If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book

We don't know how the universe came into existence and I'm fine with that.
"We" don't know if the universe even DID "come into existence".

Personally, I believe that the "heavens and the earth" came into existence (Genesis 1:1) but that the universe itself is eternal. Otherwise, where is an eternal God?
You want to fill in the knowledge gap w/ a god.
??????
The knowledge gaps are really the only reason there is to believe....the same reason man believed in gods 2000+ years ago.
?????
 
The Bible, according to many, many, many Christians, is the word of God and is taken literally as such.
It's witten by men, written from the perspective of men who are assumed to have been inspired to write.

There is nothing anywhere in the New Testament indicating these men are writing down dictation from a disembodied voice.
The creation of everything in 7 days is taking literally.
Not possible. The sun wasn't created until the fourth day.

Time is not a static uniform thing. The passage of time depends on the observer's frame of reference.
images


Thanks for admitting your genealogy only records human history, and makes many assumptions in doing so. It doesn't represent Earth history.
The existence of Adam and Eve is taking literally. The fall is taking literally. A belief that the Earth is only 6000 years old is also taken very literally by many Christians.
You seem to speak for Christians and what they believe. Please tell me which churches and which denominations you have attended. I have attended at least 12 different Christian denominations and churches.

I have never heard anyone talking about a 6000 year old Earth, and even if they did it has nothing to do with core Christian theology, practice, and creed.
Even if you take away the age of the Earth, there are still a dozen events in the Bible that fly in the face of science. I've listed them multiple times.
You haven't pointed to any scientific reports in the Bible. You've pointed to poetry and metaphor and tried to treat it as science, even though nothing you pointed to is a required belief in Christian creed.

The only legitimate points you made are that humans can't survive death or walk on water.

But Christians consider Jesus to be more than human.
By the way, this is a separate topic from the god of the gaps discussion. It's clear that you and many others here are 100% on the god of the gaps bandwagon.
Incorrect. God of the gaps is atheist invention.

The God of the gaps argument points to areas where there are no scientific theories and says God lives there. More importantly, they claim as as the gaps close , God will disappear.

This is a convenient little atheist fantasy.

I'm pointing to the known universal mathematical laws of physics, and the known fine tuning of the physical constants, and asking atheists how the rational could be caused by the irrational.
 
Yes, The Bible is the Word of God.

By some Christians, but not all. Were you there when the creation of the heavens and the Earth occurred? I know that I wasn't there. I have no clue how it happened. I can only go by what The Bible says (and be aware of the issues that can arise from translating between different languages).

Yes. Adam and Eve literally existed.

Yes, "The Fall" is a historical event.

Some Christians believe that the Earth is thousands of years old (usually somewhere around 6,000 - 10,000 years old is believed). Other Christians believe that the Earth is millions or billions of years old. The age of the Earth is unknown (The Bible doesn't specify).

You have yet to demonstrate how miracles didn't or can't occur. You have yet to demonstrate how you know more about the inner-workings of the heavens and the earth than the very creator of them.

What "gaps"? It seems that you have your preconceived notions about Christianity, and you are forever going to stick to them, regardless of any input from me, Into The Night, or anyone else.
Right, you listed off several of the events that go against science and have yet to prove that your God exists and is not just a god of the gaps, or that miracles, which by their very nature, go against science, have ever happened.
 
It's witten by men, written from the perspective of men who are assumed to have been inspired to write.

There is nothing anywhere in the New Testament indicating these men are writing down dictation from a disembodied voice.

Not possible. The sun wasn't created until the fourth day.

Time is not a static uniform thing. The passage of time depends on the observer's frame of reference.
images


Thanks for admitting your genealogy only records human history, and makes many assumptions in doing so. It doesn't represent Earth history.

You seem to speak for Christians and what they believe. Please tell me which churches and which denominations you have attended. I have attended at least 12 different Christian denominations and churches.

I have never heard anyone talking about a 6000 year old Earth, and even if they did it has nothing to do with core Christian theology, practice, and creed.

You haven't pointed to any scientific reports in the Bible. You've pointed to poetry and metaphor and tried to treat it as science, even though nothing you pointed to is a required belief in Christian creed.

The only legitimate points you made are that humans can't survive death or walk on water.

But Christians consider Jesus to be more than human.

Incorrect. God of the gaps is atheist invention.

The God of the gaps argument points to areas where there are no scientific theories and says God lives there. More importantly, they claim as as the gaps close , God will disappear.

This is a convenient little atheist fantasy.

I'm pointing to the known universal mathematical laws of physics, and the known fine tuning of the physical constants, and asking atheists how the rational could be caused by the irrational.
"You haven't pointed to any scientific reports in the Bible."

I've responded to this claim multiple times and you continue to ignore it.

Clearly you aren't looking to have a serious conversation.
 
Why would the existence of video recording devices make any sort of a difference?

I've, time and time again, literally watched people deny doing what they were caught on video doing, even after they were provided and/or directly shown the video of themselves doing it.

Why would you think that all sorts of people would suddenly accept Jesus Christ as their LORD and Savior if they simply saw a video recording of him performing a miracle or two? In fact, there were plenty of people who were RIGHT THERE IN PERSON all the while he was performing miracles who still didn't accept him as their LORD and Savior.
You arrange your life around something you have never seen and never spoken to and there are no videos for people to even deny.
 
I've explained the connection between genealogy and the age of the Earth multiple times. You already replied to it, so you know exactly what I'm talking about. That means you also know that I'm not saying genealogy is age.
Your erroneous claim is stupid.

Let's get to the root of your error. You are claiming, through implication, that only those things mentioned in the Bible occurred, i.e. that if it isn't mentioned in the Bible, it didn't occur. WWII isn't mentioned in the Bible, ergo, your position is that it didn't occur.

Otherwise, many things happened outside the "geneology" you mentioned, that you are not including in the age of the earth.
 
A belief that the Earth is only 6000 years old is also taken very literally by many Christians.
You just screwed the pooch. It can't be "taken literally" unless it is written in the Bible, as you are discussing, per your context, to be taken either literally or figuratively.

It isn't written anywhere in the Bible.


Even if you take away the age of the Earth, there are still a dozen events in the Bible that fly in the face of science.
Nope. You have listed miracles, which are miracles, which means they must necessarily violate physics, by definition. You are on tap to list non-miracles that fly in the face of science.

By the way, this is a separate topic from the god of the gaps discussion.
Don't you think you should learn what that is before you invoke it?

It's clear that you and many others here are 100% on the god of the gaps bandwagon.
Am I one of them?
 
SO your claim is that you know what others think better than they do. That's astoundingly stupid.
You haven't even scratched the surface. @Ross Dolan, aka Frank Apisa, is an atheist who denies being an atheist because simply because he fears the stigma. He refers to theists as atheists to make himself feel better.

@Ross Dolan, aka Frank Apisa, lies about eveyrthing. You couldn't find a single post from him that is entirely honest.
 
View: https://youtu.be/GoYyiNRtMEE


That said or what ever this 70 yr old man prays to "his God" and have since I was 16 and my heart was broken. And it seemed to work. All the things I have done in life that were a fckup were caused by me but they were not REALLY bad things except I hurt people but mostly myself. The stories in the "Bible" are so obviously made up and the devil and hell being the first and greatest boogy man ever created are just too human inspired. It was to keep the poor and powerless on the leash to that better life in eternity. Don't fret, just follow these rules for that reward after this is over. And of course they wanted to believe this.

And to this day people want to believe this tale of a reward when the lights go out but you MUST follow these strict rules........ Cause this all powerful, all knowing and all loving God is a jealous and vengeful being and needs to be worshipped. Don't get me started on the virgin birth and somehow the Son (Sun) is the only way to this bizarre salvation.........And the irony is if these are the words of Jesus about helping the poor and treating the stranger with kindness and all the other wonderful things he stood for, that his "believers" are so far from those directives they appear to hate his words by their actions...........it is a funny world. and OBTW he is coming soon so be ready...........
 
You just screwed the pooch. It can't be "taken literally" unless it is written in the Bible, as you are discussing, per your context, to be taken either literally or figuratively.

It isn't written anywhere in the Bible.
The fact that Christians literally accepted as true is irrelevant to whether or not it literally appears in the Bible.
Nope. You have listed miracles, which are miracles, which means they must necessarily violate physics, by definition. You are on tap to list non-miracles that fly in the face of science.
Right. There's always some implausible and irrational explanation. Hence the god of the gaps. In the minds of Christians, God can magically transform the atomic structure of water to be able to support an adult male.
Don't you think you should learn what that is before you invoke it?
You're confusion is not my issue.
Am I one of them?
Irrelevant.
 
We don't know how the universe came into existence and I'm fine with that.
We can make logical inferences based on the scientific information we have for this mathematically rational, lawfully organized universe.

We know that something can't come from nothing.
We know that the rational does not come from the irrational.
We know that organization and order do not come from chance, chaos, or disorder.

The most logical inference is that the universe was caused by some kind of rational and purposeful entity or force.

The most illogical conclusion is that a mathematically rational and lawfully organized universe was caused by chance and inanimate and irrational physical forces.
 
SO your claim is that you know what others think better than they do.

Well, Trump thinks he is a winner...running a very successful operation in the White House. I think he is fucking up the country and all the people in it, including his ass-kissers.

So, yes, there are times I do.


That's astoundingly stupid.
I think you are full of shit. One of us is correct. I say it is moi.

So, as I wrote:

MY CLAIM is that every person who uses "atheist" as a self-descriptor is motivated to do so by something other than a failure to "believe" someone else's claims of a god.

I say EVERY one of them either "believes" there are no gods...or "believes" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one.

Are you saying that you do not "believe" there are no gods...or that you do not "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one?

Are you saying that everyone who lacks a "belief" in a god is, perforce, an atheist? Are all new-born babies and toddlers atheists?

C'mon. Let's get into the discussion...or are you going to continue to avoid this conversation.
 
Irrelevant.
You're the one who claimed video evidence would be key in validating the Jesus story.
The only thing that is relevant is that there is no more reason to believe in the Christian God and there is any of the thousands of other gods man has manufactured in his mind.
Bad analogy. The Norse, Roman, and Greek gods were mythological. The stories about them are mythological.

The intellectual and theological basis of Christianity is based on a historical event and a historical person.
Hence God of the gaps. It was a plague back then and persist now.
I'm the only one here who correctly uses and understands scientific theory and universal mathmatical laws. I'm not writing about gaps. I've yet to hear from one atheist how these rational mathmatical principles could just appear by chance from an inanimate and irrational cause.
 
We can make logical inferences based on the scientific information we have for this mathematically rational, lawfully organized universe.
Rightsl, and for many people that "logical inference" is a sky wizard. Which sky wizard? Well, that's going to almost entirely depend on when you were alive, where you were born and who you were born to.
We know that something can't come from nothing.
But something, ain't God, can create something from nothing?
We know that the rational does not come from the irrational.
We know that organization and order do not come from chance, chaos, or disorder

The most logical inference is that the universe was caused by some kind of rational and purposeful entity or force.

The most illogical conclusion is that a mathematically rational and lawfully organized universe was caused by chance and inanimate and irrational physical forces.
The opinion that the universe is organized is just that... And opinion. I look at the universe and I see complete disorder.

But, again, you are only reinforcing that you are a God of the gaps person.
 
You're the one who claimed video evidence would be key in validating the Jesus story.

Bad analogy. The Norse, Roman, and Greek gods were mythological. The stories about them are mythological.
Why do you believe that the story of the Christian, Hindu, Muslim,etc god is any different?
The intellectual and theological basis of Christianity is based on a historical event and a historical person.
The existence of Jesus doesn't prove the existence of the Christian god any more than the existence of Joseph Smith proves the existence of the Mormon God or Muhammed proves the existence of the Muslim God.
I'm the only one here who correctly uses and understands scientific theory and universal mathmatical laws. I'm not writing about gaps.
You are. Neither you, me or anyone else knows how the universe came into existence, how far it extends, if it ever ends and what's beyond that point if there is one.

I admit that science has yet to explain those things.

You admit that science has yet to explain those things... And then you explain what science can't buy invoking a deity.
I've yet to hear from one atheist how these rational mathmatical principles could just appear by chance from an inanimate and irrational cause.
There's no reason to believe the equation you posted is doing anything but explaining the chaos after the fact.
 
Last edited:
Well, Trump thinks he is a winner...running a very successful operation in the White House. I think he is fucking up the country and all the people in it, including his ass-kissers.

So, yes, there are times I do.



I think you are full of shit. One of us is correct. I say it is moi.

So, as I wrote:

MY CLAIM is that every person who uses "atheist" as a self-descriptor is motivated to do so by something other than a failure to "believe" someone else's claims of a god.

I say EVERY one of them either "believes" there are no gods...or "believes" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one.

Are you saying that you do not "believe" there are no gods...or that you do not "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one?

Are you saying that everyone who lacks a "belief" in a god is, perforce, an atheist? Are all new-born babies and toddlers atheists?

C'mon. Let's get into the discussion...or are you going to continue to avoid this conversation.

So much verbiage just to show everyone you don't understand the concept.

Save yourself some time just post that you don't understand the position. And it will save time.
 
Why do you believe that the story of the Christian, Hindu, Muslim,etc god is any different?

The existence of Jesus doesn't prove the existence of the Christian god any more than the existence of Joseph Smith proves the existence of the Mormon God or Muhammed proves the existence of the Muslim God.
The Avatars of Hinduism are mythological. Not historical. The literary style of the Baghavad Gita is mythology.

Islam reveres the Abrahamic God, and is based on historical persons: Jesus and Muhammed.

Shamanism, paganism, and animism do not claim to be religious traditions based on historical events and historical people.
You are. Neither you, me or anyone else knows how the universe came into existence, how far it extends, if it ever ends and what's beyond that point if there is one.I admit that science has yet to explain those things.
You're not even will to say you are convinced and thoroughly believe the cause of the universe and it's rational-lawful organization is because of a purely inanimate physical, non-rational reason.

So you are agnostic, not atheist.

You admit that science has yet to explain those things... And then you explain what science can't buy invoking a deity.

There's no reason to believe the equation you posted is doing anything but explaining the chaos after the fact.
There is no conceivable chance science will ever explain what came before this universe, why it happened, why it's lawfully organized and mathematically rational.

Those are philosophical questions

Science is an empirical method that makes accurate predictions of the momentum, transformation, and conservation of matter and energy.

Logic and rationality are our tools to investigate philosophical and metaphysical questions.

You yourself said you can't explain why the universe appears rational and designed, and you're not even willing to say you are convinced it is because of purely inanimate and irrational physical reasons.
 
Back
Top