Atheistic Evolutionists, Logic, and Faith

[rwdeese]

1. Matter came out of nothing. 2. Matter formed itself! Wow!

Yep, you are definitely proving you do NOT hold a Ph.D.  It's called the law of conservation of mass: matter cannot be created nor destroyed!!

I wouldn't need to pass 1st grade to realize that nothing in our known understanding is derived from nothing. This is faith at its highest level - making fantasy believable! This is unreasonable, illogical, and is based upon science fiction. Something coming from nothing has no basis in knowledge, science, provable experiments, or observable information. So, foundationally, to believe in a designer is one step more logical than to believe that everything around us came from nothing! Why? We do have knowledge, science, provable experiments, and observable information that things designed come from a designer.

[rwdeese]

I'm sorry for sounding mean, but it is EXTREMELY freaking frustrating dealing with people who mire scientific facts and denounce all of the progress we as a species have made thus far.

If you are so right, why the insecurity that is being expressed through anger. I am not angry at you or the evolutionists. There is no reason to be. I do get a kick out of all the contradictions and how most who embrace various forms of evolutionary thought have proven over and over again that evolutionary thought is in no way monolithic. It is almost like one needs to pick what "denomination" they want to belong to. None the less, I forgive you. Blessings!

[rwdeese]

but i have seen evidence in this forum that uses these tactics to make the other party feel inferior.

I agree, it shouldn't be to go-to tactic to make the other side feel stupid...but sometimes pointing out how silly an argument is can be necessary for growth and change.

Do I agree with this one 

To really think that people believe it is more reasonable to believe that something came from nothing with zero evidence even in life today, but to reject the normative observable understanding that design come from a designer is very silly indeed!

[queenofnines]

Something coming from nothing has no basis in knowledge, science, provable experiments, or observable information. So, foundationally, to believe in a designer is one step more logical than to believe that everything around us came from nothing! Why? We do have knowledge, science, provable experiments, and observable information that things designed come from a designer.

Something didn't come from nothing, though.  Not sure why you are reverting to the Big Bang or abiogenesis, as these are SEPARATE fields from evolution.  In the case of the Big Bang: a tiny, dense singularity is still something (not "nothing"!).  And it was quite a deal of "something" when it contained all of the matter in the universe! 

Just because we're not sure what cause that YET, who cares?  I'm sure once scientists find out what caused the Big Bang, it still won't be good enough for believers.  Then people will be like, "Okay what caused what caused the Big Bang?" and so on to infinity.  And anyway, merely slapping a magical label of god on everything doesn't explain anything, it simply encourages people to stop asking questions and exploring!!

For your designer argument, who takes credit for all of the BAD design in the world?  (Example: the human spine cannot adequately support a person's body weight by standing upright; it's why people are susceptible to bad backs, bad knees, and the feet (arched) are extremely vulnerable)  The devil??

[rwdeese]

Something didn't come from nothing, though.  Not sure why you are reverting to the Big Bang or abiogenesis, as these are SEPARATE fields from evolution.  In the case of the Big Bang: a tiny, dense singularity is still something (not "nothing"!).  And it was quite a deal of "something" when it contained all of the matter in the universe!

 

They are intimately tied together. In fact, I do not know any no theistic evolutionists that ascribes to anything else. I better question is why are you trying so hard to separate these issues.

1. Where exactly did this "dense singularity" come from: Oh, I know... from nothing! I admire your faith!

Just because we're not sure what cause that YET, who cares?

Now this has got to be the quote of the century. Who cares that someone came up with an imaginary concept - yet to be proven in ANY capacity whatseover - and yet no one should care? Interesting! That statement would eliminate scientific research, let alone God! This is getting better - and I knew it would. Anytime one bases all reason on unreasonable notions, one will find themselves saying strange things! It may be compared to a liar. When a liar says something, they must make up more lies. The more lies they make up, the more strange and bizarre the lies get. Anytime one basis their faith on unproable fantasy, then the defesne of that fantasy actaully becomes more bizzarre than the fantasy itself.

I'm sure once scientists find out what caused the Big Bang, it still won't be good enough for believers.  Then people will be like, "Okay what caused what caused the Big Bang?" and so on to infinity.  And anyway, merely slapping a magical label of god on everything doesn't explain anything, it simply encourages people to stop asking questions and exploring!!

At least the very concept of a designer has observable confirmation. Therefore, it already has a greater foundation for reason than placing ones faith in "nothing."

For your designer argument, who takes credit for all of the BAD design in the world?  (Example: the human spine cannot adequately support a person's body weight by standing upright; it's why people are susceptible to bad backs, bad knees, and the feet (arched) are extremely vulnerable)  The devil??

Absolutely! It is all about contracts and honor!

[shernajwine]

rwdeese~i will leave the debating to you. although considering the debate on this subject has been raging since darwin himself....i'm not sure what progress you will make here 

and actually, the debate has raged since even biblical times. because evolution is idolatry.  the debate realistically centers around the existence of God. for atheism to be true, there must be an alternate explanation—other than a Creator—for how the universe and life came into existence. evolution is an enabler for atheism. evolutionary scientists likely would not admit that their goal is to give an alternate explanation of the origins of life, and thereby to give a foundation for atheism, but according to the bible, that is exactly why the theory of evolution exists.

Romans 1:25 declares, “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.”

evolution gives atheists a basis for explaining how life exists apart from a Creator God. evolution denies the need for a God to be involved in the universe. evolution is the “creation theory” for the religion of atheism.
http://www.gotquestions.org/creation-evolution.html

but you appear to be enjoying yourself.  i guess debating just isn't my cup of tea! 

[rwdeese]

rwdeese~i will leave the debating to you. although considering the debate on this subject has been raging since darwin himself....i'm not sure what progress you will make here 

and actually, the debate has raged since even biblical times. because evolution is idolatry.  the debate realistically centers around the existence of God. for atheism to be true, there must be an alternate explanation—other than a Creator—for how the universe and life came into existence. evolution is an enabler for atheism. evolutionary scientists likely would not admit that their goal is to give an alternate explanation of the origins of life, and thereby to give a foundation for atheism, but according to the bible, that is exactly why the theory of evolution exists.

Romans 1:25 declares, “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.”

evolution gives atheists a basis for explaining how life exists apart from a Creator God. evolution denies the need for a God to be involved in the universe. evolution is the “creation theory” for the religion of atheism.
http://www.gotquestions.org/creation-evolution.html

but you appear to be enjoying yourself.  i guess debating just isn't my cup of tea! 

I have just been playing. I haven't really began debating yet. lol I really don't have time right now to have any real debates. The ones here are militant, so it isn't about winning an argument. You cant win arguments with such closed minds. I actually began responding because of how I see them continually belittle others. No need to try to debate them. It is about them trying to justify their faith! You may have noticed I have hardly tried to justify Christianity at all during these discussions. I have just been playing with all the weak arguments, imaginary evidences, weak logic, and fantasy/science fiction reasoning. Its a kick... althought I don't know how long I want to play in their sandbox...lol You have a beautifu heart. Don't let these guys scrape it!

[shernajwine]

You have a beautifu heart. Don't let these guys scrape it!

thank you! Jesus protects my heart   
i'm probably not a good debater anyhow though because rather than go back and forth i would rather just hug people LOL i don't think good debates include hugging and telling people you love them even if they think you're a complete idiot! 

but i enjoy your posts very much. even if you are trolling 

[queenofnines]

1. Where exactly did this "dense singularity" come from: Oh, I know... from nothing! I admire your faith!

See, I told you that you would say this.

It did not come from nothing, it came from a natural process that scientists don't have all the details on yet.  Your camp looks at the Big Bang as a "beginning" when it is not.  It is merely the point in "time" that caused us.

Who cares that someone came up with an imaginary concept - yet to be proven in ANY capacity whatseover - and yet no one should care? Interesting!

No proof?!  Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation.  "The CMBR is well explained as radiation left over from an early stage in the creation of the universe, and its discovery is considered a LANDMARK CONFIRMATION of the Big Bang model of the universe." ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Microwave_Background_Radiation

And I wasn't trying to say scientists should stop searching for answers!!  All I was saying is that it is an extremely odd position on the believer's part to not be satisfied by what we've discovered thus far.

At least the very concept of a designer has observable confirmation. Therefore, it already has a greater foundation for reason than placing ones faith in "nothing."

"Design" is in the eye of the beholder.  And evolution has observable confirmation.  It's as solid as Newton's theory of gravity and Einstein's theory of relativity.  You just can't accept it because you know it essentially disproves the Christian god.

[queenofnines]

for atheism to be true, there must be an alternate explanation—other than a Creator—for how the universe and life came into existence. evolution is an enabler for atheism. evolutionary scientists likely would not admit that their goal is to give an alternate explanation of the origins of life, and thereby to give a foundation for atheism, but according to the bible, that is exactly why the theory of evolution exists.

   Your pastor/creationist site has brainwashed you well with this slick talk.  Evolution is not "an enabler" for atheism.  It is simply scientifically observing the truth, a truth that happens to conflict with a creator god.  Believers must think there is a real conspiracy on their hands considering scientists have discovered natural explanations for the universe and 93% of them don't believe in god.  You trust science when it comes to technology, medicine, and everything else in your life; you have no problem accepting gravity or the theory of atoms; but when it comes to evolution or the Big Bang (science that disproves the Christian god), OF COURSE the scientists got it wrong!!!

Seriously now, think about what I just said.

[rwdeese]

RW: Where exactly did this "dense singularity" come from: Oh, I know... from nothing! I admire your faith![/quote]

See, I told you that you would say this.

Great! This still doesn't change the fact of your strong faith.

It did not come from nothing, it came from a natural process that scientists don't have all the details on yet.  Your camp looks at the Big Bang as a "beginning" when it is not.  It is merely the point in "time" that caused us.

Placing scientist before a fantasy does not change it to reality. The FACT remains that there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that anything has, will, or will ever self create itself. This will always be illogical, irrational, and faith based. Merely saying "they don't have all the details" yet does not change the facts.

Who cares that someone came up with an imaginary concept - yet to be proven in ANY capacity whatseover - and yet no one should care? Interesting!

No proof?!  Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation.  "The CMBR is well explained as radiation left over from an early stage in the creation of the universe, and its discovery is considered a LANDMARK CONFIRMATION of the Big Bang model of the universe." ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Microwave_Background_Radiation

And I wasn't trying to say scientists should stop searching for answers!!  All I was saying is that it is an extremely odd position on the believer's part to not be satisfied by what we've discovered thus far.

It isn't a dissatifiaction in scientific discovery. It is being dissatisfied by the attempt by those who are atheists to reinterpret the real data based upon evolutionary presuppostions.

Oh FYI: Recent Cosmic Microwave Background data supports creationist cosmologies: http://creation.com/recent-cosmic-microwave-background-data-supports-creationist-cosmologies

RW: At least the very concept of a designer has observable confirmation. Therefore, it already has a greater foundation for reason than placing ones faith in "nothing."

"Design" is in the eye of the beholder.

Yes, but it is where reasonable people begin.

And evolution has observable confirmation.

Don't get confused between adaptation and evolution. They are totally different. 

It's as solid as Newton's theory of gravity and Einstein's theory of relativity.

Wow!

You just can't accept it because you know it essentially disproves the Christian god.

There isn't anything out there yet that has disproved the Biblical God!

[rwdeese]

  Your pastor/creationist site has brainwashed you well with this slick talk.  Evolution is not "an enabler" for atheism.

Oh really!?

It is simply scientifically observing the truth, a truth that happens to conflict with a creator god.

It is not a truth. It doesn't even qualify as a scientific theory.

Believers must think there is a real conspiracy on their hands considering scientists have discovered natural explanations for the universe and 93% of them don't believe in god.

Too funny! I know of scientists that are not allowed to work at many universities because they do not ascribe to all this monkey business. Evolution has created a cult mind-set. Instead of scientists trying to discover the truth, they will boycott those who disagree. This eliminates the whole picture from being discovered, and forces those who want a job to merely blab the status quo language to get paid.

 

You trust science when it comes to technology, medicine, and everything else in your life; you have no problem accepting gravity or the theory of atoms; but when it comes to evolution or the Big Bang (science that disproves the Christian god), OF COURSE the scientists got it wrong!!!

There is a vast difference between real science and evolutionary fantasy!

[queenofnines]

Sherna, in relation to that website you posted (I've been to it before myself as a Christian):

"Scientists who advocate evolution are rejecting a plausible theory of origins without even honestly examining its merits, because it does not fit their illogically narrow definition of “science.”"

The truth hurts.  See how the author is trying to take a defensive position here.  And no, a 6,000-year-old earth is NOT plausible!!


"Evolution is the “creation theory” for the religion of atheism."

Atheists find it hilarious when believers call our position "a religion"...because you don't realize that by accusing us of being a religion, you're using the term religion as an insult.  Pretty odd considering Christianity is a religion.  Haha!  


"According to the Bible, the choice is clear. We can believe the Word of our omnipotent and omniscient God, or we can believe the illogically biased, “scientific” explanations of fools."

Please, go live in a cave then, because if a believer partakes in modern society in any way, they are blaspheming god by taking advantage of inescapable scientific advancements.  Your fridge, your vaccines, your car, your computer, the Internet...all made by "fools"!!

P.S. The Bible says anyone who calls another a fool is in danger of hell fire.  I hope the author of these quotes is right with god!!

[queenofnines]

Illusion of design and good explanation of evolution: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt6xBUGRELI&playnext_from=TL&videos=at0tw4ldi1A + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V2alttOX44&playnext_from=TL&videos=9jy3QY4RMHk

[liljp617]

And frankly I've just grown tired of having a "discussion" with a random website from a self-claimed international evangelist.  It's close to "discussing" the topic by myself.  It would be just as easy for me to go find random doctoral dissertations from evolutionary biologists and take random quotes from them any time I wanted to counter something, but that's boring, and it's not a debate or discussion.

sorry for boring you mate.

us idiotic creationists will just never match up with the supreme intellect you apparently exude with every typed word 

You have a way of reading quite far into things and creating things that weren't said or implied.

The point is I would like to talk to you (or other people on the forum) and not random websites I could Google and find.  I want to know your position; I want your description of your position.  I don't want someone else to describe your position.