• 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!

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Where are no monkeys, fish, reptiles, and the Big Bang in Biblical account of human ancestors: "Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God." Luke 3:38.

Humanity is a collection of creatures that are linked by conception. Every time a person conceives a person, not a bird.


This includes cases of in vitro fertilization, but not the genetic manipulation to put animals and humans cells together.

Therefore, there is the very first person, and he can only be one. And if so, then he did not have a wife. And without a wife, he could not give birth to any of us. Therefore, there must have been God who gave him a wife. As you can see, there is no need to include Darwin's Theory of Evolution in this scheme. There are no monkeys in our ancestors' line [nor a common ancestor with monkeys] and cannot be.

The human genome has a lot of homologous (similar) genes: with a monkey - 98%, a mouse - 95%, a banana - 40%. For example, a healthy bird has two legs and one head, a healthy human has one head and two legs. The similarity is due to a Creator's common plan for creating, and because we are unable to digest the banana if the latter has 0.0001 % similarity with our body cells. Such a banana is poison for our genetic structure, not a banana.

On the question: "Who has created God?"

The question is meaningless if it is not proven that God exists.
The question also does not make sense, because God is not an idol: by the definition, God can not be created, designed, imagined, invented.
God is the objective fact, not a human construct.

And the believer loves God so much that he does not ask Him stupid questions. Therefore, the whole task of Theological Research is to demonstrate the existence of God to a disbeliever, and then he will not ask this question. He will be afraid of hell, and to pre-edit his speech: "But I tell you that men will give an account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken." Matthew 12:37. For example, God does not magic, but does wonders; policemen do no murder dangerous criminals, but policemen do execute them.


Do atheists know that there is "no God"? Science doesn't know. Thus, some sectarians do not know. Because there were 99.999% theists in the past, then today about 30% of people are theistic sectarians, theistic heretics.

Math-proof: Is Our World an Intelligent Simulation?, viXra.org e-Print archive, viXra:2104.0152
 
Last edited:

Altfish

Veteran Member
Where are no monkeys, fish, reptiles, and the Big Bang in Biblical account of human ancestors: "Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God." Luke 3:38.

Humanity is a collection of creatures that are linked by conception. Every time a person conceives a person, not a bird.


This includes cases of in vitro fertilization, but not the genetic manipulation to put animals and humans cells together.

Therefore, there is the very first person, and he can only be one. And if so, then he did not have a wife. And without a wife, he could not give birth to any of us. Therefore, there must have been God who gave him a wife. As you can see, there is no need to include Darwin's Theory of Evolution in this scheme. There are no monkeys in our ancestors' line [nor a common ancestor with monkeys] and cannot be.

The human genome has a lot of homologous (similar) genes: with a monkey - 98%, a mouse - 95%, a banana - 40%. For example, a healthy bird has two legs and one head, a healthy human has one head and two legs. The similarity is due to a Creator's common plan for creating, and because we are unable to digest the banana if the latter has 0.0001 % similarity with our body cells. Such a banana is poison for our genetic structure, not a banana.

On the question: "Who has created God?"

The question is meaningless if it is not proven that God exists.
The question also does not make sense, because God is not an idol: by the definition, God can not be created, designed, imagined, invented.
God is the objective fact, not a human construct.

And the believer loves God so much that he does not ask Him stupid questions. Therefore, the whole task of Theological Research is to demonstrate the existence of God to a disbeliever, and then he will not ask this question. He will be afraid of hell, and to pre-edit his speech: "But I tell you that men will give an account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken." Matthew 12:37. For example, God does not magic, but does wonders; policemen do no murder dangerous criminals, but policemen do execute them.

Do atheists know that there is "no God"? Science doesn't know. Thus, some sectarians do not know. Because there were 99.999% theists in the past, then today about 30% of people are theistic sectarians, theistic heretics.
Still have to use weasel words to duck the "Where did god come from?" question.
I'm sorry, it is NOT irrelevant. It is known as 'special pleading', I and most others won't accept it.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Still have to use weasel words to duck the "Where did god come from?" question.
I'm sorry, it is NOT irrelevant. It is known as 'special pleading', I and most others won't accept it.
Could you please say more about your position? I can not detect a malfunction in my logic chain.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
jiFfM.jpg
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
No, I don't suppose you can.

Remind me, how many of your recent papers have been accepted by peer-reviewed journals?;)
Reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw long ago:

Don't Hit A Guy When He's Down
Kick Him, It's Easier​
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Where are no monkeys, fish, reptiles, and the Big Bang in Biblical account of human ancestors: "Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God." Luke 3:38.

Neither are any of these things in any other creation myths.
That's your first hint that they are myths.

Humanity is a collection of creatures that are linked by conception. Every time a person conceives a person, not a bird.

Why would you expect otherwise?

Therefore, there is the very first person, and he can only be one.

That doesn't follow. At all.
You're failing at logic again.


And if so, then he did not have a wife. And without a wife, he could not give birth to any of us. Therefore, there must have been God who gave him a wife. As you can see, there is no need to include Darwin's Theory of Evolution in this scheme.

Off course. If you are going to simply ignore all the facts, draw ignorant conclusions that don't even logically follow from the unsupported and flawed premises.... Sure, then you can ignore one of the most established scientific theories in existence and pretend as if your favorite creation myths is accurate.

The human genome has a lot of homologous (similar) genes: with a monkey - 98%, a mouse - 95%, a banana - 40%. For example, a healthy bird has two legs and one head, a healthy human has one head and two legs. The similarity is due to a Creator's common plan for creating, and because we are unable to digest the banana if the latter has 0.0001 % similarity with our body cells. Such a banana is poison for our genetic structure, not a banana.


Funny you should mention a banana.

Here's what they look like in the wild:

upload_2021-5-20_11-56-34.png


Have fun digesting that.

I'll stick to the cultivated one. You know.... the one that we humans have artificially evolved by applying artificial selection to breed for traits WE found desirable, instead of natural selecting for traits that increase its survival chances.

upload_2021-5-20_11-58-27.png




On the question: "Who has created God?"

The question is meaningless if it is not proven that God exists.
The question also does not make sense, because God is not an idol: by the definition, God can not be created, designed, imagined, invented.
God is the objective fact, not a human construct.

I always love how you think that you can just "define" things into existence in an unfalsifiable manner and then think you've actually accomplished something.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
I always love how you think that you can just "define" things into existence in an unfalsifiable manner and then think you've actually accomplished something.

So, you disrespect the First Law of Aristotle's Logic: "everything must be defined."

That doesn't follow. At all.
You're failing at logic again.

A human produces a human. Suppose at 7000 B.C. there were 100 humans. They must be produced by their fathers and mothers. Thus, at 7001 B.C. there were about 100 humans. But the chain of ancestors can not hit the Big Bang. So, at some year, the year of Creation, there was just Adam. One human on Earth.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Could you please say more about your position? I can not detect a malfunction in my logic chain.
That is because you do not appear to have the ability to reason rationally.

Try this instead: See if you can find a testable hypothesis for your idea. What reasonable reliable and rational test could show you to be wrong?
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
A human produces a human. Suppose at 7000 B.C. there were 100 humans. They must be produced by their fathers and mothers. Thus, at 7001 B.C. there were about 100 humans. But the chain of ancestors can not hit the Big Bang. So, at some year, the year of Creation, there was just Adam. One human on Earth.

Well that explains it all, evolutionary scientists can now just go home and search for alternative employment, Evolutionary and genetic medicine can obviously no longer work so expect a flood of old wives remedies and witch doctors to cure illnesses.



.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
So, you disrespect the First Law of Aristotle's Logic: "everything must be defined."

That's not at all what I said.
But I have come to expect you to post random irrelevant comments as responses.

A human produces a human

Actually, it takes 2 humans to produce a human. There are no virgin mothers.

Suppose at 7000 B.C. there were 100 humans.

Human population has never been smaller then a couple thousand individuals, as demonstrated by genetic analysis of the human genome.

But don't let facts get in the way of your hypothetical religious drivel.

But the chain of ancestors can not hit the Big Bang.

Likely that is the case because earth is only 4.6 billion years old while the big bang happened 13.7 billion years ago, while life on this planet started around 3.8 - 4 billion years ago. :rolleyes:


So, at some year, the year of Creation, there was just Adam. One human on Earth.

Doesn't follow again. At all.
It didn't follow the first time, it doesn't follow the second time and it won't follow if you repeat this claim in the future.
 
Top