ecco
Veteran Member
I, for one, do not need to "disprove an omnipotent God" any more than I need to disprove the Easter Bunny, psychic snowflakes or Santa Claus or Thor or Dâyuni'sï or any other man-made entities.
Why do you think I am?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The creator did it.
- Thread starter A REAL CHRISTIAN
- Start date
Why do you think I am?
ecco
Veteran Member
No, I didn't insult you, just following your own description, "We are just another species in the animal kingdom. Our human traits are genetically expressed, as they relate to our environment and our social conditioning. Nothing more, nothing less."
The fact that you don't concern yourself with how life started in an evolutionary manner, you just believe it did without scientific evidence demonstrates your inability to critically think. If evolution came about from nothing into something without intelligence, meaning, purpose and design, and it's ability to transform from simple (which by the way is impossible in the first place) to complex defies the scientific method of procedure. Because of this, matter coming about in an evolutionary way has no intelligence, meaning, design or purpose, it's just matter. You admit you are just another kind in the animal kingdom did you not?
So, if you are a product of meaningless, unintelligent, purposeless matter that evolution dictates, I don't have to insult you with these facts, you admit it openly.
"Our human traits are genetically expressed"?
How does this explain self-consciousness being developed from evolutionary matter? You don't see the problem here do you? We are the only species on the planet with the abstract ability of self awareness. We know we are alive, animals don't know this in a cognitive way. Yes they react to their environment, a dog will get out of the way of an oncoming car, but it doesn't have the ability to reason why it needs to. This is what separates us from the animal kingdom. God expressed this in Genesis when he said "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."
You are not just another kind of animal, but if you want to believe that, up to you, wait, what am I saying, you already believe that, silly me.
"social conditioning"? Why should you have any more of an ability to socialize any differently than a cow in a field with the rest of the cows? What gave you this unique ability that the other animals don't have? What makes you so special? Remember, you nothing more or nothing less than a product of your meaningless, purposeless, unintelligent, design-less, directionless evolutionary environment. Where did your capacity to express love, hate, or to articulate your condescending words towards others in a calculated way actually develop?
Maybe you are right. Maybe God attaches all those little Hydrogen atoms to Oxygen atoms so we all have water to drink.
I mean, golly, how else could it happen?
Rapture Era
Active Member
Thank you for your honesty. I'm not try to trap you or your words. I understand many are researching this field. Now, more than any other time in history do we posses the incredible understanding in science as to the immense complexities of all life. And so far, science is not able to produce the answers for say, abiogenesis which is needed for the evolutionary process to advance into higher and diversified life forms. As I see it, science is saying quite the opposite, its saying that (so far) it is not possible from the evidence that we encounter. So wouldn't it be reasonable for any scientist to scrap the idea until the data shows otherwise? Is it not reasonable to think that if there is no beginning in a natural sense, that evolution dictates, what is the point of advancing a theory to fruition when the very foundation of it is in calamitous fail? It works this way with everything else in study of science, why not evolution?
I agree.
I'm confused, You said a moment a go that "We honestly admit that we currently do not know. There are many people researching this very field to someday provide answers." How can it be explained in detail when you don't know?
That's unfair! I agree that science moves forward, and as it does, it is constantly changing with new information. What hasn't changed, even with our super advanced technology and knowledge, is it's ability to reconcile how life started. This is of monumental importance! And I believe that the only answer is supernatural creation, it's the only one that fits the data if you look at it objectively.
Rapture Era
Active Member
Right?
Truly Enlightened
Well-Known Member
A Demigod, a Ghost, and a God. Sounds like the foundation for a religious belief. Or, the start of a funny joke.
(acknowledgments to Barrack)
Last edited:
Rapture Era
Active Member
How are any evidences related to evolution? "hence "biodiversity"? Man, you skipped a whole bunch of steps with that word "hence"!
If you have the wrong beginning of life, everything that follows will be false on top of false on top of false. Like a math problem, if you start off with the wrong numbers, the ending along with everything in between will be extremely disappointing, and, will invoke exponentially catastrophic numbers at end. It doesn't end up good! It's really important to get it right at the commencement!
In order for evolution to operate, it would need a beginning. No beginning, no evolution, no biodiversity, no nothin. The whole evolutionary model is
absolutely at the mercy of some kind of abiogenesis right? I mean, what else is there?
The question now becomes one of choice between plain ol matter doing something outside of plain ol matter as a beginning, or a transcendent being outside of our 3 dimensional reality creating a planet in just the right place 93,000,000 miles from our star on the perfect axis, it's own moon, spinning at the perfect speed and all of magnificent creatures we see with no pathway to evolutionary ancestors. But the most incredible thing, is that this transcendent being, namely the biblical Triune God decided to tell us what and how he created. Each of the six creation days is done in a methodical manner with one building on another. Because God is perfect, all of his creation was created perfectly. This is why we do not see any evolutionary evidence of transitional life forms in the sense that one animal turns into another into another, because it didn't happen. It's very hard to prove something that didn't happen.
Now, if he didn't tell us, I would be right along with you and every scientists scratching their heads and coming up with all kinds of theories, speculation, guesses, and hypothesis to try and make sense of it all. But that's not what happened. God didn't want us to be confused about these things. This is exactly why he decided to tell us through the account of Genesis, why and how everything came into existence. Now you can believe from the incredible evidence we see in all life forms and the ecosystems in which they live and survive and procreate in there own unique and magnificent way. Or, you can believe in the wrong and falsifiable theory of evolution in which our current knowledge and honest scientific data, is leaning away from evolution and recognizing the reality associated with the creation narrative. Think about it.
Last edited:
He has Risen!
JESUS IS LORD FOR HE HAS RISEN FROM THE DEAD
Hey Rapture man,
I am ending my input here. I doubt they are learning from us, only mocking as Peter and Paul foretold would happen in these last days. I think I will start another thread titled "Why Believe", because all of us believe things we have no way of proving in any material way. Morality for instance,... why should we believe anything is right or wrong without a Higher Authority i.e. God. Because everything would then be arbitrary and subjective.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I see that you do not even understand the concept of evidence. Would you like to learn?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You have that backwards. You are not able to learn. That is your sin. And there is no need for a higher being to have morality. That is a huge non sequitur.
Looncall
Well-Known Member
Balderdash.
Evolution is an algorithm. Descent with variation plus natural selection yield change through time. Simple and unavoidable.
You are being conned by scoundrels.
gnostic
The Lost One
I used to work as a civil engineer. Although we need to know the basics that help us, to know how to draw and design, understand the physics and maths involved in modern construction, and know what materials to use for these construction, and of course safety protocols and cost estimations of the projects.
There are so many things to learn at the university, and with only limited amount of time learning them. And the cost of studying any university courses will also limit the time you spend to study what are required and needed, to get you started in this career path.
Now unless you want to become historian in engineering, like ancient urban planning, going through these history might be considered to be important and about knowing the past, it is also time-consuming, and not relevant to most students of civil engineering. We don't need to know who constructed the first hut or construct the hut as a exercise. We don't need to know were the first to built first temple, 1st pyramids, 1st palace, or who constructed the 1st sewerage system, etc.
Knowing these are great, from history-point-of-view, but most of engineers are not being pay to be historians or archaeologists.
To give you another example. Astronomers only paid their tuition at the universities, to study the stars, planets, galaxies, etc. What they are not there to learn and train as astronomers. They are not there as engineer to design and construct space vessels, etc. Sure, some astronomers may work at space agencies, but they are not to fly out in space. So what would be the purpose of astronomers to physically and mentally train for space flight?
And it is the same with biologists.
Most biologists don't study fossils. Most biologists are not there to find the first life. Most biologists go for specific jobs, and therefore required to learn and train in specific areas, that have nothing to paleontology or abiogenesis.
Learning evolution is requirement for all biologists, but no all go into the business of paleontology or abiogenesis.
From what I getting from you, from what you are saying, it seem apparent that you have never study at university at all. There are limitations of what people study in what fields. The person doesn't need to learn everything.
In medical school, people who want to study dentistry and worked as dentists, don't need to perform surgery on the brain, heart or something else unrelated to dentistry.
You are being absurd and ignorant, Rapture Era.
ecco
Veteran Member
On what do you base your assertion that science is saying "quite the opposite"?
DUH! How can data show otherwise if no one researches the data and develops new data?
What's on the other side of that hill? We don't know. OK, let's not bother climbing the hill to find out. How ridiculous.
That is a very convoluted paragraph. I really don't understand what you are trying to say.
What's on the other side of that hill? We don't know. OK, let's not bother climbing the hill to find out. How ridiculous.
What is it about YET that you do not understand? In 1900 science had no way to stop polio. By 1960 it was virtually eliminated.
If you were alive in 1920, would you be saying:
What hasn't changed, even with our super advanced technology and knowledge, is its ability to eradicate polio.
You stated that my previous comment...
Science moves forward, even if some people still prefer to rely on the simplistic ideas of ignorant people 6000 years ago.
...was "unfair". Yet you prefer "supernatural creation" to an admission that, for now, we don't know.
[sarcasm]
Keep in mind, History shows us that the supernatural answer is always the right answer.
If one looks at it objectively, the only possible reason for lightning is that gods are tossing sticks of light at each other.
If one looks at it objectively, the only possible reason for Hawaian volcanoes is that Pele chased Kamapuaa with rivers of lava, into the Pacific Ocean.
[/sarcasm]
ecco
Veteran Member
ecco
Veteran Member
Why would anyone want to learn from myths of 6000 and 2000 years ago? Much has been learned since then.
No need to start a whole new thread. The answer to your question is:
Blind faith usually resulting from childhood indoctrination.
Dang right! Let's use the objective morality of the Bible:
- It's OK to own and beat slaves.
- It's OK to take young women (virgins) and distribute them among the victorious troops.
30And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters. 31And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth: 32Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. 33And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. 34And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. 35And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. 36Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. 37And the firstborn bare a son, and called his name Moab: the same is the father of the Moabites unto this day. 38And the younger, she also bare a son, and called his name Benammi: the same is the father of the children of Ammon unto this day.
Biblical objective morality, straight from the word of Almighty God.
Rapture Era
Active Member
Yeah, I hear ya. God has done everything he can to reveal who he is and how we can know and have a personal relationship with him. It's like having a personal relationship with our children. If they for whatever reason refuse all of our counsel and just want to go off on their own, there comes a point where the parents give them over to the delusion that so strongly pulls them away from their parents. God does the same thing. You can try to appeal with common sense and reality, but no, I'm gonna do it my way
So, okay, I understand you deciding not to continue. You know the old saying you cant lead a horse to water? But you can put salt in their oats and make them thirsty. Myself, you, and others have tried to put a little salt on this issue to at least make them thirsty enough to step out of their close-minded box
and explore an other alternative. But no, they dont have the ability to objectively look at this issue of origins, and you have to ask yourself why? Science should follow the evidence it validates as true no matter where it leads. In the majority of the sciences, this is true, but when it comes to the issue of origins,
not so much. The data is skewed to only use that which feeds their atheistic evolutionary model. Why? Because they cannot under any circumstances allow
the antithesis to to be true, Why? Can you imagine the downright devastation if the whole evolutionary lie got turned upside down on its head? Satan isn't going to allow that to happen. Why? Because he wants to take everyone of them down with him. Keep them away from this biblical God at all costs! When you step back for a moment and look at the two alternatives for origins, and the reality of the world we live in with all of its life, you can see how incredibly strong this deception really is. So, in conclusion, I understand you stepping out. I have gotten to that point as well. I came in on the 5th page and we are now on the 65th page. I think enough information has been shared for anyone to objectively look at the evidence, and at least contemplate which one fits the data more reasonably. Thank you HhR for your insights and all the information you have shared!
Looking forward to your new thread! See ya there.
Rapture Era
Active Member
Decent from what? You forgot that little part.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Decent from what? You forgot that little part.
How far back do you want to go? The mere fact that we share a common ancestor with other apes seems to be more than you an handle.
Truly Enlightened
Well-Known Member
If you even understood these subjects, you would understand why crucifixion victims die from suffocation and not from blood loss. Or, why breaking their legs would hasten the dying process. Or, why having the arms are tied or nailed above the head, would cause maximum suffering. And, why "blood and water" could not gush out of a dead person when pierced in the side. You would also be aware of the many other factors, that would contribute to how long a person would suffer before dying. If your comprehension skills weren't also compromised, you would not be talking about the differences between how the Jews and Romans view time. Or, why having a blood sacrifice because of Jesus's sacrifice, before Jesus even existed, makes absolutely no sense. You would also not be talking about your visit to a place 2000 years after the event, or saying how small it was. Finally, you would understand that systemic ignorance has nothing to do with following the commands of a God. It was because religion dogma was the only game in town, that could explain any natural phenomena. Most of us do not still live in the Dark Ages I'm afraid that I don't see the relevance of most of your post.
I suppose if I said that Jesus was just having a Near Death Experience, I would be wrong because a 3000 year old inerrant Book says so? Dead man wakes up after three days in mortuary, recounts ordeal - Daily Post Nigeria
Man bounces back to life after three days in morgue - Vanguard News Nigeria
https://listverse.com/2013/07/19/10-people-who-came-back-from-the-dead/
These cases can at least demonstrate that it is possible to appear dead, and days later come back to life. The reasons why/how may stretch the physical laws, but it doesn't break them. You are expecting rational people to believe in supernatural events, without any objective evidence. You then choose to mock them by criticizing their level of ignorance. You even mock them for accepting that their own mortality is simply part of the cycle of life. You arrogantly close your eyes and cover your ears to any objective evidence, that in anyway threatens your religious beliefs. You are in fact the poster-child for religious fundamentalism. There are no verifiable ghosts, spirits, Gods, or any supernatural/paranormal events. None have ever been demonstrated throughout human history. Just one, and I would gladly change my worldview. So far, just more sermonizing, proselytizing, Biblical quote-mining, editorializing, parroting Religious soundbites, and obstinate arrogance. Including, more opportunities to proclaim your blind faith, obedience, and loyalty to a Book of myths and superstitions.
There are some Atheist that are hoping that they are wrong. You offer nothing to help them, except prove why they are right.
Rapture Era
Active Member
It's funny, I agree with everything you said except the part where you said, "You are being absurd and ignorant, Rapture Era."
One of my sons graduated university with a major in biology and minor in Chemistry. Another one is in university with a major in Chemistry and another is in his third year of Mechanical Engineering. I hear what you are saying. In Engineering there are multitudes of various types. And they all specialize in that area. They may not concern themselves with the other areas of engineering, but at some point they must rely on each-other for a common goal of building a car or a rocket or a Mars landing vehicle for example. In any type of engineering , math is a huge part of what they do. I came home from work one night and my son and his friend who is studying aerospace engineering were working out calculations on a whiteboard, it gave me a headache just looking at it. I have seen engineering failures due to the wrong numbers being calculated and as a result, product disaster.
Now, this is where speculation contaminates science. In this case, the presupposition of evolution, that something came from nothing naturally and moved upward into everything, and then try to fit that narrative into what science is actually discovering is catastrophic to honest science. Just let science do what it does and take the truthfulness of what it discovers and teach that! Is this not reasonable? You don't need to inject science with evolution unless you have an agenda.
Agreed! That's why I support whatever truthful findings science arrives at by following the scientific method they have established. However, evolution fails miserably when scrutinized by the scientific method! I'm not absurd or ignorant, I'm a pragmatist. Look, you as an engineer know that if your math is wrong at the beginning of your project, it's not going to turn out so good. This is just plain reality and common sense. In order for something to exist, it must have a beginning in our finite world. This is reality and common sense. Those in biology who do not study abiogenesis don't understand that field of science, I get it. I mean, they may know what it is but it's not their sphere. The foundation on which evolution rests, is some kind of beginning. That makes it really important don't you think?
Because abiogenesis science cannot account for the slightest probability of a natural evolutionary genesis without stepping way outside of true science and into the realm of speculation, you now have moved away from science and into fantasy. In this fantasy world you can say whatever you like, but it doesn't make it true just because you say it. Isn't that the reason the scientific method is in place? It is vitally important in this case to know if it happened that way or not. If it didn't and so far science cannot account for it happening in that way, it's dead in the water! Again, it's impossible to prove something that never happened. Because of this, no matter how much you want it to be so,it wont be, and that's exactly where this whole evolutionary nonsense is at the moment.
Last edited:
He has Risen!
JESUS IS LORD FOR HE HAS RISEN FROM THE DEAD
Thanks for the kind words in the previous post to me...same to you Rapture man,
By the way your kids seem very intelligent, I'm sure they will be able to design many projects very well.