Evolution

[GodSchism]

This follows a previous response to a post I made in Body and Spirit. I thought it deserved attention because I believe it is an interesting topic.

First off, I'll say that I personally believe that Jesus Christ is God; but for the atheist's sake let us say Jesus is not God.

Life is a mystery. All we truly know is that it came to be from the water. It has evolved, as far as we know, to the human being; of which in a human beings dimensions have sprung reason and creativity. Can we agree that a God would in fact take our form so that reason and creativity would be in this God? If a God took any shape, it would necessarily be human form or similar because of all we suggest as a God-being is that God would have reason and creativity. If we can agree that the form of God or an immortal is here already as God would take the human form then we can move on...

Where is life evolving to? It is evident that it has gotten more complex since it's advent, striving for the human form; as far as we can assess. Thought is always evolving too; as what we knew and what we know will not be the same when we know more. However, what does thought have to do with evolution? Well, we can say that if a God took a form it would necessarily be the human form because as all we consider God to be is a being of reasoning and creativity--all that we currently possess.

Life exists only to exist--to be. Wouldn't the final step in evolution be the production of an all powerful being. One that could exist forever without tasting death. Immortality is the ultimate goal, that I believe evolution is striving for. And why not? The whole point of life is to live--why would evolution disregard this fact in it's pursuits.
Does anyone agree with what I'm trying to say--that immortality is the ultimate achievement of evolution?

Feel free to argue or disagree with the argument. Perhaps we can rationalize or come to a better understanding of what I am trying to say.

 

[JGL53]

This follows a previous response to a post I made in Body and Spirit. I thought it deserved attention because I believe it is an interesting topic.

First off, I'll say that I personally believe that Jesus Christ is God; but for the atheist's sake let us say Jesus is not God.

Life is a mystery. All we truly know is that it came to be from the water. It has evolved, as far as we know, to the human being; of which in a human beings dimensions have sprung reason and creativity. Can we agree that a God would in fact take our form so that reason and creativity would be in this God? If a God took any shape, it would necessarily be human form or similar because of all we suggest as a God-being is that God would have reason and creativity. If we can agree that the form of God or an immortal is here already as God would take the human form then we can move on...

Where is life evolving to? It is evident that it has gotten more complex since it's advent, striving for the human form; as far as we can assess. Thought is always evolving too; as what we knew and what we know will not be the same when we know more. However, what does thought have to do with evolution? Well, we can say that if a God took a form it would necessarily be the human form because as all we consider God to be is a being of reasoning and creativity--all that we currently possess.

Life exists only to exist--to be. Wouldn't the final step in evolution be the production of an all powerful being. One that could exist forever without tasting death. Immortality is the ultimate goal, that I believe evolution is striving for. And why not? The whole point of life is to live--why would evolution disregard this fact in it's pursuits.
Does anyone agree with what I'm trying to say--that immortality is the ultimate achievement of evolution?

Feel free to argue or disagree with the argument. Perhaps we can rationalize or come to a better understanding of what I am trying to say.

There is no good reason whatsoever to think that evolution is "striving for" anything whatsoever.

As time goes on, more and more facts come to the fore indicating that evolution is a matter of chance, randomness, necessity, and contingency.

Consider the fact of how much of a teeny, tiny part of the Universe is our galaxy, much less our solar system, much less the earth.

Consider the fact that the modal type of life today is bacteria, just as it has been since life first evolved on earth some 3.7 Billion or so years ago.

Consider the fact that multicellular life did not evolve until bacteria had existed for nearly 3 billion years.

Consider the fact that if a meteor hadn't hit the Gulf of Mexico near the Yucatan peninsula about 65 millions years ago, dinosaurs would probably still rule the earth and the largest extant mammal would be the size of a large rat.

Consider the fact that 80 per cent of extant multicellular life is anthropods, most of which are insects, most of which in turn are beetles (200,000 species, probably).

Consider that humans are a tiny twig at the end of a branch of the tree of life, only around for the much less than one hundredth of one per cent of the time the earth has existed.

All this leads you to the conclusion that humans are a big deal - that we are what evolution has been striving for all this time?

Do you know anything at all - really - about the evolutionary record?

Maybe you should read "Full House" by Stephen Gould and "The Ancester's Tale" by Richard Dawkins. That would start you on an education in evolution - if you are actually interested in that sort of thing.

 

[GodSchism]

There is no good reason whatsoever to think that evolution is "striving for" anything whatsoever.

As time goes on, more and more facts come to the fore indicating that evolution is a matter of chance, randomness, necessity, and contingency.

Consider the fact of how much of a teeny, tiny part of the Universe is our galaxy, much less our solar system, much less the earth.

Consider the fact that the modal type of life today is bacteria, just as it has been since life first evolved on earth some 3.7 Billion or so years ago.

Consider the fact that multicellular life did not evolve until bacteria had existed for nearly 3 billion years.

Consider the fact that if a meteor hadn't hit the Gulf of Mexico near the Yucatan peninsula about 65 millions years ago, dinosaurs would probably still rule the earth and the largest extant mammal would be the size of a large rat.

Consider the fact that 80 per cent of extant multicellular life is anthropods, most of which are insects, most of which in turn are beetles (200,000 species, probably).

Consider that humans are a tiny twig at the end of a branch of the tree of life, only around for the much less than one hundredth of one per cent of the time the earth has existed.

All this leads you to the conclusion that humans are a big deal - that we are what evolution has been striving for all this time?

Do you know anything at all - really - about the evolutionary record?

Maybe you should read "Full House" by Stephen Gould and "The Ancester's Tale" by Richard Dawkins. That would start you on an education in evolution - if you are actually interested in that sort of thing.

Yea I see your points. But to say that the human form or any higher form of life came around by chance may be a miscalculation on your part. Life is evolving and there seems to be an intelligent design to it. If it is all just randomness why would life evolve to a point where it's creation begins to ask questions to it's design? That cannot be by chance; rather, inevitability--that perhaps life knows on a certain level that it exists and is striving for an ultimate design.
But to say that life evolved from chance or randomness is a half-truth. However it came to evolve, it had to adapt to the environment; thus it began to ask questions through the senses. Think about it, from what we consider the most insignificant life, a single celled organism, sprung all life as we know it. It sprung because on an insignificant level it knew that it existed; so on a spiritual level it began to ask questions because it obviously knew, spiritually, that it existed in an environment or world that was larger than it. That is where the five senses are derived, from the spiritual undertaking that life endured. With the five senses we are able to ask an infinite amount of questions, which in the grasping of a spiritual sense came thought and reasoning, creativity, what have you...In the spirit of life, it is possible that we are carrying these questions or sensations by and through the drive of life.

However, insignificant our planet, our galaxy is in the grand scheme of things, it is wonder of how life exists. Whether it exists in other portions of the universe is irrelevant. Where ever life exists is significant. Men just don't see it that way because they gaze off into a seemingly endless universe and conclude that we are insignificant. But where ever life exists--it is spiritually driven by the question and the question by the senses. Whatever it gathers of itself, similar operations are being performed all over the universe. All are evolving in a similar fashion, as we what we know as a physical reality, evolution is concurrent to that reality, where ever life may exist.
How does life exist if it doesn't question it's reality? How does it adapt if the questions it asks are not a valid experience. Chance and randomness just seem appropriate because we can ask why didn't life go off into a different direction; when we know very well that the environment dictates the direction it goes off in. And what is the ultimate question to life, but Why? Why exist at all? Therefore, man concluded and handed off lifes questions in the assumption that there is a God above all. But when you get to God--God can say that he created all life but a God that always existed cannot answer the question why he exists, if he always existed then he has no answer to that question. That sort of God can never say where he came from or why he came to be because he always existed. In that respect, God becomes a child to his own existence.
Jesus explains it clearly when he says, the man old in days would not hesitate to ask an infant seven days old what is the place in life and that man will live!

 

[JGL53]

Rather than a tedious point by point answer to your objections, I can only point out that your epistle is just one long paean to the time-honored argument from incomprehensibility/inconceivability/incredulity. Look this up in a Logic 101 textbook. Such an argument is fallacious.

If you need another example of why, I refer you to cargo cultism. Primitive (by our standards) people on isolated islands, upon initial visitation from planes loaded with neat stuff, can only conclude that the humans were given these "complex" goods by the gods, since it is inconceivable to them that mere humans could do such things. They then pray to the gods to have their favored humans bring them more cool stuff. When they don't they get mad, not at the gods, but at the greedy and privileged humans who have forgotten them and are no longer coming around sharing with them all the products of modern human technology - what the primitives believe are god- produced.

It's not a perfect analogy - what analogy is - but I think you catch my drift.

Have a nice day.

 

[elman]

This follows a previous response to a post I made in Body and Spirit. I thought it deserved attention because I believe it is an interesting topic.

First off, I'll say that I personally believe that Jesus Christ is God; but for the atheist's sake let us say Jesus is not God.

Life is a mystery. All we truly know is that it came to be from the water. It has evolved, as far as we know, to the human being; of which in a human beings dimensions have sprung reason and creativity. Can we agree that a God would in fact take our form so that reason and creativity would be in this God? If a God took any shape, it would necessarily be human form or similar because of all we suggest as a God-being is that God would have reason and creativity. If we can agree that the form of God or an immortal is here already as God would take the human form then we can move on...

Where is life evolving to? It is evident that it has gotten more complex since it's advent, striving for the human form; as far as we can assess. Thought is always evolving too; as what we knew and what we know will not be the same when we know more. However, what does thought have to do with evolution? Well, we can say that if a God took a form it would necessarily be the human form because as all we consider God to be is a being of reasoning and creativity--all that we currently possess.

Life exists only to exist--to be. Wouldn't the final step in evolution be the production of an all powerful being. One that could exist forever without tasting death. Immortality is the ultimate goal, that I believe evolution is striving for. And why not? The whole point of life is to live--why would evolution disregard this fact in it's pursuits.
Does anyone agree with what I'm trying to say--that immortality is the ultimate achievement of evolution?

Feel free to argue or disagree with the argument. Perhaps we can rationalize or come to a better understanding of what I am trying to say.

I don't agree that the whole point of life is to live. Existing with reproduction may be the whole point of an insect's life. But I think the whole point of a human's life is to love others. And I don't think we will eventually become God and I don't think evolution will ever achieve that.

 

[The Nihilist]

I don't agree that the whole point of life is to live. Existing with reproduction may be the whole point of an insect's life. But I think the whole point of a human's life is to love others. And I don't think we will eventually become God and I don't think evolution will ever achieve that.

Why do you think the point is to love others? Do you have any good, well-grounded reasons for thinking that?

 

[billwald]

Life doesn't evolve to anything. Either a line of DNA survives or it doesn't.

Many people confuse Social Darwinism with evolution. There is no higher or lower form in evolution. Cockroaches are much better adapted to their environment than are humans They already have a million year head start on us. Are they more highly evolved?

Social Darwinists exist to claim that their breed of human is superior to other breeds, i.e. are fascist.

 

[EverlastingMan]

There is no good reason whatsoever to think that evolution is "striving for" anything whatsoever.

As time goes on, more and more facts come to the fore indicating that evolution is a matter of chance, randomness, necessity, and contingency.

Consider the fact of how much of a teeny, tiny part of the Universe is our galaxy, much less our solar system, much less the earth.

Consider the fact that the modal type of life today is bacteria, just as it has been since life first evolved on earth some 3.7 Billion or so years ago.

Consider the fact that multicellular life did not evolve until bacteria had existed for nearly 3 billion years.

Consider the fact that if a meteor hadn't hit the Gulf of Mexico near the Yucatan peninsula about 65 millions years ago, dinosaurs would probably still rule the earth and the largest extant mammal would be the size of a large rat.

Consider the fact that 80 per cent of extant multicellular life is anthropods, most of which are insects, most of which in turn are beetles (200,000 species, probably).

Consider that humans are a tiny twig at the end of a branch of the tree of life, only around for the much less than one hundredth of one per cent of the time the earth has existed.

All this leads you to the conclusion that humans are a big deal - that we are what evolution has been striving for all this time?

Do you know anything at all - really - about the evolutionary record?

Maybe you should read "Full House" by Stephen Gould and "The Ancester's Tale" by Richard Dawkins. That would start you on an education in evolution - if you are actually interested in that sort of thing.

Were we assuming that a god existed here? If so, then your points are nothing. Chance and purpose look the exact same. I could turn all your points around on you and say that they do in fact point to evolution striving towards humanity.
You say, "Look at the odds, how could we possibly be anything but an accident?" I say, "Look at the odds, it must have been driven."
Evolution cannot be used to prove either point. Its' supposed to be science, and as soon as we try to make it something else it becomes a double edged sword. It doesn't work.

 

[JGL53]

Were we assuming that a god existed here? If so, then your points are nothing. Chance and purpose look the exact same. I could turn all your points around on you and say that they do in fact point to evolution striving towards humanity.
You say, "Look at the odds, how could we possibly be anything but an accident?" I say, "Look at the odds, it must have been driven."
Evolution cannot be used to prove either point. Its' supposed to be science, and as soon as we try to make it something else it becomes a double edged sword. It doesn't work.

I see science as a single-edged sword.

EM, I think you are straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. Do you really think it just as likely that some god was lying around on a divan in heaven one day, getting bored with having an angel feed him peeled grapes, and said "What the hell, I think I'll create some beings that are spiritual like us but housed in bodies of flesh. I'll call these suckers 'humans'.

So, let's see. I'll create a singularity first, have it explode, then, over a period of 14 billion years, have matter form, congeal into 100 billion galaxies of about 100 billion stars each, etc, set up a planet I will call the 'earth', have all sorts of strange contingencies happen that will, by the most convoluted path imaginable, result in humans after about 14 billion years, with 99 per cent of "created" species becoming extinct in the process. I'll throw in several meteor strikes that will wipe out around 80 or 90 per cent of all species, every 100 million years or so.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Why do things simple and straightforward, like any old omniscient being with no imagination would do - I'll make this creation process so radically complicated that most of the greatest 'scientists' among the humans won't be able to comprehend how it could all be an intentional act by a super conscious all powerful being."

Yeah, EM, sure, it COULD have happened that way. Or leprechauns could have created the universe three seconds ago. (Prove that they didn't.)

 

[GodSchism]

I don't agree that the whole point of life is to live. Existing with reproduction may be the whole point of an insect's life. But I think the whole point of a human's life is to love others. And I don't think we will eventually become God and I don't think evolution will ever achieve that.

There is no need to love if you can't live. And not every one that lives is a lover. So the whole point of a human's life is to live. That is just a subjective thought when some people make it their whole point in life to hate. The objective thought is I exist, therefore I am meant to be--alive.

 

[GodSchism]

I don’t know why science says that the bible is not scientific fact. According to science, all life came from the water. In Genesis, it the proof is right there—where it says, And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Scientists in all their observations fail to see any connection between their claim and what is written in the bible. As you know, the Spirit is a life giving spirit of which I will demonstrate clearly.
According to evolutionary science, life sprung from a single cell organism. Why did life find it necessary to evolve into more complex-structural organisms? It was not necessary but as you know the Spirit of God was with it; as a spirit is a life-giving spirit; and in the spirit of Jesus—so you may have life and have it more abundantly. Can you see where this would apply to even the simplest life form, the single cell organism?

As being a life-giving spirit, he, the spirit of God is one that raises questions. Imagine a single cell organism, at an ‘insignificant’ level—that organism, knew that it was in an environment or ‘world’ that was larger than it. In it’s cellular structure, as the spirit of God moved upon it, just as he moves upon all things—that cell asked ‘what is this place.’ The first question or what relates to that first question is Why?
With the power of God, in order for life to evolve—mutation became possible in the process of answering the first question.

From that first question sprung all living-organisms; life that was driven by Spirit. In all life forms that first question is still being pondered, what or Why? From it’s advent, the Spirit, the five senses were derived and eventually man; whom is separate from all life forms in the respect of reason and creativity. When the simplest of questions were answered; and those being what is necessary to existence; of which is a form of a being. And if you can perceive, to give flesh form, the life-giving Spirit chose the simplest of answers.

A question can be raised—why wasn’t man given four arms and ten legs. Out of necessity to survival the Spirit chose symmetrical simplicity, which is evident in all life forms—they are symmetrically simple. This is perhaps one principal that Spirit-driven life acquired. And it is evident that the Spirit that moves upon all life is able to do some things in one kingdom that it cannot do in another kingdom. For example, in the reptile kingdom, the spirit found that the best answer was to make them cold-blooded. In the insect kingdom the spirit found that it could create animals with multiple legs; whereas in the mammal kingdom it was not necessary to create an animal with more than four legs. The Spirit is one that raises questions and solves the problems with the best and most simplistic answers, hence, symmetrical-simplicity.

To put it in perspective, the spirit of God is the one that formed man out of the dust from the ground—A truth spoken in regards that man is organic and all his flesh came from the organics of the earth. And the Gods spoke, let us form man in our image and after are likeness. Hence, in the image of God, man was given a mind that could handle truth; and with truth is reason and creativity, amongst other things such as; love, however love was something granted by the Spirit which evident in all of creation; For example, a mother giving milk to her young.

As the Spirit of God raised man up to have dominion over all the earth—that Spirit gave man the task of answering that first question—what or Why? And this is evident in man’s reasoning and creativity, man is always pondering this question. Evolution is in fact occurring, not only in the flesh but in thought. If life is driven by Spirit and the Spirit is one that raises questions then in some significant level—the Spirit of man, which is the same life-giving spirit is passing answers in mutable DNA.

If man is made in the image of God, after their likeness then the ultimate form is already here—you are wearing it. Perhaps, DNA is still being moved by the spirit, most definitely, in order to ‘tweak’ man in some respects, such as; a longer lifespan or whatever the perfect being would require, in all of man’s perfection. Jesus is the example of perfection. In his Spirit, which is God the Father, he was able to perform miracles, meaning that the perfect human has power to transcend reality and control it—that is the inevitable course of man as his imagination dictates—to rise above reality and control it. If it is within man’s imagination and resembles a perfect image of truth then the Spirit which moves upon the DNA and mutates it—the Spirit will manifest it through the flesh, however, it is not man that is capable of the power to perform miracles but it is the Spirit which is performing the miracles through man—that life-giving spirit.

Immortality is the ultimate goal of evolution because even though it is man’s purpose to possess the love of God, first and foremost, it is also his purpose or mindfulness to live forever; of which is the purpose of life is to live and to love to live. It is the spirit to raise the questions in man as it manifests itself through man. Like saying, Adam, what do you want out of life. Adam replies, to live long and prosper. And the Spirit says, No Adam—that is not your want but the Spirit of God talking through you and manifesting it’s goals. Why? Because it is given to all-living things to carry the task of life; and that is to answer the question—what or Why? Eternal life is just one of the answers that the Spirit of life came across and with that answer, it manifests itself to all living things because survival is upon all of life’s minds; but the severe depths of survival have been placed within the human breast, especially.

Now I turn my words to opposition—that it is conclusive to reality. As all opposites exist, Love and hate, attraction and repulsion, fear and comfort, good and evil, God and Satan. Satan was once thought to be an antediluvian or fossil of our energy; but that is far from fact since we are able to establish God’s possessions: Love, attraction, comfort, good, etc…And we can establish Satan’s possessions: hate, repulsion, fear, evil, etc…

However it is one Spirit that moves all. The Spirit of life is one that raises questions; but without opposition that first question—what or Why?__would have never been raised. To put it in perspective, life and the world came into opposition; therefore we can separate God’s possession which is life; and we can separate Satan’s possession which is the world, hence, Satan is the ruler of this world or the Spirit of This World is Satan. Now, a spirit of wickedness can be seen more clearly. Does Satan exist in form, perhaps, as an angel (as you know angels created the world) but it is evident that is Spirit is manifested through the possession of death; of which is the ultimate evil and it’s summation. However, the life-giving Spirit is one that works on all things; finding it necessary that opposition may be the significant part of existence and what in fact, allows the world to evolve. Without opposition there would be no questions raised.

To put it in perspective, And Satan stood upon the Lord’s right hand and said, I will be the Lord’s adversary. Opposition becomes true friendship; as without opposites there is no progression. Satan provides the world and the life-giving Spirit provides the questions and the answers. Therefore, enemies are reconciled to the infernal nature of life—that is, without opposition there is no progression.

To move onto the evolution of thought, one must consider that evil becomes necessary to the progression of the answers we seek. Without tales of Chivalrous knights slaying evil dragons, Virtue would become an insignificant portion to existence. Therefore, evil becomes a necessity to thought. Some atheists or even God-haters claim that the God the bible is an evil God. For example, God destroys and turns Sodom into salt. An evil act in deed, but in a literary sense, a necessary evil because without the experimental in the philosophical world, one could do no other than repeat the same dull round again. Evil then becomes necessary to literature; so that out of evil, good arises in it’s midst. Take thou Shalt not kill, for example. The word kill is associated with evil; but becomes necessary to establish a higher good. That’s not to say that evil that manifests it physically is indeed unnecessary; however, to establish Higher laws or Virtues, evil becomes necessary in the literature; in order for God or Good to confront Satan or evil, so that such things as perfection in Love and Virtue can be established and provided for all of mankind.

God is already perfect but man is not. Therefore it becomes necessary for God to commit seemingly evil acts in order for man to progress to the perfection of God. Hence, Sodom was turned into salt so that in literature, a lesson may be taught; in order for man to turn away from sin. God is not stupid, God knows that we all have our weaknesses and that in our weaknesses, we fall to sin. God is not a punisher but a teacher and his judgments are placed upon the earth by word of mouth and action, according to his plan for all of us. Hence, God revealed himself as a forgiving God, in his forgiveness of sins; but he is not blind to justice. The Spirit is a life-giving spirit and that is an image of truth. The Spirit already has the ultimate questions solved; but simply gives life little by little of what is meant to be because eternity is in love with the productions of time. In this image, of life-giving—that is what the Spirit of God is trying to establish—that life should be giving to not just friend but neighbor; hence, love thy neighbor. God is not blind to justice. If you are not a life-giving spirit then you are a life-taking spirit. If you do not take what God provides for then you have enmity with life; and the weeds are pulled out and burned in the fire because they are not made in the image of life but in the image of death—that is why if you do not eat the flesh and drink the blood of the son of man, you have no life in you; but to further the point, the heavens have already been established. God knows before you do; of what life is all about, so it is just not simply eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Jesus Christ; but it is also living by the living water that pours through his mouth in word. Remember, The Holy Spirit is a life-giving spirit; and what one of the triune’s God has the other two have it; however, it is the Holy Spirit that is thee life-giving spirit. Therefore, it is said, if someone raises a word against the son of man he shall be forgiven; and if someone raises a word against the Father he shall be forgiven; but if someone raises a word against the Holy Spirit, he shall not be forgiven in heaven or on earth because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of life. If you hate life then you love death. The Holy Spirit has nothing to do with death. It is all life. If you are so wicked that you hate life to the furthest degree then you are in opposition to life and in truth you are in opposition to the Holy Spirit, which is the life-giving Spirit.

Science is foolish because they, the scientists, do not speculate that a Spirit exists because they have no proof; but there so stupid that they do not see that it is Spirit of what drives them to question the world. God without science leads its followers into a pit because without God or that which is called a higher power or a higher value—the scientists fall into a bottomless pit. The blind lead the blind into pits. The scientist’s whole purpose in life is to peel the layers of reality or existence like an onion. But sooner or later they will find out that existence is infinitesimal in nature because it was created by an infinitesimal God. One who reflects his power through scientific observation.

Man, most men, place the hard questions upon God, in reflection; and the hardest question is Why? It may be interesting to find out if even God knows the answer to this question because if God always existed then there would be no reason that this question could be answered by even God. How would God know Why? If God always existed. I think Jesus sums it up perfectly, the man old in days would not hesitate to ask an infant seven days old what is the place in life and that man shall live! The old man being God, himself! Perhaps the image of a child reflects God perfectly because being an always-God, God becomes a child in the sight of that wonderful question, Why?

In the beginning, the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters creating a single cell organism; and from that organism sprung all of life through question and observation derived from the organisms senses; so that life may have life and have it more abundantly.

Calliope for the mind. Use your imagination. It is that thing behind the narrow chink in your head. Its funny, some humans are still ape-like. Some still swing from trees and throw their feces around.

 

[EverlastingMan]

I see science as a single-edged sword.

EM, I think you are straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. Do you really think it just as likely that some god was lying around on a divan in heaven one day, getting bored with having an angel feed him peeled grapes, and said "What the hell, I think I'll create some beings that are spiritual like us but housed in bodies of flesh. I'll call these suckers 'humans'.

Erm, yes actually. I do. In fact I find it rather more likely that some god at least started it than that the universe came from "nothing."

So, let's see. I'll create a singularity first, have it explode, then, over a period of 14 billion years, have matter form, congeal into 100 billion galaxies of about 100 billion stars each, etc, set up a planet I will call the 'earth', have all sorts of strange contingencies happen that will, by the most convoluted path imaginable, result in humans after about 14 billion years, with 99 per cent of "created" species becoming extinct in the process. I'll throw in several meteor strikes that will wipe out around 80 or 90 per cent of all species, every 100 million years or so.

See here, you're missing the point. You're saying, more or less, the exact same thing you said before. And I agree with you, natural history is the most complex, absurd, and unlikely thing in-well-the universe. And I agree. It is just that, and it does nothing toward proving whether or not a god actually made this universe or didn't.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Why do things simple and straightforward, like any old omniscient being with no imagination would do - I'll make this creation process so radically complicated that most of the greatest 'scientists' among the humans won't be able to comprehend how it could all be an intentional act by a super conscious all powerful being."

Actually, most scientists are agnostics mate, not atheists. That, however, is entirely beside the point.

Yeah, EM, sure, it COULD have happened that way. Or leprechauns could have created the universe three seconds ago. (Prove that they didn't.)

I had anticipated some similar reply, and had planned on using the example of purple unicorns, more likely y'know. But then I saw that you did this. Confound you.

 

[Phred]

I don’t know why science says that the bible is not scientific fact. According to science, all life came from the water. In Genesis, it the proof is right there—where it says, And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Scientists in all their observations fail to see any connection between their claim and what is written in the bible. As you know, the Spirit is a life giving spirit of which I will demonstrate clearly.

I'm sorry but that's a vast oversimplification and interpretation. HOW did life come from the water, by what process? Simply saying that "the spirit of God moved across the face of the water" is meaningless. I see no connection between these few poetic verses and reality, which is that life seems to have emerged for the first time in a primordial soup much more complex than simply water.

According to evolutionary science, life sprung from a single cell organism. Why did life find it necessary to evolve into more complex-structural organisms? It was not necessary but as you know the Spirit of God was with it; as a spirit is a life-giving spirit; and in the spirit of Jesus—so you may have life and have it more abundantly. Can you see where this would apply to even the simplest life form, the single cell organism?

According to evolutionary science we all have a common ancestor that was a single-celled organism. That much is correct. But evolution is not 'necessary" as you'll notice we still have single-celled organisms. Some of our aunts and uncles were perfectly suited for their niches and continued to be single-celled organisms. There is no need of a god or Jesus or spirit or whathaveyou.

Science is foolish because they, the scientists, do not speculate that a Spirit exists because they have no proof; but there so stupid that they do not see that it is Spirit of what drives them to question the world. God without science leads its followers into a pit because without God or that which is called a higher power or a higher value—the scientists fall into a bottomless pit. The blind lead the blind into pits. The scientist’s whole purpose in life is to peel the layers of reality or existence like an onion. But sooner or later they will find out that existence is infinitesimal in nature because it was created by an infinitesimal God. One who reflects his power through scientific observation.

I look at this the other way around. The believer is the stupid one. They have, for one reason or another, created a need within themselves that a deity must exist. Instead of starting with the evidence, as a scientist would, and letting that lead them to a conclusion the believer starts with an answer and discards knowledge that contradicts what they think they already know.

If your god existed, if your stories were true, the evidence would align with them not needing these vast interpretations. Instead it does not. We have hour upon hour upon hour of needless discussion so that the believer can try to reconcile what he believes with what he sees. And, instead of realizing this, he calls the scientist a fool for not starting with the assumption of god... which is ridiculous. You expect that, after all is examined down to it's most simplistic we will find the most complex.

Oh, don't worry, I know you can't or won't be able to see this. It makes me feel better to say it.

Calliope for the mind. Use your imagination. It is that thing behind the narrow chink in your head. Its funny, some humans are still ape-like. Some still swing from trees and throw their feces around.

Others throw words around. They're so proud of themselves for being so intelligent, so 'evolved'. Yet the chimps have one thing over them... they know they're throwing feces.

.
​

 

[us38]

Even if a god was absolutely necessary for life to come about, how is the christian god anymore likely than any other god?

 

[GodSchism]

Even if a god was absolutely necessary for life to come about, how is the christian god anymore likely than any other god?

Because the Christian God offers something that no other God can offer; and that is--justice for the poor and salvation. Rich people sit around thinking what can we do for God, so they start wars to spread justice--that is a rich man's God, and her name is blind--justice or so they call justice, blind. The poor man sits around thinking how screwed up the rich man is, thinking these men are fools--that they call justice, blind. The Christian God says that the first shall be last and the last shall be first. The first being the rich and the last being the poor. So what does Christianity offer that no other faith offers? Justice to the least of all--those who have been deprived of life by the rich.
A fool built his house upon sand. The rich are the children of the evil one. They go around sowing discord and misfortune and sin, placing burdens upon men's shoulders that no man can bare. As far as I am concerned the rich are the tares and they need to be cast in the fire because every tree that bares not fruit is deemed worthless and cast into the fire to be burned. The rich can take their money and rot in hell for all I care. They will find no forgiveness from God because God says it is easier for a camel to thread the head of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Heaven. So Christianity has a lot to offer, especially for the poor.

 

[us38]

Because the Christian God offers something that no other God can offer; and that is--justice for the poor and salvation. Rich people sit around thinking what can we do for God, so they start wars to spread justice--that is a rich man's God, and her name is blind--justice or so they call justice, blind. The poor man sits around thinking how screwed up the rich man is, thinking these men are fools--that they call justice, blind. The Christian God says that the first shall be last and the last shall be first. The first being the rich and the last being the poor. So what does Christianity offer that no other faith offers? Justice to the least of all--those who have been deprived of life by the rich.
A fool built his house upon sand. The rich are the children of the evil one. They go around sowing discord and misfortune and sin, placing burdens upon men's shoulders that no man can bare. As far as I am concerned the rich are the tares and they need to be cast in the fire because every tree that bares not fruit is deemed worthless and cast into the fire to be burned. The rich can take their money and rot in hell for all I care. They will find no forgiveness from God because God says it is easier for a camel to thread the head of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Heaven. So Christianity has a lot to offer, especially for the poor.

Appeal to consequences.

Again, why is the christian god anymore likely than any other god(s)?

 

[The Nihilist]

MOD HAT ON

us38, your font is too small. Everyone else, you're using entirely too many words.


MOD HAT OFF

 

[JGL53]

Erm, yes actually. I do. In fact I find it rather more likely that some god at least started it than that the universe came from "nothing." ….

Who said the universe “came from nothing”. I assume the universe has always existed – Ockham’s Razor.

See here, you're missing the point. You're saying, more or less, the exact same thing you said before. And I agree with you, natural history is the most complex, absurd, and unlikely thing in-well-the universe. And I agree. It is just that, and it does nothing toward proving whether or not a god actually made this universe or didn't….

No need to address an assertion backed by no evidence whatsoever. Your deistic god is an unnecessary hypothetical – explains nothing, adds nothing, requires explanation itself, complicated matters unnecessarily - Ockham’s Razor.

Actually, most scientists are agnostics mate, not atheists. That, however, is entirely beside the point.….

Something like 70 per cent of scientists do not believe in a personal god. Something like 85 per cent of the top scientists do not believe in a personal god.

As they say, that’s close enough for government work. Deism and pantheism are irrelevant to science, i.e., such ideas do not rise to the level of being non-trivial (a god that doesn’t interfere is like no god at all).

I had anticipated some similar reply, and had planned on using the example of purple unicorns, more likely y'know. But then I saw that you did this. Confound you ….

Exactly – you realize, intuitively, the ridiculousness of your proposed god, yet you still prefer him for, what exactly?

BTW, I see deism as perfectly harmless affectation. It’s sort of hard for me to get in the mood to debate you. To me, the difference between atheism and deism is like the difference between chocolate ice cream and chocolate ice cream topped with chopped nuts.

 

[GodSchism]

Appeal to consequences.

Again, why is the christian god anymore likely than any other god(s)?

It doesn't really matter what I say to you because you'll ask the same question because you are blind to truth.
Jesus says I am the truth. No other religion or God says that. It's the words we use that become immortal. Jesus' words are immortal and if you can't see that then you are blind. You're going to die a foolish person. Not right now while you are living will you think that you are foolish; but when you meet death you will proclaim your foolishness throughout eternity.

 

[Lord_Marx]

It doesn't really matter what I say to you because you'll ask the same question because you are blind to truth.

Then why bother typing in the first place?

Jesus says I am the truth. No other religion or God says that..

You're kidding right? Every one of the thousands of religions in the world claim to have been the truth. Why would anyone follow them unless they believed them to be true?

It's the words we use that become immortal. Jesus' words are immortal and if you can't see that then you are blind..

In a few thousand years Jesus' words will be completly forgoten along with (most likely) every other trace of humans.

You're going to die a foolish person. Not right now while you are living will you think that you are foolish; but when you meet death you will proclaim your foolishness throughout eternity.

I'm willing to take the risk, better to suffer in hell for an eternity then to have to live with people like yourself in heaven forever...