opinion of God. Plain and simple. No one's God is any better than anyone else's. It is Human spirit and faith in oneself.

I think there is a God. The theory of the Big Bang is confusing cause no matter how you explain it how can nothing form something?

Yet, you have no problem believing that God came from nothing? Why do people have such a hard time figuring out that if God can come from nothing, so can whatever else caused the big bang!

yes, how convenient, its no wonder scientist changed the age of the earth from 70million to 4.5 billion to facilitate for evolution.

With this statement you pronounce yourself as hopeless. Please do yourself a favor and get a proper education!

I believe it is IMPOSSIBLE to determine the age of this planet.

And does it really matter anyway??

Yet, you have no problem believing that God came from nothing? Why do people have such a hard time figuring out that if God can come from nothing, so can whatever else caused the big bang!?

the problem with saying that lobro is that it appeals to the supernatural and goes beyond science. You can not believe in naturalism and claim that the universe came from nothing. If the big bang came from nothing then that is not natural science that is something supernatural. So if you are able to believe in a supernatuaral big bang then what makes a supernatural intelligent designer so improbable?

The bottom line is if you want to claim that the univese is here because of a purely naturally scientific process then you have to be consistent. Saying the Big bang is came from nothing is not science, it is a supernatural belief. In science
nothing X nothing = nothing

Christians can say God has always been there and that is fine because we are not relying on science and we do not make the assumption of naturalism. We believe in the supernatural. You don't, so don't try and use it when it is convenient.

the problem with saying that lobro is that it appeals to the supernatural and goes beyond science. You can not believe in naturalism and claim that the universe came from nothing. If the big bang came from nothing then that is not natural science that is something supernatural. So if you are able to believe in a supernatuaral big bang then what makes a supernatural intelligent designer so improbable?

The bottom line is if you want to claim that the univese is here because of a purely naturally scientific process then you have to be consistant. Saying the the Big bang is came from nothing is not science, it is a supernatural belief. In science
nothing X nothing = nothing
I know you're studying biology, so I'll fill in a few details about Big Bang theory.

In Big Bang, everything didn't come from nothing. Everything was super compressed. You probably know what a black hole is, and in Big Bang theory, everything was pretty much a giant black hole. Something happened. Energy fluctuation, divine intervention, whatever the case may be, and energy was released from the compressed matter, somwhat like a nuclear reaction. This release of energy cause an outward explosion of the compressed matter, forming the universe as we see it today, in expansion.

I believe it is IMPOSSIBLE to determine the age of this planet.


I agree with you there. Scientist think they know but they don't. I believe the earth is much younger than they presume. If mankind has been on earth over millions years, as the evolutionists tell us, then why do the records of their activity only go back a few thousand years. I find it hard to believe that it took man millions of years to learn how to write.
Ancient languages never back beyond c. 4000 B.C. and radiate outward from Mesopotamia. Ancient Historical Records - The oldest dates go back to about 4000 B.C.
The Oldest People - They do not go back before c. 3000 B.C. and were located in Mesopotamia. Man, whom the evolutionists claim to have come into existence over a million years ago, is said to have "stopped evolving" 100,000 years ago. Why then do we not have at least 100,000 years of civilizations, cities, and human remains?
The evidence agrees with the Bible account, not with the evolutionists.

[QUOTE=retsoksirhc]I
In Big Bang, everything didn't come from nothing. Everything was super compressed.

Where did this "everything" come from?


You probably know what a black hole is, and in Big Bang theory, everything was pretty much a giant black hole. Something happened. Energy fluctuation, divine intervention, whatever the case may be, and energy was released from the compressed matter, somwhat like a nuclear reaction. This release of energy cause an outward explosion of the compressed matter, forming the universe as we see it today, in expansion.

Where did the gaint black hole come from?

I think there is a God. The theory of the Big Bang is confusing cause no matter how you explain it how can nothing form something? Also now the craziest thing scientist are saying now are that we came from stars? also stuff like evolution, they think they have it down but they can't find the missing link.

Lol Yes, The fact that the "theory" of evolution is missing a critical link (the "missing link") should speak volumes as to the credibility of such a wild theory.

where did this "everything" come from?



where did the gaint black hole come from?
With all due respect... who cares? I was telling you what the big bang theory was. I wasn't telling you what the big bang theory isn't.

[QUOTE=michealb]I know the bible says that god gave us free will and we ate from the tree of knowledge and god threw us out of the garden of eden.

No refusal, I'm just using basic logic that is easy to follow. The bible claims god is an all powerful and all knowing perfect being. The problem with perfection is that its matter of opinion. If everyone on earth but you thought I was a perfect being, I wouldn't be a perfect being because I didn't have perfect score of being perfect. The problem with being all knowing is that you know every outcome of your actions. If he is all knowing he could not make man without knowning that he was going to eat from the tree of knowledge. If he knew when he made us that we were going to eat from the tree of knowledge, it wouldn't be our fault.

Michealb, everyone knows that children grow up and can become rebelious especially in their teenage years. Knowing that is not going to stop you from having kids is it? It not going to stop me. I know for a fact that when I have a child at one point or another that child is going to disobey me. So should I then say I am not having kids because I have forknowlege that he/she is going to disobey me? NO. And just because I already know my child is going to disobey me does not mean it is not the child's fault. The child has free will to obey or disobey so she will reap the concequense of his/her choise.



In fact if god was a all knowing being that created everyone. It would mean you weren't in control of your own destiny because god would know what you were going to do before you did it, which means you were predestined to do it. If everything is predetermind, it is not your choice to do anything but you are merely following the design plan laid out for you. Which means it doesn't matter how you live your life because you were going to live it that way anyway and god already knows if your going to heaven or hell. That is of course if you believe in an all knowning, all powerful, perfect being.

What kind of logic is that? God knows the future of what the free will creatures choose. Free will does not stop becoming free because God knows what will happen. For example, I know that my niece will choose to eat chocolate cake over a bowl full of stinking dead mice. If I were to set them both before my niece, it is safe to say she will not eat the dead mice. Knowing this is not taking away the freedom of my niece since she is freely choosing one over the other. Likewise, for God to know what a person will choose does not mean that the person has no freedom to make the choice. It simply means that God knows what the person will choose.

With all due respect...who cares? I was telling you what the big bang theory was. I wasn't telling you what the big bang theory isn't.

I know what the big bang theory is and what it isn't, I didn't need you to tell me.
who cares? I couldn't care less because I don't believe it. But was interested to know why the people who believe in it do despite its improbability.

I know what the big bang theory is and what it isnt, i didnt need you to tell me.
who cares? i couldnt care less because i dont believe it. But was interested to know why the people who believe in it do despite its improbability.
Well, you fooled me into thinking you didn't know about big bang, by saying that everything came from nothing. That's not in any way shape or form part of the big bang theory, it just explains the expansion of the universe. If you don't care, that's fine. If you want to ask a question of your own, stop hijacking this thread. The original intent is to ask why people do or do not believe in god, personally.

[QUOTE=retsoksirhc]Well, you fooled me into thinking you didn't know about big bang, by saying that everything came from nothing.

Well neither you not anyone else has told me where the black hole came from so I presume from nothing.



That's not in any way shape or form part of the big bang theory, it just explains the expansion of the universe. If you don't care, that's fine. If you want to ask a question of your own, stop hijacking this thread. The original intent is to ask why people do or do not believe in god, personally.

I told people why I believed in God and said why I don't believe in the alternative (evolution) and everyone started attacking me for not believing in evolution. So I was just responding to the attacks by revealing the flaws of their theory.

To me .I believe in God and believe in evolution too
God right
Evolution fact too
Not everything who says by ( human /scientists) about evolution is correct

But the evolution can says about it is true
We can feel there is an evolution
Noteverything who says by human about God is true too
But God who says by himself is a right
So both of them are true

[QUOTE]

What kind of logic is that? God knows the future of what the free will creatures choose. Free will does not stop becoming free because God knows what will happen. For example, I know that my niece will choose to eat chocolate cake over a bowl full of stinking dead mice. If I were to set them both before my niece, it is safe to say she will not eat the dead mice. Knowing this is not taking away the freedom of my niece since she is freely choosing one over the other. Likewise, for God to know what a person will choose does not mean that the person has no freedom to make the choice. It simply means that God knows what the person will choose.

There is a difference between you thinking you know and an all knowing being knowing for sure. Your niece is able to exercise free will because there is the uncertainty that she will choose something else even if the second choice is highly unlikely it's still a possible choice. If the outcome is known for certain there is no element of choice because the outcome was always known. An all knowing being would know before you did that you were going to make that choice, so if he knew before you did that you were going to make a choice and he set up the circumstances of you making that choice, then you really had no choice to begin with.

Your example with the kids is also different because you don't have control over every aspect of their creation. If you were all powerful and all knowing you could make kids that didn't disobey you or at the very least you would know to keep them away from your tasty apples.

[QUOTE=michealb][QUOTE=sassyT]

There is a difference between you thinking you know and an all knowing being knowing for sure. Your niece is able to exercise free will because there is the uncertainty that she will choose something else even if the second choice is highly unlikely it's still a possible choice. If the outcome is known for certain there is no element of choice because the outcome was always known. [/QUOTE

Come on michealb, I think you are running out of points to make. I don't see how my knowing something before it happens has anything to do with the freedom to choose. Just because I know that my niece is not going to choose to eat stinking dead mice over a chocolate sundae does not mean I am somehow controlling her mind and have influence on her choice. Her choise is completely independent to my forknowlege. Likewise Just because God possesses forknowlege does not mean he has control over our choices. Our ability to choose is independent from the fact that God already knows.




[QUOTE]]An all knowing being would know before you did that you were going to make that choice, so if he knew before you did that you were going to make a choice and he set up the circumstances of you making that choice, then you really had no choice to begin with.

There is nothing factual about what you just said. You are drawing the conclution that Just because God knows what is going to happen then that mean he must have orchastrated the circumstances. This is circular reasoning and pure speculation on your part.


Your example with the kids is also different because you don't have control over every aspect of their creation. If you were all powerful and all knowing you could make kids that didn't disobey you or at the very least you would know to keep them away from your tasty apples.

That where free will comes in. God did not create robots. He gave us an opportunity to choose good or evil. We chose evil and so we are living the consequence.

As the point of free will is being discussed...

I believe that the Almighty is All Knowing and He gives us choice between right and wrong.

By giving us free will, we have the choice but making a choice is hard because there is the negative influence of the Satan(Devil) involved and human hearts sway to suggestions from both good and evil.
The Almighty wishes for us to persevere even in hardships and bad circumstances and for us to stand for all that is just.
The Almighty is All knowing in that He alone knows everything that has ever happened or will ever happen,this does not mean that He will stop every person from doing evil the moment he does them, but there are different circumstances that work up to people realising their mistakes and correcting them.
Some circumstances maybe natural like environmental changes or it could come from other people and their behaviour or help.

As a believer in an All Knowing Almighty, I believe that the free will we practice in this world is leading us to whatever is there in the Hereafter. The Almighty knows where we are heading but we don't and it is up to to us to search and live towards eternal peace.



Regarding evolution-
I always believe that if the process of evolution did take place then it is the Almighty who made the process happen in however many years it took.
I believe all of us,all living things on earth came from the same source,the Almighty Creator.

I won't say I am a 100% believer in evolution but I am fascinated by the process of how records of the past are fossilised and preserved for so many years and that we are able to study them.
I have actually seen a fossilised tree and it is amazing how the trunk of tree of wood changes over long period into something different.

I still await further research into the process of evolution,but until then I think we are reaping benefits of scientific research in so many other ways.

As I always say... reading up on scientific findings make me firmer in my belief than ever.:)

Well put, firm.

With regard to free will: I am not a Christian, but this is what I was always under the impression that the Christian standing was (at least, Christian Reformed :)

I was told that God gave us free will so our choices would have weight. He created man to have faith and companionship, but if he only made man follow in his steps without any choice of right or wrong, the reward of eternal life wouldn't be much of a reward, and more just something everyone was automatically given. We have right and wrong, good and evil, so that decisions have weight and we can be rewarded for doing right.

As I don't believe in heaven or hell, this doesn't have much bearing on my will to do right or wrong, but it's an interesting prospect.

The difference is between you thinking you know and definitely knowing. If you were 100% certain that the child would take the cake. Then the child isn't being given a choice because no matter what the child does you know the outcome. How can you have free will if the outcome has been determined before you were even born to make the choice. It's like saying the characters in a movie have free will.(maybe the fact that people don't understand this is why people yell at the screen in movie theaters?)

If a all knowning being is the first cause as creationist like to say. That first event is the cause of all other events and since he knew how it would turn out before hand he could have adjusted his first cause to change the series of events. If through your actions something bad happens it's still your fault, if you knew that what the results of that action were going to be.


there is nothing factual about what you just said. This is circular reasoning and pure speculation on your part.

Again I will tell you I can't give you facts about a being that doesn't exist. All I can do is give you the logic behind why it doesn't work they way you think it does. And you complaining about my circular reasoning is very funny coming from someone who's entire argument consists of "god did it, cause he is god"

I agree with your statement regarding the thought that "Don't say that everyones God is the right God", because this is just not realistic regardless of the faith it would take to believe it. There is only one God. He is the Father, Son & Holy Spirit as one being. He is the alpha and omega. In him we live and breathe and have our being. We are made in his image, and our sin separates us from Him physically. We are the only beings made on this earth that have a spirit. The spirit is a part of us given by God that we may commune with Him if we call upon Jesus to forgive our sins so that we may be alive (Born Again) in spirit. This is considered to be a second birth, as all are "dead" in spirit until the renewal that can only come through Grace by forgiveness of sins. To begin to understand God means to understand what it is to be Holy. This can only be understood once the Spirit has been renewed. The Bible says that No one has seen God, No one has seen His face. We cannot comprehend what it must be to be that Holy, because People by nature are born sinful. There can be NO SIN in the presence of God. Something MUST be done to eradicate this sin. If our sin is not forgiven, it simply stays with us, therefore separating & keeping us from enjoying God's future physical relationship with Mankind. Of course there is one catch. One must acknowledge the validity of the Bible and make a conscience decision to believe in faith. This is a personal decision and will never be pushed by God, because he wants people to accept it freely. Be careful though, there are frauds out there. 1John4 says that Only Spirits that acknowledge Jesus is God in the Flesh........ is of God. Many false religions claim Jesus as a prophet and do not give His the status of God in the flesh. This is how you divide the deceiving churches.
Praise God for a mighty worrior like you! This man hit the nail right on the head! He has the spirit of truth in him, which comes from the Father.

Praise God for a mighty worrior like you! This man hit the nail right on the head!! He has the spirit of truth in him, which comes from the Father.

Who's father? My father is invisible and rides a great winged horse up in the galaxies. He will come back when bixor rises from the sea and fires will rain down upon this 300 year old earth (I'll bet you thought it was 6000 yrs. Old, ha-ha). Then all who believe will be given party favors and ascend to be with him forever. I know this because my book says so. I pity all you worshiping the wrong god. You will be sent to nests where fire ants will eat your eyes for eternity. It's in my book!

[QUOTE=michealb]The difference is between you thinking you know and definitely knowing. If you were 100% certain that the child would take the cake. Then the child isn't being given a choice because no matter what the child does you know the outcome. How can you have free will if the outcome has been determined before you were even born to make the choice

This is where you are getting it all wrong... the outcone is NOT pre-determinded it is just simply known. That is the difference. Just because I know for a fact that my niece will choose cake over stinky dead mice does not mean I her choice is predetermined, it just means her choice is just known before hand. Your rational about this doesn't make any sense.



If a all knowning being is the first cause as creationist like to say. That first event is the cause of all other events and since he knew how it would turn out before hand he could have adjusted his first cause to change the series of events. If through your actions something bad happens it's still your fault, if you knew that what the results of that action were going to be.

You are connecting things that are mutually exclusive and have nothing to do with one another. Knowing what will happen does not mean that we are preventing or causing that thing to happen. The sun will rise tomorrow. I know.. But I am not causing it to rise nor am I preventing it from rising by knowing that it will happen.
God knowing what we are going to do does not mean that we can't do something else. It means that God simply knows what we have chosen to do ahead of time. Our freedom is not restricted by God's foreknowledge; our freedom is simply realized ahead of time by God. I don't know why you are finding something so simple hard to wrap around your head... lol



Again I will tell you I can't give you facts about a being that doesn't exist.

Yes, He does not exist according to your "faith" not fact.


All I can do is give you the logic behind why it doesn't work they way you think it does.

Speak for yourself here, you are the one who is struggling with wraping your head around the concept of omniscience and free will. I have already demonstrated that forknowlege is independent from free will with my sun rising analogy.


And you complaining about my circular reasoning is very funny coming from someone who's entire argument consists of "god did it, cause he is god"

I don't assume naturalism so I am not restricted from relying on supernatural explanations as you are.

[QUOTE=lobrobster]Who's father? My father is invisible and rides a great winged horse up in the galaxies.

Really..? I though your father was that famous one cell guy who crawled out of that primordial vegetable soup and morphed into everything we see today. :confused:

[QUOTE]Speak for yourself here, you are the one who is struggling with wraping your head around the concept of omniscience and free will. I have already demonstrated that forknowlege is independent from free will with my sun rising analogy...

Actually, he's arguing that a being, by definition, can't be omnipotent and omniscient. Read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, he explains it quite well. Or look up the definitions, you'll probably figure it out.

Ok to help sassyt out here a little bit... Yes there is a God. I hear talk about Fee wll, destiny and predetermined etc. .
Just because God is all knowing doesn't mean that somehow this over rules the fact that he has given us free will. Just because he knows the choices we will make doen't mean he is making them for us! We as people are always straying from the will of God this is why he asks us to obey him and do his will and to call upon him and have FAITH and TRUST in him. Yes God has an oringinal plan for our lives, but we do not always chose this route.

I hear the voice of the good sheperd, I hear my Fathers voice and the voice of a stranger I will not fallow. I roll my works upon the Lord. I commit and trust them wholly to him. He will cause my thoughts to become agreable to his will, and so shall my plans be established and succeed. (John10:27, Proverbs 16:3)

Hear now, you house of David! It is not enough to try the patience of human beings? Will you try the patients of my God also? Therefore the Lord will give you a sign; the virgin will be with child and give birth to a son and we will call him Immanuel.(Isiah 7:13-14)

God will never make us want him or want to know him, however he will put a calling on our hearts to want to. He wants us to want to love him and know him this is why we have free will. He is our creater and made a plan for each one of our lives we do however have a choice to pick up our cross and fallow him.
God also knows we are "fallen" and our flesh and sin separates us from him, he is a Holly perfect God and no sin can be in his presents, this is why he sent his son yet while we were still sinners to, to save us because he loved us that much and wants a personal relationship with us. So when we accept Jesus as our Lord and savior, we are covered in the

Just because he knows the choices we will make doen't mean he is making them for us! ... Yes God has an oringinal plan for our lives, but we do not always chose this route.So god knows all the choices we make and has a plan for our life, i.e.. Our life is pre-determined by god, but we do not always choose this route. Something is wrong here.

[QUOTE=sassyT]

Actually, he's arguing that a being, by definition, can't be omnipotent and omniscient. Read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, he explains it quite well. Or look up the definitions, you'll probably figure it out.

They should re-name the book The Richard Dawkins Delusion. :rolleyes:

our life is pre-determined by god

No. If that were true, we'd be puppets. We're not.

No. If that were true, we'd be puppets. We're not.But I hear that all the time, that god knows our every move, when someone dies it's "part of god's great plan". These people are wrong then?

god has a plan for our life

I watched my sons grow and mature, enjoyed seeing personalities blossom and character develop. Each child is different, with his own talents and abilities and uniqueness. I had a plan in mind for each of them, but their own choices took them in other directions.

Its kind of like that movie Next... he can see into the future based on the decisions he thinks he is going to make... but as soon as he changes his mind and decides to make a different decision in the future, the future changes... although he can still see that new future coming..

But I hear that all the time, that god knows our every move, when someone dies it's "part of god's great plan". These people are wrong then?

Does "god knows our every move" equal "god determines our every move"? And be careful that the "god knows our every move" doesn't sound like Santa knowing when we've been good or bad and is keeping a list.

The "part of god's great plan" annoys me. "God's great plan" needs to be defined. What is your guess?

And those at funerals who say "it was god's will" creep me out.

The "part of god's great plan" annoys me. "God's great plan" needs to be defined. What is your guess? I have no need to guess, I put god and santa in the same grouping. I'm in charge of my life, no one else. I agree with you about the kids and our plans for them. It just creeps my out when I hear the rhetoric as voiced by leeseeandjoel, it's very contradictory.

Ok to help sassyt out here a little bit... Yes there is a God. I hear talk about Fee will, destiny and predetermined etc. .
Just because God is all knowing doesn't mean that somehow this over rules the fact that he has given us free will. Just because he knows the choices we will make doesn't mean he is making them for us! We as people are always straying from the will of God this is why he asks us to obey him and do his will and to call upon him and have FAITH and TRUST in him. Yes God has an original plan for our lives, but we do not always chose this route.

I hear the voice of the good Shepard, I hear my Fathers voice and the voice of a stranger I will not fallow. I roll my works upon the Lord. I commit and trust them wholly to him. He will cause my thoughts to become agreeable to his will, and so shall my plans be established and succeed. (John10:27, Proverbs 16:3)

Hear now, you house of David! It is not enough to try the patience of human beings? Will you try the patients of my God also? Therefore the Lord will give you a sign; the virgin will be with child and give birth to a son and we will call him Immanuel.(Isiah 7:13-14)

God will never make us want him or want to know him, however he will put a calling on our hearts to want to. He wants us to want to love him and know him this is why we have free will. He is our creator and made a plan for each one of our lives we do however have a choice to pick up our cross and follow him.
God also knows we are "fallen" and our flesh and sin separates us from him, he is a Holly perfect God and no sin can be in his presents, this is why he sent his son yet while we were still sinners to, to save us because he loved us that much and wants a personal relationship with us. So when we accept Jesus as our Lord and savior, we are covered in the blood of Jesus and he no longer sees our sin.

He who does not take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. He who finds his life will loose it, and he who looses his life for My sake will find it. Matt 10:38,39
He is the Alpha Omega beginning and the end, who is, who was and who is to come, the Almighty.
The big bang theory just doesn't make any sense what so ever. Firstly, and mostly, because how beautifully complex and intricate the human body is made and everything else in this world, for that matter. It most certianly didn't come from micro organisms and such and if it did... were did these things come from? If this were true, than where do miracles come from and super natural happenings? Dreams, visions, souls, spirits and mostly LOVE. All of which can not be explained simply by the physical alone. Another question why do you put your faith in Scientists and theologist, historian etc, all of whom are men, and prone to mistakes and these are simply their hypothesis anyhow,their educated GUESS? They haven proven the Bible to be true over and over again, so It seems like it takes a lot more faith to not believe in our God than it does to believe. So to call us who do illogical, or irrational or uneducated is ignorant in itself. I guess they say ignorance is bliss, but that only lasts so long...

I have no need to guess, I put god and santa in the same grouping. I'm in charge of my life, no one else. I agree with you about the kids and our plans for them. It just creeps my out when I hear the rhetoric as voiced by leeseeandjoel, it's very contradictory.

I think one of the big turnoffs is the over-verbalization, the over-Gospeling. There are ways and there are ways for a Christian to approach a non-Christian to interest him in Christianity. Whomping him over the head with lots of words isn't one of them. Reminds me of my mother who used to say to my dad, a minister, "Just because you have a captive audience on Sunday morning is no reason to have a long sermon." She threatened to have a trapdoor installed in the pulpit, so if he started repeating himself or otherwise began boring the congregation, my mom would push a button to open the trapdoor and cause him to slide on a chute to the church basement.

Does "god knows our every move" equal "god determines our every move"? And be careful that the "god knows our every move" doesn't sound like Santa knowing when we've been good or bad and is keeping a list.

The "part of god's great plan" annoys me. "God's great plan" needs to be defined. What is your guess?

And those at funerals who say "it was god's will" creep me out.

If God knows you will die tomorrow, is He powerless to prevent it? You can't have it both ways. Either God is omniscient, or omnipotent. He can't be both.

Who's father? My father is invisible and rides a great winged horse up in the galaxies. He will come back when bixor rises from the sea and fires will rain down upon this 300 year old earth (I'll bet you thought it was 6000 yrs. old, ha-ha). Then all who believe will be given party favors and ascend to be with him forever. I know this because my book says so. I pity all you worshiping the wrong god. You will be sent to nests where fire ants will eat your eyes for eternity. It's in my book!


I could write a book and say it where true, but that wouldn't make it so. The bible is important for us as believers, but even if we didn't have it, we would still know him. Do you think the bible was around in Moses' Day, nope, yet he still knew him. He is alive. It's like if you are familiar with someone's voice and they called you on the phone, wouldn't you know who it was even with out them saying so? It's kind of like that. When I was a little girl I just knew God existed(without being trained either) Not to mention the many times he has manifested in my life, many a miracles... How about your invisible Father... has he ever pulled you through and brought you out and shown himself to be true and alive in your life over and over again... mocking me will not change what is true or not.. so try to make yourself feel better.. tell me another prophesy about my life.. fire ants... really??

If God knows you will die tomorrow, is He powerless to prevent it? You can't have it both ways. Either God is omniscient, or omnipotent. He can't be both.

Oh, yes he can be both. One Jewish rabbi wrote a book about this. The rabbi concluded that, in order to give us free will, God had to take a step back to allow that to happen.

I see my child eyeing the candy rack at the grocery store and, as his mother, knowing he loves M&Ms also know what will likely happen. I can reach out to stop him, but I don't. He has a choice. He decides to surrepitiously take a package of M&Ms. Could I have stopped him? Yes. Did I? No. Why didn't I? Perhaps there's a better lesson to be learned after the fact than by taking away his choice.

God is omniscient and omnipotent, and yet we have free will. He knows what will happen but He doesn't stop us. He isn't a robot at the beck and call of his omniscience and omnipotence. And perhaps there's a lesson for us to learn when He doesn't stop us?

If God knows you will die tomorrow, is He powerless to prevent it?

God could prevent my dying tomorrow, but why should He? He put the forces of Nature to work in our lives and doesn't interfere with them. Earthquakes and tsunamis and monsoons and e. Coli and MRSA and heart attacks and cancer kill people. Could He save everyone? Sure He could! Does He? No.

So god knows all the choices we make and has a plan for our life, ie. our life is pre-determined by god, but we do not always choose this route. Something is wrong here.

Ok your not getting it... He has an original plan.. however we stray from that original plan.. God will open up another avanue for us and allow us to learn from our mistakes. Is it that hard to understand that God would want to protect you and bless your life and love you. He doesn't want to restict your happiness and hurt you. It's a lot like parenting what parent wouldn't want their children to prosper and live greatly. When God says don't he means don't hurt yourself or someone else. Basically the one command Gods asks of us is to LOVE. Everything he does is to glorify himself. Have you ever read the story of Job? God allowed Job to face some really difficult times and Job remained faithful and God blessed him even more! That wasn't the original plan however, satin had to ask permission from God to test him in the first place. He thought that if maybe you took all the blessings from Jobs life he would renouce the Lord and Satin would prove Job wasn't worth bragging about. (yes God bragged about job much like we as parents do) In the end Job still glorifies his Heavenly father. This doesn't mean now that you can say every christian will have to experience the same as Job. We are all unique and this includes the plans for our lives. God will never allow you to go through anything that his mercy and grace will not allow you to endure. Like the darkest part of the night is right before the light comes...

Oh, yes he can be both. One Jewish rabbi wrote a book about this. The rabbi concluded that, in order to give us free will, God had to take a step back to allow that to happen.

I see my child eyeing the candy rack at the grocery store and, as his mother, knowing he loves M&Ms also know what will likely happen. I can reach out to stop him, but I don't. He has a choice. He decides to surrepitiously take a package of M&Ms. Could I have stopped him? Yes. Did I? No. Why didn't I? Perhaps there's a better lesson to be learned after the fact than by taking away his choice.

God is omniscient and omnipotent, and yet we have free will. He knows what will happen but He doesn't stop us. He isn't a robot at the beck and call of his omniscience and omnipotence. And perhaps there's a lesson for us to learn when He doesn't stop us?
I agree with wondergirl

Ok your not getting it...He has an original plan..however we stray from that original plan.. God will open up another avanue for us and allow us to learn from our mistakes. Is it that hard to understand that God would want to protect you and bless your life and love you. He doesn't want to restict your happiness and hurt you. it's a lot like parenting what parent wouldn't want their children to prosper and live greatly. When God says don't he means don't hurt yourself or someone else. Basically the one command Gods asks of us is to LOVE. Everything he does is to glorify himself. Have you ever read the story of Job?? God allowed Job to face some really difficult times and Job remained faithful and God blessed him even more!! That wasn't the original plan however, satin had to ask permission from God to test him in the first place. He thought that if maybe you took all the blessings from Jobs life he would renouce the Lord and Satin would prove Job wasn't worth bragging about. (yes God bragged about job much like we as parents do) In the end Job still glorifies his Heavenly father. This doesn't mean now that you can say every christian will have to experience the same as Job. We are all unique and this includes the plans for our lives. God will never allow you to go through anything that his mercy and grace will not allow you to endure. like the darkest part of the night is right before the light comes......

This is exactly what I mean. Non-Christians couldn't care less about Job, and probably have no clue about him. The above paragraph goes on and on, rambles and uses all those words and phrases that so easily turn off a non-Christian. Very few people will read what is in that paragraph. Those who do would say the same thing, so you are preaching only to the choir.

Saying "Ok your not getting it" to a non-Christian is one of the worst things a Christian can do. Talk about turnoff!

Take that Gospel message and personalize it. Make it yours. Roll it around in your heart and wrap it up inside your own situation. Apply it to your own life. Only when the Gospel is in your bones and part of how your mind works will you be able to speak it so that non-Christians will listen and be interested.

I could write a book and say it where true, but that wouldn't make it so.

O'rly? Kind of my point. :)


Do you think the bible was around in Moses' Day, nope, yet he still knew him.

Of course they did. I would have known Him too. God made frequent cameo appearances in those days. Talking behind burning bushes and all that. It supposedly was nothing unusual for God to just drop by and talk to someone back then. Serious question...

Don't you find it the least bit curious that God hasn't made a personal appearance or uttered a single work in over 2000 years?? I wonder why that is?


It's like if you are familiar with someone's voice and they called you on the phone, wouldn't you know who it was even with out them saying so?

I'm not sure who's point you're trying to prove. Yes, I would know them because... I've spoken with them before!


When I was a little girl I just knew God existed(without being trained either)

This is genuinely interesting to me. Do you think if you had been brought up in Pakistan the God you 'knew' existed would have been Allah? If you had been brought up in India, might it not have been Brahma or Vishnu? By what coincidence do you attribute the sheer luck of your having been born in a geographical location where the God of Abraham is worshiped?



Not to mention the many times he has manifested in my life, many a miracles...

I have no doubt you have overcame hardships in your life. We just don't agree on why. I give you more credit than you do. I don't credit a god.


How about your invisible Father... has he ever pulled you through and brought you out and shown himself to be true and alive in your life over and over again...

Well, if I claimed that he did, it would be every bit as strong as your claim that your god has pulled you though. So let's try an experiment. I'm going to say, YES! My invisible father has pulled me through many trying times in my life. Are you going to claim he didn't? What's your rationale for doubting me?

Does "god knows our every move" equal "god determines our every move"? And be careful that the "god knows our every move" doesn't sound like Santa knowing when we've been good or bad and is keeping a list.

The "part of god's great plan" annoys me. "God's great plan" needs to be defined. What is your guess?

And those at funerals who say "it was god's will" creep me out.

"God's great plan" cannot defined it's personal... it's like defining every part of our bodies and then saying now what is that bodies purpose... there are more variables to it.

And for the funerals... was it Gods plan.. well there are two sure things in life, you are born and then you die. We all will face death one day. I do believe that some times it is in Gods will and sometimes people go too soon by someone else's choice.
For instance.. my baby sister was accidentally killed by a shot gun at 9 yrs old, I don't think that was in Gods will, but he allowed her to leave this world anyhow. At the same time, I didn't know it then, but it actually spared her from a lot of other hurt that I didn't foresee coming.
Then my brother was murdered in 2003 at 20 yrs old. I also didn't think that was God's will and was a choice someone else made, but he allowed it to happen.. for reasons I do not understand yet.
My Daddy died last year.. he just fell asleep and didn't wake up. However if you were to read the story of his life you would understand.. he was a beautiful man and the Lord had mercy on his soul and took him home. He struggled in his life partly because he did his will instead of asking God what his was, so our family has endured much do to bad decisions. God has not let any of it happen in vain he has taught me a lot about life and what is important and what is not and how glorious and magnificent he is and Loving. I praise God for my life and theirs.. my fathers, sisters and brothers legacy and purpose will be fulfilled through me now and what a blessing that is...

The problem lies in Man's tendency to humanize God. We think that God is this old gray haired man sitting in a chair that floats in the clouds. "how can HE do this..?" "how can HE do that...?"

Try as we might, our minds cannot fathom God... we can speculate this or that but we don't have the ability to vision it.

There are just something's that we cannot fathom. Try to imagine a 16 armed monkey with red hair and a horses tail. Easy right? You've never seen one but can easily picture what that would look like. Now imagine God. An image probably popped in your head.. maybe it's the Christian picture of Jesus or maybe it's a cartoon character or whatever it is.. I'm sure it varies much more than the monkey.

Now try to imagine "nothing"... literally NOTHING. Im sure most invisionied blackness.. or grayness... or whiteness... but not NOTHINGNESS. Unfortunately, that is just something that we cannot fathom.

Just as God is.

The Bible humanizes God all through it. But how else can it try to describe it? It Man attempted to describe God as God really is, we would all be worse off than we are now.

Don't you find it the least bit curious that God hasn't made a personal appearance or uttered a single work in over 2000 years?!?! I wonder why that is?




Maybe he has? Maybe the same things have been happening this entire time? Anyone who claims that God spoke to them from behind a burning bush is deemed crazy, neurotic, etc... no one takes them seriously.

Once the Bible was finalized and re-released to the public, if anyone witnessed God or claimed to be spoken to by Him, he's just some wacko

Now try to imagine "nothing" ...literally NOTHING. Im sure most invisionied blackness.. or grayness... or whiteness... but not NOTHINGNESS. Unfortunately, that is just something that we cannot fathom.

I admit 'nothing' bothers me. I have tried to contemplate it and found it disturbing. I'm still an atheist, but I do see what you're saying here.

I admit 'nothing' bothers me. I have tried to contemplate it and found it disturbing. I'm still an atheist, but I do see what you're saying here.

I can understand your disturbance... especially coming from an atheist.

And yet, one MUST admit that nothingness does, or at least did at one time, exist.

"God's great plan" cannot defined it's personal... it's like defining every part of our bodies and then saying now what is that bodies purpose... there are more variables to it.
Check out the Gospels and the Two Greatest Commandments for God's plan.


I do believe that some times it is in Gods will
Sometimes? Not all the time?


I don't think that was in Gods will
But you don't know. Romans 11:34 For who has known the mind of the Lord..


but it actually spared her from a lot of other hurt that I didn't foresee coming
So it's better to be dead? My father almost ran over me when I was 3. Should I have been killed so I didn't end up with an autistic child?


if you were to read the story of his life you would understand.. he was a beautiful man and the Lord had mercy on his soul and took him home
So those who loved the Lord and who died in pain and agony, chewed up by lions or in an earthquake, weren't as beautiful? A peaceful death shows God loves that person more?

Maybe he has? Maybe the same things have been happening this entire time?? Anyone who claims that God spoke to them from behind a burning bush is deemed crazy, neurotic, etc... no one takes them seriously.

Once the Bible was finalized and re-released to the public, if anyone witnessed God or claimed to be spoken to by Him, hes just some wacko

This is off topic a bit, but I never understood this...

It seems to me that there would be more need for God to come down and speak to us now, then back in those days when there weren't even that many people around.

To me, the whole idea is so patently false that it should be obvious to anyone who puts even a moment's thought into it. If any parent today were to even think about putting a knife to their child's throat as Abraham did, they would rightly be carted off to jail. Saying that God told them to do it wouldn't suffice. Why then, do people believe God did such things in those days? And even if God DID do such things, why wouldn't that be considered an atrocity?

We don't accept people's assertions that God speaks to them, because we know it is delusional. It's why Andrea Yates is behind bars right now. So why do we accept it from people who lived 2000 years ago?

And yet, one MUST admit that nothingness does, or at least did at one time, exist.

Wait a sec... I thought if you believed in at least the Christian god, you didn't have to accept there was ever nothingness. Didn't god ALWAYS exist?

This is off topic a bit, but I never understood this...

It seems to me that there would be more need for God to come down and speak to us now, then back in those days when there weren't even that many people around.

To me, the whole idea is so patently false that it should be obvious to anyone who puts even a moment's thought into it. If any parent today were to even think about putting a knife to their child's throat as Abraham did, they would rightly be carted off to jail. Saying that God told them to do it wouldn't suffice. Why then, do people believe God did such things in those days? And even if God DID do such things, why wouldn't that be considered an atrocity?

We don't accept people's assertions that God speaks to them, because we know it is delusional. It's why Andrea Yates is behind bars right now. So why when, do we accept it from people who lived 2000 years ago?
I'm going to jump off your off-topic comments and ask you to think about the story of Abraham. Whether it was true or not, whether God talked to him or not, think of the story as something like one of Aesop's fables. What truth is being taught in the story?

Wait a sec... I thought if you believed in at least the Christian god, you didn't have to accept there was ever nothingness. Didn't god ALWAYS exist?

Well the answer that any religious fanatic would give you is that God hasn't done this since Jesus came. Once Jesus came, it was no longer necessary. Now it all relies on Faith.

Which I think is a load of crap myself.

That is just what must be said in order to keep things in line... as accurate with the Bible as possible.

Herein lies the problem with the Bible.

Was it meant to be literal? Or was it just a way to get certain points across?

Is it truly the ONLY Word of God? Or are the millions of other deeply insightful books written by some of the greatest minds ever also God word put into print?

Did God ever speak the people of that time as it is depicted that they did? Or was it just as much as we hear a greater voice inside that speaks to us every day?

Wait a sec... I thought if you believed in at least the Christian god, you didn't have to accept there was ever nothingness. Didn't god ALWAYS exist?

Unless God is that nothingness as much as he is everything else.

But wait, how could that be? Where would he have sat? When did he buy that golden throne that floats on clouds?

Which God are speaking of?

Agdistis, Ah Puch, Ahura Mazda, Alberich, Amaterasu, An, Anat, Andvari, Anshar, Anu, Aphrodite, Apollo, Apsu, Ares, Artemis, Asclepius, Athena, Athirat, Athtart, Atlas, Baal, Ba Xian, Bacchus, Balder, Bast, Bellona, Bergelmir, Bes, Bixia Yuanjin, Bragi, Brahma, Brigit, Camaxtli, Ceres, Ceridwen, Cernunnos, Chac, Chalchiuhtlicue, Charun, Cheng-huang, Cybele, Dagon, Damkina, Davlin, Demeter, Diana, Di Cang, Dionysus, Ea, El, Enki, Enlil, Epona, Ereskigal, Farbauti, Fenrir, Forseti, Freya, Freyr, Frigg, Gaia, Ganesha, Ganga, Garuda, Gauri, Geb, Geong Si, Hades, Hanuman, Helios, Heng-o, Hephaestus, Hera, Hermes, Hod, Hoderi, Hoori, Horus, Hotei, Hestia, Huitzilopochtli, Hsi-Wang-Mu, Hygeia, Inanna, Inti, Ishtar, Isis, Ixtab, Izanaki, Izanami, Jesus, Juno, Jupiter, Kagutsuchi, Kartikeya, Khepri, Ki, Kingu, Kinich Ahau, Kishar, Krishna, Kukulcan, Lakshmi, Liza, Loki, Lugh, Magna Mater, Marduk, Mars, Medb, Mercury, Mimir, Minerva, Mithras, Morrigan, Mot, Mummu, Nammu, Nanna, Nanna, Nanse, Nemesis, Nephthys, Neptune, Nergal, Ninazu, Ninhurzag, Nintu, Ninurta, Njord, Nut, Odin, Ohkuninushi, Ohyamatsumi, Orgelmir, Osiris, Ostara, Pan, Parvati, Poseidon, Quetzalcoatl, Rama, Re, Rhea, Sabazius, Sarasvati, Shiva, Seshat, Seti, Shamash, Shapsu, Shen Yi, Shiva, Shu, Si-Wang-Mu, Sin, Sirona, Surya, Susanoh, Tawaret, Tefnut, Tezcatlipoca, Thanatos, Thor, Tiamat, Tlaloc, Tonatiuh, Toyo-Uke-Bime, Tyche, Tyr, Utu, Uzume, Venus, Vesta, Vishnu, Vulcan, Xipe, Xi Wang-mu, Xochipilli, Xochiquetzal, Yam, Yarikh, Ymir, Yu-huang, Yum Kimil, or Zeus.

And more importantly, why?

workerbee

Which God are speaking of?

Agdistis, Ah Puch, Ahura Mazda, Alberich, Amaterasu, An, Anat, Andvari, Anshar, Anu, Aphrodite, Apollo, Apsu, Ares, Artemis, Asclepius, Athena, Athirat, Athtart, Atlas, Baal, Ba Xian, Bacchus, Balder, Bast, Bellona, Bergelmir, Bes, Bixia Yuanjin, Bragi, Brahma, Brigit, Camaxtli, Ceres, Ceridwen, Cernunnos, Chac, Chalchiuhtlicue, Charun, Cheng-huang, Cybele, Dagon, Damkina, Davlin, Demeter, Diana, Di Cang, Dionysus, Ea, El, Enki, Enlil, Epona, Ereskigal, Farbauti, Fenrir, Forseti, Freya, Freyr, Frigg, Gaia, Ganesha, Ganga, Garuda, Gauri, Geb, Geong Si, Hades, Hanuman, Helios, Heng-o, Hephaestus, Hera, Hermes, Hod, Hoderi, Hoori, Horus, Hotei, Hestia, Huitzilopochtli, Hsi-Wang-Mu, Hygeia, Inanna, Inti, Ishtar, Isis, Ixtab, Izanaki, Izanami, Jesus, Juno, Jupiter, Kagutsuchi, Kartikeya, Khepri, Ki, Kingu, Kinich Ahau, Kishar, Krishna, Kukulcan, Lakshmi, Liza, Loki, Lugh, Magna Mater, Marduk, Mars, Medb, Mercury, Mimir, Minerva, Mithras, Morrigan, Mot, Mummu, Nammu, Nanna, Nanna, Nanse, Nemesis, Nephthys, Neptune, Nergal, Ninazu, Ninhurzag, Nintu, Ninurta, Njord, Nut, Odin, Ohkuninushi, Ohyamatsumi, Orgelmir, Osiris, Ostara, Pan, Parvati, Poseidon, Quetzalcoatl, Rama, Re, Rhea, Sabazius, Sarasvati, Shiva, Seshat, Seti, Shamash, Shapsu, Shen Yi, Shiva, Shu, Si-Wang-Mu, Sin, Sirona, Surya, Susanoh, Tawaret, Tefnut, Tezcatlipoca, Thanatos, Thor, Tiamat, Tlaloc, Tonatiuh, Toyo-Uke-Bime, Tyche, Tyr, Utu, Uzume, Venus, Vesta, Vishnu, Vulcan, Xipe, Xi Wang-mu, Xochipilli, Xochiquetzal, Yam, Yarikh, Ymir, Yu-huang, Yum Kimil, or Zeus.

And more importantly, why?

workerbee

Nice God list, dude!

[QUOTE=jillianleab]

They should re-name the book The Richard Dawkins Delusion. :rolleyes:

Well that was rude of you.

This is exactly what I mean. Non-Christians couldn't care less about Job, and probably have no clue about him. The above paragraph goes on and on, rambles and uses all those words and phrases that so easily turn off a non-Christian. Very few people will read what is in that paragraph. Those who do would say the same thing, so you are preaching only to the choir.

Saying "Ok your not getting it" to a non-Christian is one of the worst things a Christian can do. Talk about turnoff!

Take that Gospel message and personalize it. Make it yours. Roll it around in your heart and wrap it up inside your own situation. Apply it to your own life. Only when the Gospel is in your bones and part of how your mind works will you be able to speak it so that non-Christians will listen and be interested.

Ok Job was just a point of reference. I was giving non-christians the benefit of the doubt by assuming that they have educated themselves and made an educated decision on behalf of their beliefs, then decided to just not believe it. Your right I guess most of them have not read this book. My mistake..

I didn't mean "ok your not getting it" as OK their not getting the idea of God. I meant they were not getting just the point I was trying to make. At the same time why should I sugar coat my belief? To not infringe on someone else's comfort zone? I have not heard you once do as you are saying "personalizing the gospel" So I wonder who is preaching to the choir? I'm not trying to be combative, I applaud your efforts in not wanting to "turn off" non christians. This was not my intentions, but being passionate about christ is not a fault I am willing to accept.
My story is not one people are comfortable hearing so I guess not to be a hypocrite I'll tell you. You doubt the fact I have "rolled it around and made it part of my bones". I assure you this has been my everything in life and the reason I am not dead right now. By "this" I mean Gods LOVE!
This should sum it up... it goes further back than me but that is a good place to start ". I watched my sister get shot and killed right in front of me with a 12 gage shot gun at close range, just to give you a visual. I had kind of an "out of body experience" at that point. She looked down, looked up at me, and fell to her knees. She said "Mommy I don't want to die" Then she said something I will never forget she said" I see the angels, it's OK Mommy I'm going to be with Jesus" I ran to my Grandmothers house down the street to get help. I remember praying to the Lord all that night asking him please don't take her, not her, Jesus ,I'll do anything, I'll be good forever what ever it takes Lord, just not her....well next thing I remember we got the call. Elizabeth was dead at 9 years old! I didn't understand it! When I went to bed that night I asked the Lord to give me peace tell my why this was happening to us. I needed to know. ( I always have had dreams about things that were going to happen and etc.) Well that night I didn't get the answers I was looking for, I got something better...her!! In this dream, not your regular dreams, vivid and bright and my senses where keener, ...young men will have dreams old men will have visions...it's in the bible..again point of reference ) she came to me and said she was sorry for having to leave so fast, but where she was going was great! It was with Jesus! She wanted me to be sure and take care of Daddy and it was important that I tell him how much she loved him(i didn't realize the point of this until later) Then she kissed me and left with the angels. She was so radiant and so beautiful! I woke up and just cried....

I didn't have another encounter with her until I was at her funeral. I was standing outside for a bit of fresh air and then there she was with Jesus. She said to him "my daddy is singing a song just for me... doesn't he sing pretty? Lord, why is he crying? Doesn't he know where I am, with you? "Then it was over..
At this point in my life I was still young and rebellious. I knew I loved God, but wasn't living the "christian life".
Then after Elizabeth died all "hell" broke loose. My parents where hurting and wrapped up in their own sadness and grief, and my brother's situation (who, if you didn't figure out yet, was the one playing with the shot gun that killed my sister) That Clyde, my step grandfather, saw this as his opportunity to allow me to be his "pray". I was rapped by him for many years.. I will not go into detail for my own sanity.. Yes, my Daddy finally realized something was going on just by the way i acted around Clyde. I hated him and was mean and ugly. I felt like I couldn't tell them because I didn't want them to hurt anymore. So I thought if I could just "deal" with it and eventually It would just "go away". I was just a little girl and didn't know any better. They thought it was just teenage rebellion, but eventually they realized something was going on with their baby girl.

Yes we went to court and that was an experience in it self. I was smart though, I left clues behind during the attacks just incase "one day" happened. It was a hung jury by 1 juror and I refused to go back to court. I just wanted to get on with life. My parents respected my decision. During this entire process I clung to Jesus. Knowing through this entire ordeal that there was some reason all of these things had happened.

I praise God daily for the Daddy I had. If it weren't for him I don't know what I would have done. He loved the Lord too, but struggled most of his life and blamed God. He wouldn't allow God's healing and love to take hold of him. Mostly because he didn't feel like he deserved it, he blamed himself for everything. He lived in constant limbo of this and always felt condemned. The best way to describe my Father simply is this: he loved hard, Laughed hard, cried hard and lived hard. He was a beautiful man!

My brothers' life was a sad story. He had to live with what he did and did not seek God. I remember one thing he once said. It scared the hell out of me.. he said "I made a deal with the devil in exchange for my soul, I want to live "happy" here on earth." I wouldn't recommend making any deals with the devil! He was murdered at 20 by a phyco, aids infected killer with nothing to loose. All over a tattoo my brother wasn't willing to give him.The devil is a liar a cheat and a murderer. I pray God had mercy on his soul.

The dream of my brother...
It was about a year ago my brother came to me in a dream which I thought was a little odd. Because I haven't dreamed of him since he went. I had always been worried about the fate of his soul.. and never got any real answers. In this dream he was scared and alone. He said he came just to know if I blamed him for the life he lived and that he knew now, Jesus was where he should have looked..he was also worried about one of my children. He couldn't look me in the eyes and he was so sad.. I couldn't get too close to him even as much as I wanted to hug him, touch him and hold him. It seemed he wasn't in heaven or hell, but somewhere in between.. when I looked up and the dream was over.
I know this might freak some christians out, but there are things we do not understand

My Father died a year and a half ago....
My Father pretty much died of a broken heart. The Lord took him home so as to not endure anymore of this life..I still see him...

Now if you think I didn't struggle with all of this and I went on thinking all is fine, I'm a perfect little christian, I never question God, I feel no resentment and I was always grateful.....well that's for sure wong!

I struggled, I blamed , I was mad ,angry, resentful and basically pissed off! I didn't feel I deserved any of this. It seemed, to me, God had deserted me. He wasn't the God I thought he was...all of this made me question "who is God really? " and it wasn't until then, that I got my answers....

My suicide...
I decided one night I didn't want to live anymore. I was ready for the end. I prayed I asked God if I were to decide to end my life, would he still bring me home. I thought if Dad could will himself into dying then why can't I. I felt I had nothing left. I didn't feel I was good for my children or anyone else for that matter. What could I offer them? I was scared, used and abused. (I was a christian at this time.) So that night I took a bunch of pills and downed a bottle of Captan Morgan, something that was definitely not the norm for me. When I started to fall a sleep I felt my body slip away.
I wasn't sleeping. You know that point where your body is very still but your conscious is awake? Well at that point the room was all of the sudden illuminated... I saw my Father he started to show me flashes his life and then he showed me flashes of what his life would have been if he would have just allowed God to change it... This was quick, less than about 20 seconds. All of a sudden there stood Jesus, he was glorious , beautiful, Loving and kind. All I could do was cry in his presents and fall at his feet. I felt his love and sadness for his lost people. It was the most amazing love, nothing I have ever felt before... He told me I would go to heaven if I left now, but I would not be fulfilling the plan he had for my life. Then he began to show me glimpses of my future..A life I could have,..If i chose,...and what I would miss out on,..and who I would be hurting. He than lifted my chin and i said "yes Lord I want to go back, for you lord. I want to please you Heavenly Father." I couldn't stop crying. The next thing I remember was my Father showing me what his last breath was like, as if I were him at that last moment... the angels on both sides of me were waiting to take me to heaven... I could see them... and then I took one last breath,. that was when everything ended and I was back in my room. All I could do was weep and praise God for his wondrous ways and unfailing love for his people...


We will all get to this point at some time in our lives our another. It is at that point, when we decide which way we will go. With the Lord by my side, I had to relive all of this and tear down walls, rebuild and redefine who I was, What I was created for and Heal all of my past wounds. I praise God for his mercy, grace and love and I realize now that none of these things I have been through will have been in vain. The Lord has been blessing my life richly and I will continue to seek his face and Glorify him. I hope my story was worth sharing.

Check out the Gospels and the Two Greatest Commandments for God's plan.
.....And the greates of these commandments is LOVE. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your strength, with all of your soul and all of your mind Love your nieghbors as yourself. There is no other commandments greater than these...Yes I know Read Matt 12:29-31

Sometimes? not all the time?


But you don't know. Romans 11:34 For who has known the mind of the Lord....?

Yes I know. He also says his thoughts are greater than ours, but when you have a personal relationship with him he just reveals some things to you .
So it's better to be dead? My father almost ran over me when I was 3. Should I have been killed so I didn't end up with an autistic child?


So those who loved the Lord and who died in pain and agony, chewed up by lions or in an earthquake, weren't as beautiful? A peaceful death shows God loves that person more?

No I never said just because he dies peacefully meant that God loved him more Those where your words. My sister was killed with a 12 gage and my brother was beaten with a marbled piece of wood. Does that mean God loves them any less.

Check out the Gospels and the Two Greatest Commandments for God's plan.



Sometimes? not all the time?


But you don't know. Romans 11:34 For who has known the mind of the Lord....?

So it's better to be dead? My father almost ran over me when I was 3. Should I have been killed so I didn't end up with an autistic child?

So those who loved the Lord and who died in pain and agony, chewed up by lions or in an earthquake, weren't as beautiful? A peaceful death shows God loves that person more?
... And the greates of these commandments is LOVE. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your strength, with all of your soul and all of your mind Love your nieghbors as yourself. There is no other commandments greater than these... Yes I know Read Matt 12:29-31

No I never said just because he dies peacefully meant that God loved him more Those where your words. My sister was killed with a 12 gage and my brother was beaten with a marbled piece of wood. Does that mean God loves them any less.

Yes I know. He also says his thoughts are greater than ours, but when you have a personal relationship with him he just reveals some things to you .

I'm going to jump off your off-topic comments and ask you to think about the story of Abraham. Whether it was true or not, whether God talked to him or not, think of the story as something like one of Aesop's fables. What truth is being taught in the story?

Are you asking me what the moral of the story is? Good question... I learned about it in Catechism, but I'm not sure I remember.

What I always took out of it (back when I was a believer), was the extraordinary faith and obedience Abraham had for God, that he was willing to sacrifice his only son for Him. I guess I also took solace that God jumped in at the last minute to say, 'just kidding!'. Back then I was naïve enough to think this showed God's compassion. But that was before I was willing to look at the bible objectively...

I now realize that under any circumstance this is an insanely cruel prank to play on somebody who loves, trusts, and worships you (not to mention the unspeakable terror the child went through). I now also realize that zero respect should be given to Abraham for following such heinous orders. Again, we don't hold people like Andrea Yates in any high regard. She claims God told her to kill her children. Are YOU OK with that wondergirl?

I'm sure there's a moral that I'm missing and you can point it out to me.

Are you asking me what the moral of the story is? Good question... I learned about it in Catechism, but I'm not sure I remember.

What I always took out of it (back when I was a believer), was the extraordinary faith and obedience Abraham had for God, that he was willing to sacrifice his only son for Him. I guess I also took solace that God jumped in at the last minute to say, 'just kidding!'. Back then I was naive enough to think this showed God's compassion. But that was before I was willing to look at the bible objectively...

I now realize that under any circumstance this is an insanely cruel prank to play on somebody who loves, trusts, and worships you (not to mention the unspeakable terror the child went through). I now also realize that zero respect should be given to Abraham for following such heinous orders. Again, we don't hold people like Andrea Yates in any high regard. She claims God told her to kill her children. Are YOU ok with that wondergirl?

I'm sure there's a moral that I'm missing and you can point it out to me.

I have one question... If there is no God.. what is our purpose in this life and why should we hope for anything? Well I guess one more question... Do you believe in an evil entity? Or the opposite of god, but not equal too?

Are YOU OK with that wondergirl?
No, I'm not. Andrea Yates has been diagnosed as mentally ill.


I'm sure there's a moral that I'm missing and you can point it out to me.

It's not so much a moral as a bigger story with cultural implications than just the scary little story that you've described.

Human sacrifice was a fact of life among the cultures in the ancient Near East. The central idea in the Abraham-Isaac story is that of substitution--of an animal sacrificed in the stead of and on behalf of a human. What is especially interesting about this sacrificial situation is that Abraham readily and willingly went from human to animal sacrifice in response to "an angel of the Lord [who] called out to him." In other words, Abraham obeyed a moral directive from the only source of moral authority.

I have one question...If there is no God..what is our purpose in this life and why should we hope for anything? well i guess one more question...Do you believe in an evil entity?? or the opposite of god, but not equal too?

I know you directed this at lobrobster, but I'd like to comment, if you don't mind.

Your question assumes there is a bigger purpose to our (humans) being here. It assumes we are "meant to be", not that we "just are". My purpose in life is to be a good friend, wife, daughter, sister, and (eventually, maybe) mother. My purpose in life is to do what I can to make this world better for the people who will live on beyond me. Hope still exists, just not perhaps the way you think of it - I don't hope I will go to heaven and not hell; the thought never crosses my mind, actually. But I hope for a good, long, happy life, and do things to make my life good, long and happy. I do that because it makes my existence better, it makes me feel like a better person, like a contributing member of society. I don't do it to get in good with a higher being, I do it for me. For an atheist, this life is all there is, we need to spend our time wisely because when we die it's over.

As far as an evil entity, no, I don't believe in one, and you'll probably find most atheists don't. In general (by definition) atheists don't believe in any supernatural beings; no gods, no devils, no demons, no spirits, no ghosts, and so on.

The next question most people ask is where an atheist gets his/her morals from; I'll go into that if you ask, but I'll spare you if you don't care to know. :)

The next question most people ask is where an atheist gets his/her morals from; I'll go into that if you ask, but I'll spare you if you don't care to know. :)

Give us a hint -- say, two or three words.

I have one question... If there is no God.. what is our purpose in this life and why should we hope for anything? Well I guess one more question... Do you believe in an evil entity? Or the opposite of god, but not equal too?

I think jillianleab explained it well and I don't have too much to add except: There's one more very important point that is often overlooked... Even if belief in God DID provide hope, that doesn't mean God exists! This is a critically important piece of logic that is too often misunderstood by believers. Atheists tend to care mainly about what is true. Not what makes them feel better. If you had a terminal illness, you would probably feel better if your doctor told you it can be treated. You would no doubt feel better, but it wouldn't change the truth of the matter.



Do you believe in an evil entity? Or the opposite of god, but not equal too?

Again, jillianleab said it well. I am an equal opportunity disbeliever. Contrary to what many theists think, most atheists have nothing against God. They simply don't believe in things that fly in the face of what we know about our physical world and cannot be substantiated in any way. That includes devils, ghosts, astrology, numerology, etc.

Humans have always wanted someone bigger than they are to blame, to thank, to ask for favors and help, to love, to look up to. Throughout the ages, that someone has usually been called God (or gods).

Wow, I don't mean to sound condescending, but you got this part right wondergirl. Why not just take the next logical step and concede that it was our past need to place blame for things we could not understand, that we 'invented' the concept of god? In other words, why did the volcano erupt and wipe out entire villages? We angered the Volcano God. Why did a tsunami kill tens of thousands along the coast for as far as the eye can see on a clear, sunny, day? The God of the sea was angry.

It's easy to see how man created god. Not the other way around. You start making a very astute observation, but somehow get derailed. What derailed you?


Whose god is the right god? God is unknowable and indefinable. God doesn't belong to any particular religion, and can't be fenced off or put into a box or plugged into a certain set of circumstances. God is too big for that. All a religion does is define God for its own purposes and help people relate to and understand God.

I also didn't' realize you understood this. I guess you learn a lot if you keep reading people's posts. I did have you wrongly pegged. Not that you'd care, but I can take you a little more seriously now.

It's easy to see how man created god. Not the other way around. You start off making a very astute observation, but somehow get derailed. What derailed you?

I don't think I've gotten derailed. When you've lived as long as I have, you may see things differently than you do right now. I know MY ideas have changed over the years. I lately have been chewing on the idea that man invented the devil as a cop-out and to avoid personal responsibility for wrongdoing--"The devil made me do it."

I just started a new book by Rodney Stark, Discovering God. It talks about much of what this thread is about. I'll let you know how it goes.

God could prevent my dying tomorrow, but why should He? He put the forces of Nature to work in our lives and doesn't interfere with them. Earthquakes and tsunamis and monsoons and e. Coli and MRSA and heart attacks and cancer kill people. Could He save everyone? Sure He could! Does He? No.

Wait a minute, I learn more and more. You don't believe in miracles?! My point is this...

Say God knows he will be ending the world next Thursday. Is there any circumstance in which He could prevent Himself from doing so? If so, He is not omniscient after all. His knowledge that the world was ending Thursday was wrong. If He was right, then He is not omnipotent, since He did not have the power to prevent it from happening.

I'm not trying to be funny or difficult. Even I think questions like 'Can God make a square circle?', are silly. But I don't think my question is silly. It seems self-evident that omniscience and omnipotence are necessarily incompatible.

I know MY ideas have changed over the years.

And that in a nutshell is the difference. We are not even having the same conversation. You are speaking of ideas, while I am discussing only what is likely to be true or false.

I'm sure my ideas on things will change as time goes on. But if I live to be 80, I hope to aways be rational and able to use logic in forming my view of the world.

Wait a minute, I learn more and more. You don't believe in miracles?!! My point is this...

Say God knows he will be ending the world next Thursday. Is there any circumstance in which He could prevent Himself from doing so? If so, He is not omniscient after all. His knowledge that the world was ending Thursday was wrong. If He was right, then He is not omnipotent, since He did not have the power to prevent it from happening.

I'm not trying to be funny or difficult. Even I think questions like 'Can God make a square circle?', are silly. But I don't think my question is silly. It seems self-evident that omniscience and omnipotence are necessarily incompatible.

You are thinking like a human being. Oooops! You are a human being!

As I said before, God is so huge and so far beyond our knowing that we cannot begin to imagine who he is and what he can do. Your questions immediately put him into that nice little box and you wrap up the box with your limited ideas (human version) of omniscience and omnipotence. Meanwhile, you are painting yourself into a corner with what you consider logic and reason. Stop! Let God be God. Don't try to figure him out and pin him down as to how he thinks. Like the Psalmist wrote about him, "Be still, and know that I am God."

And no, omniscience and omnipotence are not incompatible. Remember my M&M story?

And that in a nutshell is the difference. We are not even having the same conversation. You are speaking of ideas, while I am discussing only what is likely to be true or false.

I'm sure my ideas on things will change as time goes on. But if I live to be 80, I hope to aways be rational and able to use logic in forming my view of the world.

I pride myself on being logical and rational. I've had many years of school in a number of disciplines, so I consider myself well-educated and well-read. I even work in a library. It doesn't get any more broadening than that!

You say I'm speaking of "ideas," so what are you speaking of? Aren't you talking about your own ideas of truth?

I know you directed this at lobrobster, but I'd like to comment, if you don't mind.

Your question assumes there is a bigger purpose to our (humans) being here. It assumes we are "meant to be", not that we "just are". My purpose in life is to be a good friend, wife, daughter, sister, and (eventually, maybe) mother. My purpose in life is to do what I can to make this world better for the people who will live on beyond me. Hope still exists, just not perhaps the way you think of it - I don't hope I will go to heaven and not hell; the thought never crosses my mind, actually. But I hope for a good, long, happy life, and do things to make my life good, long and happy. I do that because it makes my existence better, it makes me feel like a better person, like a contributing member of society. I don't do it to get in good with a higher being, I do it for me. For an atheist, this life is all there is, we need to spend our time wisely because when we die it's over.

As far as an evil entity, no, I don't believe in one, and you'll probably find most atheists don't. In general (by definition) atheists don't believe in any supernatural beings; no gods, no devils, no demons, no spirits, no ghosts, and so on.

The next question most people ask is where an atheist gets his/her morals from; I'll go into that if you ask, but I'll spare you if you don't care to know. :) Your answer also assumes we "Just are" and aren't "meant to be". Let me ask another question. The stuff you cannot see, but feel, where does that come from? As intricate as this world is your are going to tell me it was just happened by chance?
My Hope is not limited to "I hope I will go to Heaven". What about the things that you have no control over, like getting cancer or a car accident. Also how do atheists explain miracles and please don't deny there are any, they happen every day. I'm sure most people have experienced one or another in their lifetime.
One more thing just to clarify "doing good" just to get in with a Higher being, I know him as God, Isn't what I believe. Once again, to sum God up in one word it would be... love. I want to Love him and I want to Love other people. God isn't up there with a tali of how many good deeds you do in his name, actually he despises it.
I just cannot accept that this is all this life is.. I know better.. having experienced it myself. Having said that you will now probably call me crazy, but it's to be expected. Since you don't believe in supernatural happenings.

LONDON (AFP) - Albert Einstein described belief in God as "childish superstition" and said Jews were not the chosen people, in a letter to be sold in London this week, an auctioneer said Tuesday.

Belief in God 'childish,' Jews not chosen people: Einstein letter - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080513/wl_uk_afp/britainreligionsciencejewseinstein)
I tend to agree with the honest super geniuses.

I think jillianleab explained it well and I don't have too much to add except: There's one more very important point that is often overlooked... Even if belief in God DID provide hope, that doesn't mean God exists! This is a critically important piece of logic that is too often misunderstood by believers. Atheists tend to care mainly about what is true. Not what makes them feel better. If you had a terminal illness, you would probably feel better if your doctor told you it can be treated. You would no doubt feel better, but it wouldn't change the truth of the matter.




Again, jillianleab said it well. I am an equal opportunity disbeliever. Contrary to what many theists think, most atheists have nothing against God. They simply don't believe in things that fly in the face of what we know about our physical world and cannot be substantiated in any way. That includes devils, ghosts, astrology, numerology, etc.
This "critically important logic" you are talking about, that for some reason you think as a believer I have over looked, does not apply to most believers. Here is why, belief in God does provide hope, however, God doesn't ever just leave you hanging.. it doesn't stop at that point. He continues to manifest and he makes himself known in your life! He says always give a reason for why you hope.. if I didn't have any reason ,yes, I would be illogical. If you give him a chance and it doesn't work out, what's the loss? Atheism will always take you back.

This "critically important logic" you are talking about, that for some reason you think as a believer I have over looked, does not apply to most believers. Here is why, belief in God does provide hope, however, God doesn't ever just leave you hanging..it doesn't stop at that point. He continues to manifest and he makes himself known in your life! He says always give a reason for why you hope.. if I didn't have any reason ,yes, I would be illogical. If you give him a chance and it doesn't work out, whats the loss?? Atheism will always take you back.
---------------------------------------------------------------
God leaves people hanging all the time, then they fall to their deaths.

---------------------------------------------------------------
God leaves people hanging all the time, then they fall to their deaths.

God's not the one leaving them hanging.

Something good happens- Thank God for this... Thank God for that.
Something bad happens- God never did that.
God had nothing to do with that.

Something good happens- Thank God for this... Thank God for that.
Something bad happens- God never did that.
God had nothing to do with that.

When something bad happens, we did it. Mother Nature also is guilty.

---------------------------------------------------------------
God leaves people hanging all the time, then they fall to their deaths.
Really, how do you know? Was it God? Do they fall to their deaths or do they go home?

You have not because you ask not...
Did they ask God to save them, to come and rescue them?
Don't forget, the son of God was persecuted, mocked and eventually hung on the cross.
Could he have stopped it? Yes, but then that would have defeated the entire purpose. Not to mention his Glorious resurrection.

When something bad happens, we did it. Mother Nature also is guilty.

Wait, I'm confused Wondergirl. Do you believe in God or Gods, plural? If you believe in only one God than who is mother nature? Did she come from God? Or is she her own God.
Yes, a lot of the time when something bad happeneds, we did it, but not always, this isn't an absolute. Niether is "mother nature"

When you think about it everybody is an atheist, it's just that technically athiests as are commonaly describes believe in one less god than a Christian.

(I know I have paraphrased somebody but I can't remember who!)

I haven't seen anyone worshipping Zeus recently...

So when somebody says I don't understand how you cannot believe because (insert any comment from the why I believe in God posts). Then they have to consider they already do understand- they have not been believing in loads of gods since they were born, and continue to do so today.

People that believe in God lack education In one source 41% of people that went to high school believe the Bible as the word of God, only 2 % of people that graduate college believe the bible is the word of God. That should tell you something. There are thousands of Gods that have come and gone way before your god. The good news for athiests is that we are growing. Worldwide we number about 1 billion growing very quickly. In the U.S one of the last countries that is holding on to religions but that is changing. In 1990 we numbered 14.2 million in 2001 just under 30 million as of 2006 42 million Athiests have grown at a shocking rate. At this rate maybe in 10 years we will be a third or even half the population of America. I think one reason is the internet.

workerbee.

When you think about it everybody is an athiest, it's just that technically athiests as are commonaly describes believe in one less god than a Christian.

(I know I have paraphrased somebody but I can't remember who!)

"We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further." - Richard Dawkins

people that believe in God lack education In one source 41% of people that went to high school believe the Bible as the word of God, only 2 % of people that graduate college believe the bible is the wrod of God. that should tell you something. there are thousands of Gods that have come and gone way before your god. The good news for athiests is that we are growing. Worldwide we number about 1 billion growing very quickly. In the U.S one of the last countries that is holding on to religions but that is changing. In 1990 we numbered 14.2 million in 2001 just under 30 million as of 2006 42 million Athiests have grown at a shocking rate. At this rate maybe in 10 years we will be a third or even half the population of America. I think one reason is the internet.

workerbee.


Yes. Atheism is growing at a far faster pace than any single religion. Also...

Atheists as a whole, outnumber Jews in America (not sure about Christians). The problem is, there is no 'voice' of atheism. Do we need a voice? On the one hand, the answer is no, since we are not trying to advance any agenda. On the other hand, rational thinking is in society's best interest. To think that Intelligent Design almost made it into a public school system to be taught alongside evolution is an absurdity to any reasonably educated person. There is also the problem of thwarting science in the name of religion, not to mention our willingness to respect the unfounded beliefs that lead to terrorism.

I'm not even so sure that atheism itself is growing or just the idea that people who were already atheists are just beginning to feel comfortable admitting it. Either way, the rise of reason good news!