My favorite argument for the existence of God

[Michael]

lol, and Thor is an expert on the ancient Norse religion too, is he?

AFAIK, Thor never walked the planet as a human being, nor is he currently recognized as an "expert" on the topic of God.

Jesus is not counted as an expert on the claims of Christianity WHEN HE IS ONE OF THE CLAIMS. Thaty is called circular reasoning and it's a logical fallacy. Naughty naughty.

Jesus is a world recognized expert on the topic of "God". Christianity is simply one religious interpretation of his teachings about God. Islam is another.

 

[Michael]

You are not quite right, the Qur'an recognises Jesus as one of the holy Prophets just as the Qur'an also mentions Jonah and Mary. There is nothing said in the Qur'an about what Jesus taught although his miracles were mentioned.

I realize that Islam and Christianity have differing views about who Jesus was, and what he was about, but both religions recognize him as an "expert" on the topic of God. Between both religions, they currently make up over half the planet. That's about as close to a "consensus" (of expertise) as anyone is likely to get.

That was the only point I was trying to make.

 

[Kylie]

AFAIK, Thor never walked the planet as a human being, nor is he currently recognized as an "expert" on the topic of God.

Excuse me, but Thor has walked the Earth. I watched the movies.

And if Thor is a God, then he is indeed an expert on gods.

Jesus is a world recognized expert on the topic of "God". Christianity is simply one religious interpretation of his teachings about God. Islam is another.

That's assuming he ever existed and was actually a god.

 

[Michael]

Excuse me, but Thor has walked the Earth. I watched the movies.

And if Thor is a God, then he is indeed an expert on gods.



That's assuming he ever existed and was actually a god.

So what's the percentage of human beings living on Earth today who agree that Thor is an expert on the topic of God? How does that figure compare to Jesus?

 

[Skreeper]

Wow, .. what arrogance, just because you couldn't see loving anyone you don't know (especially someone who believes in God, since you're an atheist) you want to stop everyone else from loving too?

So if I was driving down the highway and found your car flipped over with you trapped inside and the engine caught on fire, and I ran out to pry the door open, and save you and your daughter whose name I don't know, nor care to know, you would find this "incredibly disturbing"? Why would anyone risk their life to save someone they never met and don't know?
Well I'm guilty of this many times over, so you better get me off this Forum!!!

I have met people like that, we were driving down the road and seen this teenage girl stuck at the light because she couldn't shift her older car into drive, so my friend said: F-her, just keep on going, she should of get her f'n car fixed.
And yes, I pulled of to the side of the road, in the middle of a Phoenix heat wave and made my friend to come and help me push her car off the road, and stayed there till I got the shifter to work.
I can imagine what you would have done!?
And yes, she was in tears, and couldn't stop thanking me. Don't you just hate people like that?

Yes, .. I could see that now, .. which is why nursing students are advised not to help anyone in an accident trapped in a car, .. so they would not be sued!



I love everyone I ever talked to, or meet on the street. I will help anyone and everyone, even those I don't know the names, or what their children's names are, or if they love me or not, and neither you, nor the Moderators here who take your side will stop me, .. OK!

You can get me kicked off the Forum, but that will not stop me being me, and loving everyone just as my Teacher Jesus Christ taught me to do.
I KNOW what you're doing, and I don't take kindly to be labeled a stalker so I ask you kindly to STOP IT. If you don't agree with my views on love, and God, and Evolution, there are different ways to approach it than what you're doing.



Which comes from? You know, telling someone that they are wrong usually takes some effort, especially taking the time to show them they're wrong!?
When you tell people in person that they are wrong, do you smile, and tell them gently and kindly, none threatening like? Or you make them know right off the bat that; "they are not your friend", and they better not ASSUME you are theirs!?



OH NO YOU DON'T, you will NOT make me out to be some pervert, stalker, .. criminal just because you're an atheist and I'm a Believer by making this post as a cry for HELP!

"OOhh, I'm a victim, .. I'm a victim, look at my avatar picture, I'm so innocent!!!"

NO, .. if moderators going to judge me on THIS your POST, which is your pathetic attempt to criminalize me as proof that I intended to harm you, and NOT from my letter, then go ahead, kick me off this Forum.

.. unless this is the "atheist in you talking", following the famous Atheist of atheists of all time:

Hey, .. I'm a companionate guy, all you have to do is apologize?

Ssheessh: "What's my favorite colour? What's my daughter's name?"
Thank God I didn't guess your daughters name, you'd have the cops banging down my door with weapons drawn. What in the world does "knowing your favorite color and knowing your daughters name have to do with someone loving you, or any other human?

So when someone says: "I love children!" that should be enough to charge them with child stalking?
"I heard him officer, that pervert over there said "I love children!" And I don't care if he's the Kindergarten teacher, he should not love children who are not in his classroom when he don't know ANYTHING ABOUT THEM!"

If you really don't understand why telling strangers on the internet that you love them is creepy then you really have a problem. Especially if you keep doing it after being asked to stop it. Seriously get help.

 

[Jimmy D]

"It Never Happens".

What "never happens"?

 

[HitchSlap]

Are we having fun yet?

 

[Skreeper]

Good morning Jimmy D.!

Evolution. Evolutionists, including Dawkins says that "No animal of ANY species has EVER speciated into another species during its lifetime."

So how did gorillas evolve into humans?

Over many many generations. The important part of that quote is: "...during its lifetime."

And as a sidenote: Gorillas didn't evolve into humans. We share a common ancestor.

 

[HitchSlap]

So how did gorillas evolve into humans?

By committee, of course.

 

[Arius]

No "evolutionist" ever said that. Please stop making that claim.

So are you saying now that Evolution (I gave the definition many times already) where one species of a type, like a gorilla does turn into, or speciate into, or morphs into, or gives birth to another completely different species like a human?
Please answer me that simple question, .. does, or does not a gorilla evolve, turn, speciate, morphs or gives birth to a human in it's lifetime?
I don't believe paleontologists that bones of one species evolves into the bone of another species, .. I just can't. But hey, I'm a scientist, so all they have to do is have a camera in one of the graves on a gorilla skeleton, and show me how it speciate into a human?

The skull & bones are the result of evolution.

Hey, I'm going by what Evolutionists wrote, that's all:
Transitional Fossils

Now please look at this:

especially time 1:14 - Pastor Dawkins: "the nostrils move backwards, .. move backwards on the scull, moved backwards on the snout, .." Is he serious? I didn't see it move, did you?

How funny that you finally got something right by accident. Individuals don't evolve, so one skull doesn't evolve into another. But you probably don't understand what you're saying or my answer so I'm expecting a nonsensical response.

Isn't a population of gorillas or a population of humans made up of individuals?
If yes, then what nonsense are you talking about?
if no, then please explain how, or why a "population of gorillas or humans" are NOT made up of individuals?
Thank you.

If none of those individuals evolve, you can bet all the transitional fossils that Mr. Dawkins has that the population will not 'evolve/transition' either. In other words; The Father of Evolution admits that "Evolution never happens".
Please provide evidence contrary to what I have proven over and over again with evidence?

 

[Speedwell]

So are you saying now that Evolution (I gave the definition many times already) where one species of a type, like a gorilla does turn into, or speciate into, or morphs into, or gives birth to another completely different species like a human?
Please answer me that simple question, .. does, or does not a gorilla evolve, turn, speciate, morphs or gives birth to a human in it's lifetime?
I don't believe paleontologists that bones of one species evolves into the bone of another species, .. I just can't. But hey, I'm a scientist, so all they have to do is have a camera in one of the graves on a gorilla skeleton, and show me how it speciate into a human?



Hey, I'm going by what Evolutionists wrote, that's all:
Transitional Fossils

Now please look at this:

especially time 1:14 - Pastor Dawkins: "the nostrils move backwards, .. move backwards on the scull, moved backwards on the snout, .." Is he serious? I didn't see it move, did you?



Isn't a population of gorillas or a population of humans made up of individuals?
If yes, then what nonsense are you talking about?
if no, then please explain how, or why a "population of gorillas or humans" are NOT made up of individuals?
Thank you.

If none of those individuals evolve, you can bet all the transitional fossils that Mr. Dawkins has that the population will not 'evolve/transition' either. In other words; The Father of Evolution admits that "Evolution never happens".
Please provide evidence contrary to what I have proven over and over again with evidence?

You haven't "proved" anything. All you have done is present and demand proof for a grotesque misrepresentation of the theory of evolution. I don't see what your point is at all.

 

[Arius]

I suppose you could call it fun - trying to decide fairly whether the egregious misrepresentation here of evolution, evolutionary theory, and those who accept it, is deliberate straw-manning or plain ignorance.

Or, perhaps, a mixture of both...

So what's worse, .. an idiot like me, or an entire Forum that claims to know what Evolution is, what it does, .. how it works and don't have any evidence or proof to correct him?

Repeating that: "evolution happens over a very long period of time effecting an entire generation that is, from what you guys tell me, is without individuals" is not an answer.

 

[Arius]

I suppose you could call it fun - trying to decide fairly whether the egregious misrepresentation here of evolution, evolutionary theory, and those who accept it, is deliberate straw-manning or plain ignorance.

Or, perhaps, a mixture of both...

 

[Arius]

By committee, of course.

.. which consists of 'no individuals', .. correct?

 

[Skreeper]

Why are you so obsessed with Dawkins? He is a great biologist but not the only one on this planet. How about you show some stuff from Francis Collins?

 

[HitchSlap]

So what's worse, .. an idiot like me,

Well, idiots can be dangerous.

or an entire Forum that claims to know what Evolution is, what it does, .. how it works

The evidence is there for all to see, and is fact, whether we all claim it or we all don't.

and don't have any evidence or proof to correct him?

"We" aren't responsible for your ignorance. That's on you.

Repeating that: "evolution happens over a very long period of time effecting an entire generation that is, from what you guys tell me, is without individuals" is not an answer.

Again, we're not responsible for comprehension. If you have questions, you should ask.

There are many on here who have tried to explain ToE, in simple terms for someone unacquainted with evolutionary theory, or the scientific method, but you won't pipe down long enough to really digest the information. ToE is not easy, nor can and adequate understanding be gained in a matter of several posts. How long do you think it takes to become a skilled heart surgeon? Well, ToE has a tremendous body of work behind it - 159 years worth - so for those of us who have studied ToE to have grasped an understanding of it, consider your creationists PRATTS a thing of humor.

If you truly would like to understand (which I really don't think you do, and at this point are probably coming to the unpleasant realization that ToE is not at all what the creationists have told you it is), then show some humility, and ask proper questions, then listen to what the answers really are.

 

[HitchSlap]

.. which consists of 'no individuals', .. correct?

Individuals a committee make.

 

[Arius]

Over many many generations. The important part of that quote is: "...during its lifetime."

And as a sidenote: Gorillas didn't evolve into humans. We share a common ancestor.

Back to that mysterious species you guys keep referring to as the "Common Ancestor" Ay? But you won't tell me "what species that mysterious creature you call Common Ancestor was?"

And what do we really know about these mysterious creatures, .. you show in cartoons and Evolutionary Indoctrinating Films

.. they lived somewhat like humans, but no mention what species they were?
Why is that?
Were they human?

Yes, .. "during it's (individual to population to earths human population) lifetime".
Look at the above documentary (or should I say human mockumentary) evolution is all about skull & bones, no actual scientific observation of gorillas (or any one species) turning, speciating into another completely different species, .. NONE! Anton Szandor LaVey could have done this documentary as well, or wait, maybe he did? Hear that eerie voice?

 

[Arius]

Individuals a committee make.

Where the 'committee' of gorillas evolves/speciate into human, but NOT any of the individuals. They stay apes whose skull and bones after a few thousand years are valued more than the "individual" when it was alive. Like the poor Aborigines.

 

[HitchSlap]

Where the 'committee' of gorillas evolves/speciate into human, but NOT any of the individuals. They stay apes whose skull and bones after a few thousand years are valued more than the "individual" when it was alive. Like the poor Aborigines.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

But here's something useful in the meantime.