Your God probably does not exist.
I think that we can say that the god of the Christian Bible has been ruled out by the evidence supporting evolution, which doesn't go away even if evolution is falsified. Why is all of that evidence there? What other logical possibility remains if evolution is ruled out? I can only think of one, a deceptive intelligent designer of immense power, whether supernatural or a race of superhuman extraterrestrials. Did the Christian deity plant evidence deceptively? The Bible says no:
- Titus 1:2 "in the hope of eternal life that God, who cannot lie, promised before time began."
- Hebrews 8:16 "so that through two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to seize the hope set before us."
I think that this argument excludes the possibility of a deity that doesn't lie and that claims to have created life the way the Bible describes that creation. It doesn't rule out other deities - deceptive deities like Loki, but it does rule out that one. Some Christian apologists seem to understand that, such as the ones who reinterpret the biblical narrative to reflect modern science, such as those claiming that a day of creation wasn't a literal day. This must be an attempt to save the deity from being caught in a lie. If that deity weren't defined as being incapable of lying, one wouldn't need all of those apologist verbal gymnastics. He could just say, "Well, God, in His infinite wisdom and for whatever His reasons, chose to deceive man." But they don't, and for good reason. There goes the promise of salvation if this deity lies. It becomes the promise of a known liar.
What do you think? Is this a compelling argument?
Why do so many Christians think that it is okay to lie about someone if you are "Lying for Jesus"?
Rhetorical question, of course. I'm sure you know why. Their agenda is promoting their religion, and their methods and values are not yours or mine.
- "What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church … a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." - Martin Luther.
Your agenda is to teach and learn. Theirs is to indoctrinate. You values include honesty and critical thought. They value persuasion. You value reason applied to evidence. They value whatever persuades including specious argumentation and logical fallacy.
our sun like all stars have a finite lifespan, and ours will end in approximately 3.5 billion years, either collapsing into a red dwarf, or exploding into a supernova.
Hope you don't mind a correction.
It's correct that the sun has a finite life and that it will degenerate after going off the main sequence. It is estimated that the sun will burn for another five billion years before expanding and reddening into a red giant. Then the outer layers of the sun will separate from its core forming a planetary nebula around a white dwarf. Only stars much more massive than the sun can supernova, and those will leave a central core that is either a neutron star (such as pulsars and magnetars) or, if massive enough, a black hole.
I'd also like your feedback on the argument against the biblical god. Is it sound? Does it rule out the biblical god?
A human life cycle starts at pregnancy. That’s biology
You probably meant conception. When pregnancy begins depends on definition. Generally, it is defined as the time of endometrial implantation, but state legislators in anti-choice states will have motivation to define if legally as beginning with conception, given the implications of IUDs, birth control pills, and morning after pills, which terminate the conceptus prior to implantation.
But as you already read, when a human life begins doesn't matter unless one assumes that it is a moral imperative that a human life cannot ever be deliberately ended. That's not my belief, so it doesn't matter to me whether one calls a precognitive conceptus a human life, a baby, a child, or anything else.
Incidentally, biology also says that you are an ape. Wasn't it you objecting to that a few pages back? I'm guessing that you choose your biology to conform with your religious beliefs and to help you in your efforts to persuade rather than convince. You're going to want to pick those things that are consistent with the beliefs you are trying to promote while disregarding that which seems to support the opposite positions.
They are unwilling to repent.
Not true. Anybody with a conscience has felt remorse for deliberately wronging another, and regret for harming them unwittingly. What the skeptic is unwilling to do is repent to an imaginary deity for imaginary offenses against it.
It is serious insult to call any Christian as Nazi.
Why would a Christian Nazi be offended to be recognized as that? I doubt that any of these people would have been offended: