My favorite argument for the existence of God

[lesliedellow]

False. Genesis 1:8 shows that Adam's firmament/heaven was made on the 2nd Day, by God the Trinity. Genesis 2:4 shows that other heavens (plural) were made the 3rd Day. Adam was also made the 3rd Day by Lord God/YHWH/Jesus BEFORE the plants herbs and trees which were also made by Lord God/YHWH/Jesus.

"And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day."

Now maybe my eyes need testing, but I don't see anything there about the creation of Adam.

 

[Aman777]

"And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day."

Now maybe my eyes need testing, but I don't see anything there about the creation of Adam.

That is because Genesis chapter one is a condensed outline of ALL of the rest of the Bible. The DETAILS concerning the 6 Creative Days can be found beginning at Gen 2:4:

Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

Adam's Earth was made the THIRD Day. Gen 1:10 Lord God/Jesus made other heavenS on the THIRD Day, according to this verse.

Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

Plants, herbs and Trees GREW on the THIRD Day. Gen 1:12

Gen 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man (Heb-Adam) of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Read on and you will see that the Trees were made AFTER Adam was made. Gen 2:8-9

See the details which God has added to the outline of the THIRD Day in Genesis chapter one?

 

[Skreeper]

Are you telling us that the current classification system is better than God's? Or do scientists wish to avoid God's Truth at all cost? Knowing the difference between His and Their kinds is fundamental to any understanding of True Science. God Bless you

I feel like there is no point in having a discussion with someone like you so let's just leave it at that.

 

[lesliedellow]

That is because Genesis chapter one is a condensed outline of ALL of the rest of the Bible. The DETAILS concerning the 6 Creative Days can be found beginning at Gen 2:4:

Oh sure. So in that summary something really important like the creation of plant life gets a mention, but trivial details, like the creation of man, get omitted.

 

[Aman777]

I feel like there is no point in having a discussion with someone like you so let's just leave it at that.

Here's the Truth. Their kinds are the kinds God the TRINITY created from Water. Gen 1:21 His kinds are the kinds Lord God/Jesus fashioned with His own Hands. Gen 2:7

Jesus creates temporarily, while God the TRINITY creates Eternally. If you understood, you would know WHY mankind MUST be born again by the TRINITY or they can never enter heaven. God Bless you

 

[AV1611VET]

From my time here I have noticed that having a serious discussion with you is a huge waste of my time.

I feel like there is no point in having a discussion with someone like you so let's just leave it at that.

Picky, picky, picky.

 

[Aman777]

Oh sure. So in that summary something really important like the creation of plant life gets a mention, but trivial details like the creation of man gets omitted.

Which creation do you speak of? Adam was "formed" physically from the dust of the ground by Lord God/Jesus on the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4-7
The same Adam was "created in God's Image" or born again Spiritually in Christ, by God the TRINITY, on the present 6th Day. Gen 1:27 and Gen 5:1-2

Pro 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings isto search out a matter.

 

[lesliedellow]

Which creation do you speak of? Adam was "formed" physically from the dust of the ground by Lord God/Jesus on the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4-7
The same Adam was "created in God's Image" or born again Spiritually in Christ, by God the TRINITY, on the present 6th Day. Gen 1:27 and Gen 5:1-2

Pro 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings isto search out a matter.

Sure he was. Funny how the Bible doesn't say anything about separate corporeal and spiritual creations for Adam, isn't it?

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Nothing there to suggest that an already existing Adam is being recreated. Furthermore, I defy you to find any biblical commentary, conservative, liberal, or otherwise, which does go along with your cockeyed ideas.

 

[Skreeper]

Picky, picky, picky.

There are a lot people here who don't share these...let's call them "fringe beliefs". It's much more productive to have serious discussion with them.

 

[AV1611VET]

There are a lot people here who don't share these...let's call them "fringe beliefs". It's much more productive to have serious discussion with them.

I understand.

My pastor would probably have a bug fit if he saw some of the stuff I said.

And my wife ... well ... nevermind.

 

[Aman777]

Sure he was. Funny how the Bible doesn't say anything about separate corporeal and spiritual creations for Adam, isn't it?

It does in the verse you cited. Let me show you:

*** And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Remember that Adam was formed in a corporeal or physical body, on the 3rd Day before the plants. Gen 2:4-7
Eve was NOT made from Adam's rib until the 6th Day. Gen 2:22

Notice that BOTH Adam and Eve were "created in God's Image by the Trinity" at the SAME time, on the 6th Day, which was AFTER Cain killed Abel. Gen 5:1-2

Adam was formed on the 3rd and Eve on the present 6th Day and BOTH were born again Spiritually in Christ long AFTER they were first made physically.

*** Nothing there to suggest that an already existing Adam is being recreated. Furthermore, I defy you to find any biblical commentary, conservative, liberal, or otherwise, which does go along with your cockeyed ideas.

I don't seek the approval of men since I have the agreement of Scripture, Science, History and God's Truth, which NO man can refute. God Bless you

 

[lesliedellow]

It does in the verse you cited. Let me show you:

*** And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Man is there used in the sense of mankind, and the "them" refers to the plurality of mankind's members.

 

[pitabread]

Picky, picky, picky.

I can't speak for Skreeper, but in my own experience, the minute a believer starts trying to argue over Bible verses, I disengage. Quoting the Bible and trying to argue over meaning tends to be a fruitless exercise for a non-believer.

 

[AV1611VET]

I can't speak for Skreeper, but in my own experience, the minute a believer starts trying to argue over Bible verses, I disengage.

Do you re-engage when you realize that every born-again Christian that ever lived, is alive, and will live believes IN THE BEGINNING, GOD?

 

[pitabread]

Do you re-engage when you realize that every born-again Christian that ever lived, is alive, and will live believes IN THE BEGINNING, GOD?

I don't believe in any of that to begin with.

 

[AV1611VET]

I don't believe in any of that to begin with.

What's keeping you from becoming an atheist then?

I'll take a guess and say it's Christian iconography, churches, martyrs, songs, hymns, holidays, debates, slogans, testimonies, colleges, bookstores, and the like, that keeps you from becoming a an atheist.

 

[pitabread]

What's keeping you from becoming an atheist then?

I'll take a guess and say it's Christian iconography, churches, martyrs, songs, hymns, holidays, debates, slogans, testimonies, colleges, bookstores, and the like, that keeps you from becoming a an atheist.

That guess is incorrect.

My personally philosophy is that the existence of the supernatural is not contingent on my belief about the supernatural. Whatever is, is.

I also believe that if there is some sort of supernatural deity in the universe (or outside of it), that it is not likely represented by any human religions and in all likely would be unknowable to us.

Hence, I consider myself an 'agnostic' of sorts.

When it comes to Christianity specifically, the theology is fundamentally illogical to me. I could never honestly embrace Christianity as a faith, as I would be lying to myself in the process.

 

[Kylie]

yes it does. you can check it for yourself here:

Eyespot apparatus - Wikipedia

"Besides photoreceptor proteins, eyespots contain a large number of structural, metabolic and signaling proteins. The eyespot proteome of Chlamydomonas cells consists of roughly 200 different proteins.["

so yes even a simple eyespot isnt simple at all and made from many parts. the guy in video is wrong. period.

It does not support your claim.

The fact it has many parts does not support your claim because evolution explains it quite nicely.

Until you show me how it could not have evolved, you have nothing.

 

[xianghua]

Because meaning is determined by usage, and common usage for the word "robot" is as an appelation for some kind of semi autonomous electro mechanical system - not as a term for a biological organism.

so this is because it's made from organic components?

 

[xianghua]

Robots are artificial, so you'd have a problem applying 'natural' to what they do.

so an artificial human can be consider as robot because it's artificial?

nevertheless, robots don't evolve naturally;

so if they did you will not call them robots anymore?