God used Evolution to create man

Status
Not open for further replies.

JayFern

Well-Known Member
Oct 14, 2014
576
3
✟791.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
So there's no such thing as a win-win situation in your estimation?
No someone always loses, for every winner there's a loser.
For some reason Americans can not see that, they only see the winners, the millions of losers are kept in the religious blind spots Christians use to defend themselves, they see losers as people who have just not tried hard enough.
For a very religious country America is one sick place to live in more ways than one.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,293
51,527
Guam
✟4,913,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
For a very religious country America is one sick place to live in more ways than one.
Maybe your America, but not God's America.

We have win-win situations here.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,293
51,527
Guam
✟4,913,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Who needs to find an excuse not to believe when there's absolutely no evidence to understand?
Many unbelievers are under conviction from the Holy Spirit, and will do almost anything to "shake Him off."

Drugs, alcohol, hobbies, whatever.
 
Upvote 0

JayFern

Well-Known Member
Oct 14, 2014
576
3
✟791.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Many unbelievers are under conviction from the Holy Spirit, and will do almost anything to "shake Him off."

Drugs, alcohol, hobbies, whatever.
HOBBIES????????? ^_^^_^^_^^_^^_^^_^

That's brilliant even if you are scratching, even the unbelievers are really believers who are just fighting against believing,
is there no end to your lunacy AV?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,293
51,527
Guam
✟4,913,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
HOBBIES????????? ^_^^_^^_^^_^^_^^_^
Affirmative.

Anything that takes your mind off your conviction.

Acts 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paul of Eugene OR

Finally Old Enough
Site Supporter
May 3, 2014
6,373
1,857
✟256,002.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Who were they then and how old were they when they told their stories because the gospels were not written until at least 60 - 70 years after Jesus was supposed to have died?
The original number was about 60 but they got rid of the ones they didn't like or didn't suit their purpose.

That's why all you can use is "FAITH", good luck with believing hearsay.

Hey, that's how evolution works, also! What doesn't work out so good is merely dropped out of the reproduction cycle!
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,695
5,246
✟302,373.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Can you provide 60+ genuine eyewitness accounts by 40+ different
authors from different walks of life and vastly different time periods
that all coincide in harmony. Then you may have a case. Otherwise
you are just inventing your own god.

Can you verify even one of your authors? I'm not aware that any of the gospels has a by-line...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,796
✟247,431.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Sometimes, sometimes not. Why don't you just read the book?
All this is common knowledge to Christians.

How do you know when it was directly dictated by Jesus and when it isn't?

Why didn't Jesus assure the original texts were preserved if he chose to divinely inspire this text? You would think he would want to preserve this divine text, wouldn't you?
 
Upvote 0
D

DerelictJunction

Guest
Sometimes, sometimes not. Why don't you just read the book?
All this is common knowledge to Christians.
Your presumption concerning my knowledge is completely inaccurate.
I've read it many times and cannot see where any dictation may have occurred at all. Just because my interpretation fails to agree with yours doesn't mean my interpretation is invalid.

A great many Christians don't take Genesis literally, nor do they interpret Jesus' reference to Noah, or Adam to be any more a testament to their previous existence than a reference to Captain Ahab is a testament to his previous existence.

"Common Knowledge" does not always indicate truth and is rarely as common as the purveyors of such would like to believe.

Perhaps it would be better for your side of this debate if you provided the evidence rather than asking me to do the research to support your claims.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FredVB

Regular Member
Mar 11, 2010
4,541
927
America
Visit site
✟268,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Does anybody bring up necessary existence? I can understand that some people would just avoid that. But no one has answers for anything being here, without that considered. There must be existence that is necessary existence, or nothing would exist, ever. We might not understand what such could be, but it is not the alternative, which is nothing and never anything other than nothing, total nonexistence, without existence of space, time, or anything. The alternative is yet staggering if it was never considered. Necessary existence, existence that exists because that existence must exist, cannot have any kind of limit to existence. Limits would be arbitrary but not involving what is essential existence. So everything that is true of this essential existence is unlimited in any way, infinite where that can be applied. This being would be the explanation of all else that was brought into existence. There is nothing otherwise for anything to exist.

Just as I say there are those who will just avoid the reasoning that is shown. But the logic is undeniable. It goes way beyond simply saying there's something, so God exists. There can be no logical denial of necessary existence, which will amount to all that was said of it in the quote above. If there wasn't that, there wouldn't be anything, that is there wouldn't be any material thing at all, there wouldn't be any potential or kinetic energy at all, no spatial dimensions, no dimension of time to have anything available, no power and no mind for any intelligence to be present anywhere, and with absolutely nothing in that way it is completely without logic to say all that was needed for the universe to exist as it does just came into being from nothing existing that is defined that way. To think that persistently is highly illogical, where belief that God is the explanation is without being so illogical, with there being reasonable explanation that is consistent with faith being put in God, that is still reasonable, as opposed to the alternative of denial, such as the dismissiveness that can be seen here. Those showing that just don't want to deal with it, and will avoid having anything to show that there would be acknowledgement of anything like the Creator.

If you actually look carefully to understand my argument, you would likely see that the logic doesn't appeal to God existing, the logic establishes that there is necessary existence, that existence is not finite by its necessity and is without any limit, and that has this necessary existence being the cause of all other things coming into being. This does not appeal to God, but what is established by logic with it is fully consistent with people's belief in God. There is no argument against that logically possible.
If the necessary existence was the universe itself, the universe would show all the characteristics of necessary existence. Necessary existence is absolutely necessary, it wouldn't be otherwise, by that necessity, and so would not change by evolving, never having a beginning either, that would only be something possible for what wouldn't be necessary existence. With the absolute necessity would be no limit or being finite. There would not be any uneven gaps. With there being power with being necessary existence, there would be infinite power. If there were ever any intelligence then there would be intelligence that is all-knowing. I could go on like that. The universe the way it appears is not like that at all. But one who believes that the universe is a manifestation of that infinite, omnipresent being, which would be omnipotent, would be consistent with that much of the logic, being a pantheist that way. This would not be an atheist position though, and the atheists have no explanation and are ignorant of that logic, either willfully if it is heard or conceived, or else never having come to that logic. So they cannot have anything consistent with it from their position.

How do those who don't want to see the logic of necessary existence equate it with things that are believed in without the logic or evidence? There isn't the same argument at all, it can't even be shown. And even you will believe some things without evidence. And there are abundant gaps in evidence for what is believed of evolution from natural processes without intelligence. The argument I made throughout my posts here wouldn't have really been looked at and considered then, you will put faith instead then in all that was needed for all the universe being here coming into existence when there was absolutely nothing existing for it before, and still claim you have the only position that is logical.

There is existence that is necessary, or nothing would ever come to exist. That is logical. To ignore that, even with claiming to be logical, apparently about the evolution of the universe, is still missing that logic, leaving as an alternative just a faith that may be had without any logic that everything comes into existence from absolutely nothing existing before. The necessary existence is necessarily without limit, without gaps, eternal and infinite, with that being true of all qualities, including the power, which there would be to have the cause of the universe coming to be. The universe and anything of it does not have existence that is without limit, without any gaps in its constitution, being eternal and infinite without any beginning, and having any form of power that is truly infinite. That necessary existence does and anything of the universe does not shows that the universe and anything of it is not necessary existence. It must have been brought into being by something causing it. Nothing had to be read into this for this logic. Staying in ignorance is not used as support of this, but that ignorance of this logic is showing, with apparent choice for that, whether or not it is pointed out.


I shouldn't even bother with those who are stubborn and though responding won't even look at what is explained in my posts in this thread, even when they have been in the discussion already through that time. I am not going to keep repeating it, that isn't worth it, it can easily be seen anyway, and those not looking so as to understand are just showing what I said, they will resist understanding for the sake of their position, and bring up things to say unrelated to it. What I explained is argument enough for establishing the conclusion.


Could we change a God to anything we wanted then use your argument to say it exists?

With seeing all the logic of what I have posted, you could not reasonably change necessary existence to something that is definitely not. But you might see something other than God for that. Reasoning to show it is God is another logical argument other than this. But what other do you have for it that can reasonably be argued?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.