Renouncing Religion

[kimmyh51]

The Earth is 4.54 billion years old. The Bible points toward an Earth that was created only a few thousand years ago. Common sense aptly explains the absurdity that is the latter measurement. Mind you, this isn't the only reason that I find the Bible bogus.

I encourage you all to read literature outside of the Bible. And if you have a third-grade reading level, as most people who outright reject scientific fact do, sorry, I can't help you.

Some of the stuff you say above is quite, umm - I dunno, not narrow minded, but unenlightened for want of a better word

For example, you are assuming that gods 'day' or 'year' is the same as the calendar one, where does it state that?

I believe there are passages in the bible that actually hint pretty strongly that the concept of time, is not the same for god as it is for us. After all he has been here forever, so what might seem a long time to us, (ie a few billion years) is maybe only a day or few to him.

I have also read literature outside the bible and studied biology at university level. And that is one of the things that convinces me of gods reality (that and personal experience, but for here I will stick to the facts and avoid my own experiences which to you are simply going to be hearsay)

Anyway, if you look at the makeup of a biological cell, its complexity, and then the complexity of the systems it interacts with (even the basic stuff like Krebs cycle, atp synthesis etc), all the chemical reactions that go on,and the fact that numerous organisms with very very different physical appearance, characteristics habits etc, (all are made up of the same basic cell structure (nucleus, cell wall/membrane), and all contain an extremely complex genetic code that took us years and years to figure out - google genome mapping project) all living on a planet which just happens to be a perfect biological environment with an atmosphere which is just exactly correct in its %ges of co2, o2, etc etc for life, temperatures at just the right level, supplies of water, oxygen, food etc. A planet which is also covered in plant life which is very diverse and which also meets not only the nutritional needs of all the different creatures that just appeared here, but also the medicinal needs of those creatures (medicine is pretty much all either derived directly from active plant chemicals or synthesised based on substances produced by nature, or on ideas which were inspired by nature

As for the big bang theory.... come on??? I have studied that - and at the time, as a non christian with no intention of ever becoming a christian, I still thought w t f?

As has been said before, the idea of the big bang theory creating the planet and all the complex organisms on it in perfect equilibruim by accident, is as ridiculous, as an explosion in a print shop producing the oxford dictionary.

If I had a third grade reading level I might be willing to accept the theory that because god talks about creation as taking 6 days he meant 6 x 24 hours. However I cant see how any curious person would not consider the possibility that 6 days to a god who creates entire planets, might be different to 6 x 24 hours
Or even that this god might be capable of creating these items in a fully mature state, so that after they are created they are already matured to the point where they have a few billion years worth of biological/carbondateable historical evidence.


Anyway it is my study at university level that on a purely intellectial level, was the most compelling evidence to me that there MUST be a god.

Can I ask what exactly study you have undertaken to bring you to your conclusions? As what you mention in your post is very simplistic and any person including the 3rd graders you reference, could understand those concepts...


Finally - I put to you that you dont really believe that it is as simple as that either. Because if you did, you would not be wasting any of your time posting a thread like this here.


A thread that firstly invites debate on this topic and and secondly is asking for someone to prove you wrong.


The fact that you have posted here to start with is the answer you are looking for, dont ignore it.

 

[Tim the Plumber]

Can I ask what exactly study you have undertaken to bring you to your conclusions? As what you mention in your post is very simplistic and any person including the 3rd graders you reference, could understand those concepts...


Finally - I put to you that you dont really believe that it is as simple as that either. Because if you did, you would not be wasting any of your time posting a thread like this here.


A thread that firstly invites debate on this topic and and secondly is asking for someone to prove you wrong.


The fact that you have posted here to start with is the answer you are looking for, dont ignore it.

If an alien landed and walked up to us we would not know if it was a designed thing or a product of evolvolution.

If it was made of flesh bone and blood we would still not know.

If it reproduced by it's self it or by sexual methods it would by subject to the selective pressures of it's enviroment and thus subject to evolution. But we would still not be able to say that it was or was not the porducet of design.

If we examined it's equivalent of DNA, that is it's mechanisim for passing on it's pattern to the next generation, we would find either of 2 things.

1 A set of instructions laid out with at least some level of intelegence and consistencey. Single ideas would have single locations. They would not be fragmented and randomly spaced out. Visualise a filing system of some sort.

or

2 An example of the selective choosing from randomness. If you visualise a hundred filing systems thrown up in the air, mixed and then shreaded, you have something of the picture of the information in DNA. Chance botch job repairs to bits that did not work are all over the place and have been refined to work well.

If you you found 1 it's been designed by an intelegent designer.

If you found 2 it has almost certainly been subject to selective breeding. This may have been overseen by intelegence and may have been added to by bits of design, genetic engineering.

If you then compaired it's DNA or equivalent pattern copying mechanisim to other members of it's species you would, if it's natural selection at work, see various givaway things going on which will confirm it.

If you are able to look at it's home planet and the other animals on there they will, if they and it have come about via evolution, show common features. Such as the general type of eye is common to all vertibates on earth. Or that the specific way blood clots involves 5 protiens when it could use 1 but this is common to us all. Then you have proof undeniable.

If you examine the fossil record on the planet and found the fossils of previous ancestor species of the alien with examples of the extinction of different "failed" branches in the time line you have proof beyond utterly undeniable proof.

If your study of some of the aniamls of the alien world allows you to make very good predictions about the way the "DNA" of the other animals is put together you have a useful aspect of the already confirmed theory.

This study of "DNA" will also allow you to make statements about when different types of animal last had a common ancester. When this reflects the way the continental plates have moved around on the planet you can afford a smug grin.

The theory of designed creation is proovably wrong (easily).

The theory of evolution is proovably correct. In sooooo many ways

 

[razeontherock]

If you then compaired it's DNA or equivalent pattern copying mechanisim to other members of it's species you would, if it's natural selection at work, see various givaway things going on which will confirm it.

If you are able to look at it's home planet and the other animals on there they will, if they and it have come about via evolution, show common features. Such as the general type of eye is common to all vertibates on earth. Or that the specific way blood clots involves 5 protiens when it could use 1 but this is common to us all. Then you have proof undeniable.

Here you have a perfect example of taking valid findings, and drawing invalid conclusions. What you have proof of, is one Creator who made things according to His own will. He is our common ancestor, yet you sweep that under the rug. Why?

Please apply critical thought ...

 

[Tim the Plumber]

Here you have a perfect example of taking valid findings, and drawing invalid conclusions. What you have proof of, is one Creator who made things according to His own will. He is our common ancestor, yet you sweep that under the rug. Why?

If the result of examining the alien's DNA, or what ever it's using to pass on it's characteristics, is that it has evolved from the same ancestor as our selves that would be extreemly interesting and take a lot of explaining.

How far back would the same ancestor link be required to be to show "God"?

Well we have the clear record of our evolution on earth. The fossil record shows that we have been doing this evolution thing as multiple celular organisims fro the last 600 million years. If the link is more recent than that then the alien's ancestors came from earth.

Recent observations of super novae have shown fairly complex carbon molecules in the expanding gas clouds of their explosins. Perhaps the very early stages of complex carbon molecule evolution are space based.

Cellular life however has happened on earth as a result of the place being poluted by the toxic gas oxygen. So the chances of any alien being closely related to us is low unless some high tec aliens have been wandering around growing specimens and spieces in an alien abdution type thing.

 

[the sad clown]

The Earth is 4.54 billion years old. The Bible points toward an Earth that was created only a few thousand years ago. Common sense aptly explains the absurdity that is the latter measurement. Mind you, this isn't the only reason that I find the Bible bogus.

I encourage you all to read literature outside of the Bible. And if you have a third-grade reading level, as most people who outright reject scientific fact do, sorry, I can't help you.

No need to be insulting. And as others have pointed out, Christianity has a much greater level of intellectual sophistication than you are giving it credit for. You have mistaken one variety of Christianity (one that I suspect is a small minority of Christians) for the whole of Christianity.

 

[maizer]

From this point forth, I will now identify as atheist. Probably about 75% of my reasoning for dumping Christianity has to do with the logical fallacies I've found in its teachings. The other 25% that drove to my identification as an atheist has to do with the bigoted attitudes of ultra-conservative churches, and the sociopolitical turmoil that is inherently produced with the existence of religions. I no longer wish to be identified with any organizations that endorse and impose religious beliefs. Thank you, and good day.

Everyone has the right to make up their mind. I guess this wasn't an easy process at all, but just as you are finding out about all the other beliefs out there, Christ is much more than those ultra-conservative churches. Things that make sense now may not in the future, and vice versa. I hope you the best of luck on your journey!

 

[Scott1979]

You are entitled to believe what you want and nobody on here can judge you for that. On the same note the christians on here have a right to believe what they want and not get mocked for it. You want acceptance for your beliefs yet you mock God which offends those who do believe.