How can atheists be so gullible?
bibleisreal

United States

#328 Apr 9, 2013
King Truth wrote:
Think about it for a second, doesn't everything you own or have a creator in some way. Your jeans, buildings, glasses, car, etc. So it comes to reason that everything you have or know someone has created. Yet when it comes to the universe most of you are reluctant to believe it was created. Most of you are happy saying matter which is just there created and started everything. Well what started matter? This question cannot be answered by science, so until that question is most of you ranting on here are just plain ignorant and hardheaded to count anything out that has a shred of a possibility. Most of your views on religion are personal not reasonable.
Thank you!! Somewhere someone had to create something. U cant get around it. Even if matter was created by this and this...then what created this and this?

Logically I lay down my pride and admit God is God.

Either matter time and space are ur gods or because only gods can always exsist or create themselves or a god creates them...or what I believe, the God created it.

But they wont admit it..they will get mad, call u names, get u off the "matter" topic so u cant corner them cause they have no answer. Which will it be? We will see
3:16

United States

#329 Apr 9, 2013
Hahaha wrote:
[QUOTE who="3:16 "]My faith comes from me. My family was the go to church at Christmas and Easter kind if family. I believed in God and that was it. When I turned 19 I wanted something more than just two times if the year. I researched on my own with the bible and other reading materials. I then asked a believing friend of mine and he invited me to church. It was the best thing I ever did. My faith got stronger, I became happy and saw myself as a good person and no longer searching for that something I didn't know what it was. I met the woman who became my wife and gave me children. I think it was God that lead me down that path because I just said Ok God, I will sit still and listen.
I pray you non believers find Jesus soon before its too late. Things going on in this world right are told what will happen in the Bible before the world ends. Prayers to all of you. "

You are a prime example of what I believe is wrong with religion. You live in the fear of the unknown and immerse yourself with these beliefs because some moderately educated man tells you to every Sunday. I for one do not want to live my life with a fear of death. If the fear of "hell" is what makes you practice religion then I feel sorry for you, because you are living in a state of mental incarceration. You are nothing more than an income source to your church, and probably like most other christians, baptize and brainwash your children into the same belief system years before they can even comprehend what they are being taught. Overall I think this quote sums up all you shallow minded hypocritical schmucks..........

"I'd be more willing to except religion, even if I didn't believe it, if I thought it made people nicer to each other but I don't think it does." -- Andy Rooney
At one point in time did I say I was scared of dying? As a matter of fact if its my time to leave, I welcome it because its a better life in heaven than here on earth. Am I afraid of hell? No, I'm to busy being focused on my faith and mission to be afraid of hell. That answers the reason I am a Christian. God bless you.
Horus

Farmington, MO

#330 Apr 9, 2013
bibleisreal wrote:
<quoted text>Thank you!! Somewhere someone had to create something. U cant get around it. Even if matter was created by this and this...then what created this and this?

Logically I lay down my pride and admit God is God.

Either matter time and space are ur gods or because only gods can always exsist or create themselves or a god creates them...or what I believe, the God created it.

But they wont admit it..they will get mad, call u names, get u off the "matter" topic so u cant corner them cause they have no answer. Which will it be? We will see
Again, God implies a sentient being.

Religion uses God to fill in the blanks. Science keeps the questions open and does not need an immediate answer.

If it was a God/Gods, how do you know what they are or are not capable of? They only have the powers that you attribute to them, and you will attribute a power to them, to solve any problem that doesn't have another easy answer.

The more unanswered questions, the more God/Gods will play a central roll in a culture. As we learn more and more through science, the belief in an omniscient and omnipotent being watching over us, becomes less and less necessary, and will someday, generations from now, move into the realm of superstition with witchcraft and the like.
bibleisreal

United States

#331 Apr 9, 2013
Horus wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, God implies a sentient being.
Religion uses God to fill in the blanks. Science keeps the questions open and does not need an immediate answer.
If it was a God/Gods, how do you know what they are or are not capable of? They only have the powers that you attribute to them, and you will attribute a power to them, to solve any problem that doesn't have another easy answer.
The more unanswered questions, the more God/Gods will play a central roll in a culture. As we learn more and more through science, the belief in an omniscient and omnipotent being watching over us, becomes less and less necessary, and will someday, generations from now, move into the realm of superstition with witchcraft and the like.
This was the first logical post that didnt demean and didnt argue just to argue. So thank you

However, the question of where matter came from has plagued big bang theorists since its been around. The problem is there is no other answer other than someone somewhere had to create something. Something supernatural HAD to happen. Now what u think that supernatural thing is is up to you. There's no way around it. Space time and matter got here somehow and had to come here simotaniously. If u had matter and no space, where would u put it? If u had space and matter but no time, when would u put it? There IS no answer other than the supernatural. They will never find another answer because it will always lead to the supernatural. Anything supernatural is a god. Or God. U can wait all u want, but they will never get passes that.

The whole point to this thread was big bang theorists where stating that the big bang is fact. That is certainly not true. I only poked holes to prove that no one can answer very fundalmental questions about it. Until those questions are answered u cant call it fact. U cant say we are still working on it but its fact. AND u cant demean others for coming to different conclusions while ur working on it. Thats childish and it just makes you look horrible. Dont believe in God, thats ur choice. But dont look down on those who do and certainly do not say the big bang is fact. If it was fact u would know where matter came from. Until u can answer anyone with any question, admit its just a theory, a hypothesis, a guess, we are working on it. Its not fact at this point. Have a good day
guest

United States

#332 Apr 9, 2013
Horus wrote:
<quoted text>
"The idea of intelligent design was much easier to accept. Once I came to that realization the rest was easy"
You said it, not me.
Yes in comparison to coming into being from a big bang the idea of ID is easier and more logical. But the fact remains in todays society being a Christian is not easy. Why would someone choose to be demeaned as Christians are if it would be much easier to claim atheism? So your statement of taking the easy way was misplaced.
Horus

Farmington, MO

#333 Apr 9, 2013
bibleisreal wrote:
<quoted text>This was the first logical post that didnt demean and didnt argue just to argue. So thank you

However, the question of where matter came from has plagued big bang theorists since its been around. The problem is there is no other answer other than someone somewhere had to create something. Something supernatural HAD to happen. Now what u think that supernatural thing is is up to you. There's no way around it. Space time and matter got here somehow and had to come here simotaniously. If u had matter and no space, where would u put it? If u had space and matter but no time, when would u put it? There IS no answer other than the supernatural. They will never find another answer because it will always lead to the supernatural. Anything supernatural is a god. Or God. U can wait all u want, but they will never get passes that.

The whole point to this thread was big bang theorists where stating that the big bang is fact. That is certainly not true. I only poked holes to prove that no one can answer very fundalmental questions about it. Until those questions are answered u cant call it fact. U cant say we are still working on it but its fact. AND u cant demean others for coming to different conclusions while ur working on it. Thats childish and it just makes you look horrible. Dont believe in God, thats ur choice. But dont look down on those who do and certainly do not say the big bang is fact. If it was fact u would know where matter came from. Until u can answer anyone with any question, admit its just a theory, a hypothesis, a guess, we are working on it. Its not fact at this point. Have a good day
I have never debated whether or not the Big Bang was fact, it is just the most probable conclusion. That's why the Big Bang theory is taught in most institutions as "the most probable theory", and evolution is taught as the proven theory that it is.

TEF

“Non credo quia absurdum est”

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#334 Apr 9, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes in comparison to coming into being from a big bang the idea of ID is easier and more logical. But the fact remains in todays society being a Christian is not easy. Why would someone choose to be demeaned as Christians are if it would be much easier to claim atheism? So your statement of taking the easy way was misplaced.
ID isn't more "logical" at all. In fact, arguments for ID lead to a slew of logical fallacies and inconsistencies. It may be easier to believe, but it certainly doesn't make more sense in any logical way.
Horus

Farmington, MO

#335 Apr 9, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>Yes in comparison to coming into being from a big bang the idea of ID is easier and more logical. But the fact remains in todays society being a Christian is not easy. Why would someone choose to be demeaned as Christians are if it would be much easier to claim atheism? So your statement of taking the easy way was misplaced.
The massive majority of this nation is Christian. Saying it would be easier to be in the minority, due to some perceived war on Christians is just inane.

There is no war on Christians, there is nobody that I know of that is even trying to start one. The war is on ignorance, bigotry, hate mongering and fear mongering, if you use your religion to further those causes then its you that is the problem, not Christians as a whole.

I happen to have a very firm belief in, and good relationship with God. But that belief does not preclude learning new things, or working toward more understanding of our world and this universe. It certainly doesn't include feeling like my beliefs have a place in anyone else's private life or the laws of our nation.
Guest

United States

#336 Apr 9, 2013
TEF wrote:
<quoted text>
ID isn't more "logical" at all. In fact, arguments for ID lead to a slew of logical fallacies and inconsistencies. It may be easier to believe, but it certainly doesn't make more sense in any logical way.
It is more believable to me than the idea that something came from nothing. The theory of the Big Bang has never been logical to me.
bibleisreal

United States

#337 Apr 9, 2013
Horus wrote:
<quoted text>
I have never debated whether or not the Big Bang was fact, it is just the most probable conclusion. That's why the Big Bang theory is taught in most institutions as "the most probable theory", and evolution is taught as the proven theory that it is.
I guess thats where we disagree and thats ok. I believe someone had to create something at some point is the most probable conclusion.
U were almost there..then u threw in that last line.
Evolution is only fact when ur talking about micro evolution...variations within kinds. No one has ever proved macro evolution which is kinds changing into other kinds. No one has ever seen a dog produce a non dog. Its not a fact. And how did life come from non living matieral? U cant answer that. So quit saying its fact. Its a theory just like the big bang. U cant call it fact until u have all the answers. Until then its a guess..a theory. How did life come from non living matieral? How come no one has ever seen a dog produce a non dog. U were almost there..now we have to do this all over again...how many posts will it take? That will be ur call. Ill be here. Ill keep asking those questions..ull get mad..call me names...then we will end tomm cordially like we almost did today. Im waiting

TEF

“Non credo quia absurdum est”

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#338 Apr 9, 2013
bibleisreal wrote:
<quoted text>
This was the first logical post that didnt demean and didnt argue just to argue. So thank you
However, the question of where matter came from has plagued big bang theorists since its been around. The problem is there is no other answer other than someone somewhere had to create something. Something supernatural HAD to happen. Now what u think that supernatural thing is is up to you. There's no way around it. Space time and matter got here somehow and had to come here simotaniously. If u had matter and no space, where would u put it? If u had space and matter but no time, when would u put it? There IS no answer other than the supernatural. They will never find another answer because it will always lead to the supernatural. Anything supernatural is a god. Or God. U can wait all u want, but they will never get passes that.
The whole point to this thread was big bang theorists where stating that the big bang is fact. That is certainly not true. I only poked holes to prove that no one can answer very fundalmental questions about it. Until those questions are answered u cant call it fact. U cant say we are still working on it but its fact. AND u cant demean others for coming to different conclusions while ur working on it. Thats childish and it just makes you look horrible. Dont believe in God, thats ur choice. But dont look down on those who do and certainly do not say the big bang is fact. If it was fact u would know where matter came from. Until u can answer anyone with any question, admit its just a theory, a hypothesis, a guess, we are working on it. Its not fact at this point. Have a good day
You seem to be under the impression that just because a theory doesn't answer all questions (no theory ever does), that it cannot be fact. Again, this is simply your misunderstanding and ignorance of science and the philosophic basis thereof.

Allow me to show the flaw in your logic with a few analogies.

Can you trace your heritage, completely, all the way back? Of course you can't. Does that mean you do not, "in fact", exist?

We do not yet fully understand gravity. Does that mean the theory of gravity is not fact?

Since atomic theory is based on the understanding of matter, does that mean atomic theory isn't fact?

Since "micro-evolution" is a proven fact (as you have already conceded) yet is based on the metaphysical assumption of matter, does that mean it is really not a proven fact?

Your insistence on an answer to the origin of matter being key in determining what is fact or not is completely contrived.

TEF

“Non credo quia absurdum est”

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#339 Apr 9, 2013
Guest wrote:
<quoted text>
It is more believable to me than the idea that something came from nothing. The theory of the Big Bang has never been logical to me.
That is because you do not understand logic. Nor does the Big Bang theory propose that something came from nothing. Even some physicists who argue that are wrong simply because they do not understand what "nothing means" (see Lawrence Krauss or Stephen Hawking).

In fact, the Big Bang theory doesn't deal with anything "before" at all, it is simply an explanation of how the Universe expanded, not existence itself.

TEF

“Non credo quia absurdum est”

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#340 Apr 9, 2013
bibleisreal wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess thats where we disagree and thats ok. I believe someone had to create something at some point is the most probable conclusion.
U were almost there..then u threw in that last line.
Evolution is only fact when ur talking about micro evolution...variations within kinds. No one has ever proved macro evolution which is kinds changing into other kinds. No one has ever seen a dog produce a non dog. Its not a fact. And how did life come from non living matieral? U cant answer that. So quit saying its fact. Its a theory just like the big bang. U cant call it fact until u have all the answers. Until then its a guess..a theory. How did life come from non living matieral? How come no one has ever seen a dog produce a non dog. U were almost there..now we have to do this all over again...how many posts will it take? That will be ur call. Ill be here. Ill keep asking those questions..ull get mad..call me names...then we will end tomm cordially like we almost did today. Im waiting
Again, you are completely ignorant of science (there is no distinction between micro and macro evolution). I'll explain evolution to you as if you were a middle schooler. First of all, evolution does not state that one species eventually gives birth to another species. So please stop with this strawman argument.

A species is simply defined as a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. Given enough time and assuming there is some mechanism for change, a descendant organism will be genetically different enough from an ascendant organism that fertile reproduction would be impossible between the two, thus evolution has occurred. This effectively means you have two different species. This has been observed in nature numerous times, and is basically evolution in a nutshell, and is a fact.
guest

Farmington, MO

#341 Apr 9, 2013
bibleisreal wrote:
<quoted text>I guess thats where we disagree and thats ok. I believe someone had to create something at some point is the most probable conclusion.
U were almost there..then u threw in that last line.
Evolution is only fact when ur talking about micro evolution...variations within kinds. No one has ever proved macro evolution which is kinds changing into other kinds. No one has ever seen a dog produce a non dog. Its not a fact. And how did life come from non living matieral? U cant answer that. So quit saying its fact. Its a theory just like the big bang. U cant call it fact until u have all the answers. Until then its a guess..a theory. How did life come from non living matieral? How come no one has ever seen a dog produce a non dog. U were almost there..now we have to do this all over again...how many posts will it take? That will be ur call. Ill be here. Ill keep asking those questions..ull get mad..call me names...then we will end tomm cordially like we almost did today. Im waiting
When did I call you a name?

I'm going for a float around the neighborhood, since gravity is not, by your definition, a fact.

TEF

“Non credo quia absurdum est”

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#342 Apr 9, 2013
Allow me to give an example.

At some point in recent evolutionary history (time X), there was a species of cats in Asia. This species of cats split at some point and some of them moved into Africa. Over time, due to environmental factors, these two groups "micro" (I'm only using that word to make you understand) evolved enough to be significantly genetically different from one another. Thus, the Asia group could not create fertile offspring with the Africa group after a long period of time (time Y). Thus one species of cats became two species of cats. This is a very simplistic evolutionary history of tigers and lions from a common ancestor (it is in reality much more complicated and deals with many more species).

You can do this with all species, and all common ancestors of species, and ancestors of those species to come to the point of a common ancestor of all species (Darwin's theory in a nutshell). This is the very definition of a logical conclusion, especially since nothing points to the contrary of this.

Now, I anticipate "well where did the common ancestor come from?" That is a valid question, but the lack of answer DOES NOT DISPROVE OR DIMINISH THE OVERWHELMING SUPPORT OF EVOLUTION. In fact, evolution doesn't deal with biogenesis at all, only the change of life.

Fact is, we may never have the definitive answer as to how life began, but we do have the definitive answer as to how life survived, thrived, and changed over time. That fact is called evolution.
bibleisreal

United States

#343 Apr 9, 2013
TEF wrote:
Allow me to give an example.
At some point in recent evolutionary history (time X), there was a species of cats in Asia. This species of cats split at some point and some of them moved into Africa. Over time, due to environmental factors, these two groups "micro" (I'm only using that word to make you understand) evolved enough to be significantly genetically different from one another. Thus, the Asia group could not create fertile offspring with the Africa group after a long period of time (time Y). Thus one species of cats became two species of cats. This is a very simplistic evolutionary history of tigers and lions from a common ancestor (it is in reality much more complicated and deals with many more species).
You can do this with all species, and all common ancestors of species, and ancestors of those species to come to the point of a common ancestor of all species (Darwin's theory in a nutshell). This is the very definition of a logical conclusion, especially since nothing points to the contrary of this.
Now, I anticipate "well where did the common ancestor come from?" That is a valid question, but the lack of answer DOES NOT DISPROVE OR DIMINISH THE OVERWHELMING SUPPORT OF EVOLUTION. In fact, evolution doesn't deal with biogenesis at all, only the change of life.
Fact is, we may never have the definitive answer as to how life began, but we do have the definitive answer as to how life survived, thrived, and changed over time. That fact is called evolution.
Yes one variation of cats to another variation. Yes animals adapt to their surroundings. Thats all u can prove. Tigers and meow little cats are the same "kind" of animal. Yes the horse and zebra probably had a common ancestor...wont argue with that but they are still the same "kind" of animal. No one has seen an animal switch kinds. Ur example above only proved the micro part of it. That doesnt mean macro took place. Its never been seen. Its a theory. A guess. An assumption...not fact. Until u wake up and ur female cat gives birth to some baby half squirrel half cats..then we will talk. As for now we have kinds bredding with the same kinds making variations. Its a theory. I dont care if u call biogenesis something different then evolution..but u need it for evolution to work. U have to have life coming to be from non living matieral. U have to have this for ur evolution theory to make any sense. U dont have it though. Just like u need to know where matter space and time came from before the big bang can even start making sense. U have a theory..nothing more. Not fact. Believe it if u want. But its not a fact.

TEF

“Non credo quia absurdum est”

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#344 Apr 9, 2013
bibleisreal wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes one variation of cats to another variation. Yes animals adapt to their surroundings. Thats all u can prove. Tigers and meow little cats are the same "kind" of animal. Yes the horse and zebra probably had a common ancestor...wont argue with that but they are still the same "kind" of animal. No one has seen an animal switch kinds. Ur example above only proved the micro part of it. That doesnt mean macro took place. Its never been seen. Its a theory. A guess. An assumption...not fact. Until u wake up and ur female cat gives birth to some baby half squirrel half cats..then we will talk. As for now we have kinds bredding with the same kinds making variations. Its a theory. I dont care if u call biogenesis something different then evolution..but u need it for evolution to work. U have to have life coming to be from non living matieral. U have to have this for ur evolution theory to make any sense. U dont have it though. Just like u need to know where matter space and time came from before the big bang can even start making sense. U have a theory..nothing more. Not fact. Believe it if u want. But its not a fact.
You keep using variations of the strawman "when a dog gives birth to a non-dog", which is utter nonsense. In fact, if a cat ever gave birth to a squirrel, that would DISPROVE evolution. Also, you completely failed to understand my post, but you did leave yourself wide-open.

You concede that the horse and zebra had a common ancestor (even though they are two different species), why is that?
bibleisreal

United States

#345 Apr 9, 2013
TEF wrote:
<quoted text>
You keep using variations of the strawman "when a dog gives birth to a non-dog", which is utter nonsense. In fact, if a cat ever gave birth to a squirrel, that would DISPROVE evolution. Also, you completely failed to understand my post, but you did leave yourself wide-open.
You concede that the horse and zebra had a common ancestor (even though they are two different species), why is that?
I will admit when I goof up..lol and I did. Trying to type on my phone sometimes gets crazy confusing. Yes zebra and horse are different species. I was thinking about wolf and coyote and somehow got confused. My bad...didnt mean to open myself up..lol

Again, other than animals adapting to their environment and variations...we have seen no other kind of evolution. U cant say its a fact. U say it takes billions of years..im guessing ud say that..dont know for sure...but with all the animals in the world and all the history we have recorded, u think we would have at least seen several examples. We havent. Other than animals adapting to their enviornment and variations within kinds. Like I said...its not fact yet. Its a theory. Let othera believe God created animals. U can believe animals evolved into different animals and then us. Each is a religion.
bibleisreal

United States

#346 Apr 9, 2013
Actually I was right...u questioning it got me confused..lol the reason I said horse and zebra is because they are of the same kind. They can bring forth. They can mate. I think the cross is called a zebrula or something. A wolf and a coyote can also mate. They are the same "kind" of animal. But a chicken and a dog cannot. They are not the same kind. Obviously...u didnt me to tell u that.

My mind has been going a mile a minute today with so much going on. Sorry for the mixup.
bibleisreal

United States

#347 Apr 9, 2013
So the simple answer to ur question is because they are of the same kind. They can mate

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Cape Girardeau Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Is Luhr Bros company good to work for 21 min Guest 31
Illegal Dumping 2 hr Guest 2
Hobby lobby 3 hr Blytheville 18
go at the damn greenlight! 5 hr Guest 24
St. Francis interview process 5 hr Guest 90
Jeff Thiele at good will (Nov '14) 6 hr Hotmomma 14
Lady in wheelchair begging for money, at inters... 7 hr guest 10

Cape Girardeau Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Cape Girardeau Mortgages