All things were created through Him.

Interstellar gas and dark matter seems the top of the list. An odd thing for a deity to insist upon. And, ebola... nifty thing for the Gang of Three (but One) to add to the list of things "necessary" to "create" for the glory of itself.

Alas, you miss the actual 'miracle' in pursuit of your mythical one.

Edward, you do realize all the planets in the Solar System are named after gods as well, right?

It's just that we realize them to be the gods of myth ... just like your Christ.

That doesn't mean we don't respect the historical importance of their influence on the human condition. It just means that science has revealed the universe to be so much more beautiful and wondrous than anything our little religions could have ever imagined.

How does religion always manage to creep its way in to things? live and let live. You believe in God, good for you but let others believe as they so choose to. We DO have free will to choose you know. sheesh.

A big voice, hey? Really? How quaint!

@Edward

So the proof of the supernatural is nature. Please take a moment and reconsider what you are stating. It is tough to take your point seriously when your evidence of something existing is indistinguishable from it not existing.

All That is

Please don't confuse the point. No one is saying people aren't free to do and believe what they choose. If people could keep their religious beliefs personal and to themselves ... we wouldn't be having this conversation. It's when people (see Edward) try and superimpose their beliefs over science that we have a problem.

Science is proof enough, something does not come from nothing. "For every action there must be an opposite reaction."

1) Your mixing two different scientific laws there: Conservation of mass/energy and Newton's laws of motion.

2) If something doesn't come from nothing, then where did God come from?

3) The Big Bang doesn't mean nothing existed and then all of sudden something did. It states that all of the matter and energy in the universe once was concentrated into an extremely small volume. The Big Bang was a rapid expansion of this volume, which continues today. So, once again, the Big Bang isn't something from nothing.

It's called that because it's where stars are created, go back to kansas you tool

I have found much salvation in my toy poodles, thank you though.

Edward you missing the point - Creation as in the Creation of Stars which in essence is the creation of life, since every single last cell in your body was created from star dust, Is it possible that your bible meant the word of god is a nebula?

As far as what created the big bang? As humans continue to use scientific reason and understanding the answers will present themselves in time.

Gee, I couldn't have guessed that this headline would turn the discussion page into another giant pro/anti-religious bitchfest........

First of all, Edward, you ARE entitled to your faith and opinions. Just be careful about proselytizing too deeply on this forum, lest the belligerent athiests get their panties in a wad....

That being said, my only counterpoint Edward would be that I believe the Word of God was not literal, as in spoken, but rather essentially the very thought process that formed the physical manifestation of the universe out of God's will. This is a very spiritually-based esoteric view of things, and you are free to disagree. But I come from the religous stance that the Bible was written metaphorically and should be rendered as such. I interpret the Bible as a story of Paradise Lost to Paradise Found, with the teachings of Jesus as the modality for progress.

For everyone else......I can understand that you are deeply offended at the very mention of God or Jesus, but that does not warrant you the right to make offensive, sophomoric insults at those who do believe. Granted, the Bible, especially the OT, is full of contradictions and the portrayal of God as sociopathic, misogynistic and vengeful God. I also understand that religion, including Christianity, is historically rife with wars, killings and horrific situations of all kinds. But a fleeting moment of clear logic would help one understand that those who commit heinous acts in the name of God (any god, for that matter), is NOT acting in the manner by which their spiritual leaders (like Jesus) have taught them.

Jesus stood unequivocably for love, tolerance, and compassion. He did not waver in his teachings, and there are no contradictions to what JESUS himself said. His teachings were not marred with exceptions and inconsistencies. He taught love and compasssion for ALL, with no exceptions. Period. THAT is what ALL Christians are SUPPOSED to follow. Of course, if Christians do not follow Jesus' teachings, it is not a reflection upon Jesus or Christianity itself, instead it is a reflection upon the person who is not being a very good Christian. The same can be said for any other religion, or even sociopolitical factions.

So what is so wrong about teachings others to follow a life of love, tolerance, and compassion?? If you athiests have a problem, make the problem about the people who "talk the talk" but do not "walk the walk". It is not fair nor logical to lambast religion in general because you are offended by a particular person's proselytizing.

And if you do not believe there is a God at all, well, so be it. You have that right. But you do not have the right to offend me with asinine comments that are meant to hurt and belittle my beliefs.

I am amazed at the number of athiests who, in the same paragraph, complain about Christians preaching to them but then turn around and act in the same manner. It's hypocritical, and like all debates, it minimizes your argument.

Let's chalk up this photo of the stars as a beautiful picture. You may believe that it is the handiwork of God Himself, or you can believe that it is nothing more than a serendipitous collection of elemental gases. Either way, it is a beautiful picture.

First of all, Edward, you ARE entitled to your faith and opinions. Just be careful about proselytizing too deeply on this forum, lest the belligerent athiests get their panties in a wad

Not all atheists are belligerent. Some of us just think all ideas should be tested. His idea that God created the universe has some serious holes in it.

Also Edward made erroneous statements, such as the Big Bang theory says something came from nothing. He also took the word "creation" out of context here.

He is certainly entitled to his beliefs and deserves respect from others on here. No debate on that point.

Edward,

While I don't share your theology, I have to admit that these images are awesome and should make any thinking person ask himself, "What's it all about?" All philosophy begins with wonder.

intellectual beauty is truly more fascinating than, intellectual formatting......

something does not come from nothing.

If that is the case then who created the creator? If something can't come from nothing then god could never exist.

These Nebula's are where stars form from the gasses that are floating around from a star going Super-Nova millions of years before. By calling these formations the "Pillars of Creation" they aren't saying a deity had any role, they're saying this is how a star is created, the way a chef creates a meal by combining foods or a musician creates a song by combining notes. Claiming this is scientists validating a religion is a desperate attempt to validate yourself by misunderstanding what other people are saying. Writing off scientific discoveries doesn't make you a good christian, it just makes you a stupid human being.

Indy Patriot wins. Hands down.

I wish people could, just for once, see something glorious and beautiful without seeing a need to bring their own ego into it. Because that is really all that God is - a reflection of the human ego in a miraculous and wondrous universe.

That is what all religionists are - ranging from Mr bin Laden to the preachers knocking on our door, unashamed, unabashed egoists. It's a very clever dodge, saying that it's all about God when it is about worship of one's own ego.

If you believe in a religion and think I am blowing smoke - let me offer you a simple intellectual exercise. There're a bunch of religions that you don't believe in. Re-read what I just said but instead of including all religion just imagine I had restricted my statements to that one particular religion you disagree with. Can you see yourself nodding in agreement now?

So what's the difference? The difference is you. It's your ego. It's all you.

The universe is an amazing place to live in, and we don't understand most of it - in fact, so poor is our understanding that it there's room for billions of gods in what we don't know. But that's all it is. We don't know.

It's interesting how those who Insult the beliefs of Others have a right to speak their minds..and those of us who believe need to keep our shut about it. Kind of one way if you ask me.

Edward, isn't faith supposed to be a quality that requires no connection to material proof? It's one thing to be spiritual and to seek a uniting principle throughout all that exists, but it's another to force physical data through the tiny filter of one religion, especially one centered on a wildly inconsistent, caftan-wearing sky god with a loud voice.

Since human beings truly aren't the center of the universe(s), it should be sufficiently amazing that we talking, two-legged hamsters have invented a means of looking at the progress of an incredible galactic phenomenon. Let eternity take care of itself, as it will do anyway.

Just be careful about proselytizing too deeply on this forum, lest the belligerent athiests get their panties in a wad.

As atheists should be careful not to push science too forcefully, otherwise the belligerent theists get their panties in a wad (See: Edward & Indy)

But you do not have the right to offend me with asinine comments that are meant to hurt and belittle my beliefs.

And Edward's doing JUST THAT is ok with you?

Not belligerent. If someone stated that the moon was made of monkey poop and cheetos, I would laugh just as hard and correct them.

a couple of Christian opinions and the rest atheist comments, who is shoving their thoughts down peoples throat? lol............

I am a man of faith and I others chose not to believe, that is their right. If they do not want me to share, that is all right with me. If they want to believe in evolution by faith, that is fine with me. We all have a choice to make; however, I believe God already knows who will choose Him and who will not and we all will have to deal with that eternally.

All you people make such a big stink over real vs myth. What a comedian God is to have the system set up that we discuss and challenge each other over his/her/its existence. If God hung a Ribbon of Clouds around the earth with his existence spread far and wide in flashing lights, where would the journey be? The journey being a search for understanding the MYSTERY of Life - Giving Birth to an animate computer being. With a hard-drive of unparalleled MEMORY and RAM for the day to day things. An Engine of the Heart the brings the fuel of water and blood together to nourish the MIND and BODY to experience all the feelings of Joy, Sadness, Love, Hate, Friendship, Loneliness, Fear, Faith and so on.

If I become bored or lonely I can create a scientific production of Energy and Matter by Jogging, thus propelling my body of existence through a space/time equation thus increasing my exposure to a higher level of understanding.

Yes, out of Loneliness the Universe was created with a Big Bang of Celebration to continue growing and announcing the infinite Creation of Worlds, Stars, Planets and Mass that produces the Materials necessary to expand our knowledge and express our wonderment.

Watching the amazing video, as it pulls back, it did look like a hand, perhaps the hand of God. As it pulled back more, it looks like they transposed the constellation the nebula resides in, but heck..that looked like a DEMON to me! Just saying...

At any rate, beautiful pictures. The universe is an amazing place.

Atlas Shrugging:

We all have a choice to make; however, I believe God already knows who will choose Him and who will not and we all will have to deal with that eternally.

So do we have free will or not? If we chose whether or not to believe in God, then it isn't pre-determined--there isn't something about us that will make us pick theism over atheism or vice versa. But if God knows what we'll pick, then we don't actually have a choice. It's already been chosen for us.

The Big Bang isn't the whole universe. It is the 'visible universe'

There is most likely something beyond the opaque blast of the big bang 'cosmic background noise'. Or maybe other dimensions.

@Atlas; Exactly,the way it always is,they are shoving what they believe down our throat far more than we are to them.Then they claim we are the ones that are far worse.lol(hypocrisy abounds) We offer opinion on the cause,you atheistS try to offer facts. Why could this not be our creator in action. Who are any of us to say it is not.

There is much empirical proof of Jesus,and the history in the bible.

@jon;

Interstellar gas and dark matter seems the top of the list. An odd thing for a deity to insist upon. And, ebola... nifty thing for the Gang of Three (but One) to add to the list of things "necessary" to "create" for the glory of itself.

Alas, you miss the actual 'miracle' in pursuit of your mythical one.

Are you saying because we think that this could be God in action,that we doubt the matter,and the components it is made up of,try again sir,I am a Christian,and I study quantum vacuum fluctuations,so do not ignorantly say we miss the "true miracle" like we are blind fools,because of our faith.

That in itself is ignorant.and you sir may be the one missing the "miracle".

Interestingly called Pillars of Creation? when science rarely calls anything "Creation".

Actually, Science uses the word creation fairly regularly. Creation is the act of a thing being created. Science watches as a seed becomes a tree. Science watches as sperm and egg get together and cell division starts. Science watches as water vapor accumulates into cloud formations which yield rain storms. There are many MANY types of observable creation.

It is the unobservable creation that is a bit more of a touchy subject. Whether it happened through a big bang and/or by a divine manifestation all things were indeed created and science has no problem with that. It's when folks start saying something no one can observe created it that scientists start arguing. For example, there is debate about the big bang still because no one can observe it. But it is a well received theory because the science and mathematics seems to back it up. The only thing backing up God is faith. That's good enough for some people and not good enough for others.

Fred Evil- Sorry, "Fred", but you either are trying to be needlessly argumentative, or you have a problem with reading comprehension. My entire post was written fairly equitable for both factions, but you chose to twist my words to maike it appear as if I was bashing athiests.

There are kind, compassionate athiests, and then there are the belligerent ones who make offensive statements on public forums. Which one are you?

And for the record, Edward was proselytizing. He was not making a statement with the intention of offending you. If you were offended, that is because you have fundamental differences over his OPINION. But his post was not meant to be cruel to others, unlike many of the comments by the (here we go again) BELLIGERENT athiests on this forum.

SO go back and re-read my post if you are confused. If you are not confused, then it is apparent you are simply trying to be a troll. Good day.

Edward, You are certainly taking some heat here my brother. Those who profess their unbelief in these statements will believe at some point. Unfortunately for many it will be too late and they will be the ones taking the heat.... for an eternity.

You just new this article would attract the religious nuts, spouting ancient sheepherder mumbo jumbo texts and zero evidence to support their claims. It never fails.

Indypatriot,

Proselytizing is offensive. It is also belligerent, as evidenced by the above post from Stykbowhntr, who informs all non believers they are subject to eternal agonizing torture at the hands of his blood thirsty god.

Proselytes by nature assume they are better than non believers. They assert the entire human race is subject to the authority of a mysterious and invisible being who has reaveled himself to a select few and whose secret plans are understood by only a precious few... then they ask for money.

The entire judeo/christian ethos is founded on the premise that (a particular) god has declared one group of humans, "special," and has chosen them above all others for his 'special' attention. All other humans are fuel for the flames. I see no unequivocal love in that scenario.

It is also the height of arrogance to claim you have been selected by the lord and master of the universe... so quit with the pious fraud of humility.

It is offensive, bellicose and disgusting, not to mention primitive nonsense. Poor Edward who started all this by posting his lunatic ravings on a science forum included in his initial post the words, "Jesus Christ... the Lamb of God." Precisely... and shepherds show their love for their lambs, how?? By eating them and wearing their skins.

Edward - Thank you for that beautiful, inspirational post No. 1. Thank God we live in a country where we are free to express our feelings and beliefs. Life is so much richer when we believe. :)

Kevin, I really don't understand what your point was. You have pointedly taken everything about Christianity out of context while magnifying the negatives and ignoring the positives. Did you expect me to agree with your post? Are you trying to change my worldview on these things? If so, you ARE proselytizing, my friend. You are also making just as many unwarranted assertions about Christians as you claim they do. I'm not sure how that helps the argument.

The OT was written by the Jes,. for the Jews, in the context of Jewish society 2000 years ago. It doesn't really relate much to Christians, given what Jesus taught.

And "Jesus is the Lamb of God" is a metaphorical statement, not a literal one.

Everything else you wrote is either baseless or meant to be inflammatory, and thus not worth arguing over.

All you people make such a big stink over real vs myth.

whatstheharm.net I suggest you visit it. One of the most poinient questions posed in support of belief in myth is "What's the harm?" The many answers to this question can be summed up in something of a Taoist manner: When you believe incorrect things about reality, then your beliefs will lead you to incorrect action. However, when you believe correct things about reality, then your beliefs will lead you to commit correct actions.

History is so densly peppered with examples of the harm caused by people acting on their beliefs when they believed in nonsense and myth that there are as many human errors as there are stars in the sky. Entire civilizations have erred and caused harm to themselves and their neighbors through incorrect action caused by acting on incorrect beliefs. Though this harm is usually not fatal to a population as a whole and so the trait of incorrect belief is not that well selected against.

Atheists, especially the aggressive ones, are tired of people being conned by those who espouse and propogate myths as an explanation for reality because of the incalculable harm it has done and continues to do today. Most of which goes unreported.

Interesting that he would send his only son 6500 light years to save a relatively primitive mammal species on a backwater planet in the outer spiral arm of a far off minor galaxy.

I personally find organized religion to be oft-corrupt and appalling. With that said, everyone's entitled to their beliefs and I do believe there are some redeeming qualities in the concept of religion.

It's just that most religions, such as Christianity, hold such stupid, weak-minded, and ridiculous beliefs. Yet so many people swear by the whole thing. Christianity has had a history of brutality yet its proponents just gloss over that. Furthermore, it has the potential of slowing scientific progress. These are dangerous things.

These pics are amazing and truly a wonder. Let not our fear of the afterlife prevent our further understanding of this incredible universe.

@Edward

You say something cannot come from nothing? How did your God come from nothing? I know that it says he's been there for an eternity, but how is it possible that he came out of nowhere? That would mean that God never had his first thought, had his first sight. He's just always been there. Its ridiculous. If you believe that, then whats to make you think that there is no Bible god and that the Universe and all the star-creators haven't just out of nowhere been there for an eternity...That they have just always been there since forever back in time.

Oh, me next, PULLEEEEZZEE me next!?!

Seriously, though, this:

For everyone else......I can understand that you are deeply offended at the very mention of God or Jesus, but that does not warrant you the right to make offensive, sophomoric insults at those who do believe.

For one thing, it's not necessarily offense at the mention of god or Jesus (though some may get their knickers in a knot over it). It's the offense of ascribing well-understood, partially understood, or not-understood natural processes to said god. You cherry-pick quotes, out of your own bible no less (Jesus was a war-monger just as much as he was a peace-lover, get over it). Of course, the whole thing is so poorly cobbled together, you can use Jesus' supposed sayings to support just about any position. But I digress.

Not only is it insulting to our intelligence, and the drive to achieve that intelligence, that you disregard the work of hard-working scientists that worked out how all this stuff works, but you continue to insult by claiming that anyone who questions you or your priest or pastor or who-the-@!$%#-ever will end up being tortured for eternity. Well, bite me @!$%#. And, you want special protection for your ideas, how you can insult and smear us all you want, but then when we name-call back, you run to mommy and claim persecution. I understand that a whole lot of your ridiculous ideas are based on martyrdom, but getting called a moron on the internetz is hardly equal to being "bludgeoned to death by big @!$%#ing rocks." You don't get special privilege for your ideas. You don't get to have them protected from ridicule, mockery, disdain, dismissal, inquiry, disagreement, argument, or any other modality we have of determining truth and countering propaganda. That's what it means to have a society with free speech, and a society with freedom of religion. We can choose not to believe, and you can't force us to at gunpoint anymore.

And if you do not believe there is a God at all, well, so be it. You have that right. But you do not have the right to offend me with asinine comments that are meant to hurt and belittle my beliefs.

I am amazed at the number of athiests who, in the same paragraph, complain about Christians preaching to them but then turn around and act in the same manner. It's hypocritical, and like all debates, it minimizes your argument.

As stated above, you do not have the right to force us to shut up and not talk about god, your feelings are immaterial in this matter. The atheists that you see "preaching" are rather arguing that there is no evidence for the god of the bible or any other god. The godbots, on the other hand, are the ones preaching, lifting up a thousands-year-old book of nonsense and fables thought up by sheepherders in the stone age, interpreted by desert nomads in the bronze age, and finally edited by politicians in the iron age. And, there seems to be a decent amount of evidence that they were all on hardcore psychedelic drugs at the time, seeing as how none of them managed to make any real sense or make it fit neatly into known history. We can fact-check a lot of the claims in the bible, and they just don't add up.

Not only this, but you seem to be under the impression that proselytizing is just something we should live with. Once again, this is your "I have free speech to talk about god, but you don't have free speech to disagree with me because it causes me butthurt" syndrome. Well, unfortunately for you, this is no longer Joe McCarthy's era, where they forcibly added "under god" to the pledge, In God We Trust to the money, and anyone who disagreed was automatically hauled before Congress to explain why they didn't trust the ramblings of boring old men standing in front of a lower case "t" trying to tell us that if we don't swallow whole what they tell us, we'll end up as human barbecue. Your beliefs aren't special. They may be unique, but that doesn't mean they're true. You don't get to harass and harangue us without us fighting back anymore. You don't get to call time-out because you feel you're losing the argument. You don't get to spout your nonsense without question, or get to claim persecution when your ridiculous ideas are laughed at anymore.

I'm calling your disingenuous attitude out. I don't particularly care if you believe in Jesus as some mythical, quasi-holy being that descended to Earth on a giant potato and told everyone "Hey man, be groovy." Or, whether you believe in Chopraism and that your prayers are really thoughts in tune with quantum fluctuations that send good vibes out into the universe that come back to you in multiplicative ways. You have no evidence, you have nothing but your beliefs. As soon as those beliefs are out, they are fair game. So, keep them in your head, or face the wrath of the pen (keyboard).

o for fracks sake people, god believers u go to ur corner and atheists u return to ur corner. look, both of u have the right to ur beliefs but i hate to break it to u, both of u have to exist on this planet together. Christians you have no more right to shove your beliefs down an athesists throat as an atheist has the right to insult the christian for believing.

For 1 thing, the bible states that the ultimate decision to believe or not is between them and god, u can no more force a non believer to believe than force the stars to move. Its free will, k? And yes free will is possible even if god knows ahead of time. Ill explain in a scientific scenario.

According to most mainstream scientists time travel is certainly possible and does not go against einsteins theories and the laws of physics, if, and i stress if, it is accomplished within certain parameters, too many to list here. Now if a person used that ability to go back in time and bet on horseraces, he has in fact knowledge of the outcome, but he has not influenced it in any way, the same horse would win as long as he didnt interfere. Granted the race is a matter of chance, but the same holds true if he goes back and watches himself make certain choices, as long as he doesnt interfere, it is still his own free will.

For another point, as far as atheism with scientific beliefs go, it also is a faith based belief system. you are believing what someone else tells you, and accepting their conclusions without testing the evidence yourself. Unless you yourself run the tests, examine the evidence, study the data, and come to a conclusion yourself, you are putting your faith in what someone else tells you. this is no different than what a god believer does, he/she is accepting what someone else tells them and accepting their proof and their conclusions. So in essence atheists and christians are the same in that respect, they have faith in their own belief system.

If a person has a belief and uses it in a productive and peaceful manner, then they have the right to be respected, because so many god believers and atheists alike do not use it peacefully. Dont be one of the latter.

others chose not to believe,

Point of order, BELIEF is NOT a CHOICE. I am either convinced by the evidence before me, or NOT.

If you have a low threshold of proof, don't blame me for having higher standards.

@ swan;

You just new this article would attract the religious nuts, spouting ancient sheepherder mumbo jumbo texts and zero evidence to support their claims. It never fails.

Who on this vine number one is"spouting "anceint sheepherder mumbo jumbo"? John gives one verse,and his opinion,I would hardly call that being a "religous nut". We do not have to back anything up,this is where so many athiestS are misled.

You are just being insultive,and bias,because you have nothing better to offer.

Zero evidence?

What about the unearthing of writings and happenings they are finding on the walls of Old Jerusalem and other lost cities,that match the names of kings,and scripture found in the bible, What about the dead sea scrolls,this is replicating evidence of the bible,the tomb of Jesus brother with his name on it that dates to the time of his death correlating with the bible,there is much more empirical evidence,wooden compartments found 13,000 ft (uninhabitable area) on mt Ararat that date almost perfectly to the time of noah. The list is growing daily. Is this sheeepherder mumbo jumbo?I think not.

These are things you can see, touch, and feel.

Elements that are found in space are also in us,coincidence I think not,was the "let be there be light" command the cause of a quantum fluctuation(something coming from nothing) maybe so.

Coral, that's not evidence.

@ janstince;

Not only is it insulting to our intelligence, and the drive to achieve that intelligence, that you disregard the work of hard-working scientists that worked out how all this stuff works,

Yes all us religous nuts could never believe anything proven by science,yuk,yuk,yuk,.WOW.

You are the only insultive one cussing at people for what they believe.

As far as your statement above,i bequeath you with the ignorant statement of the day award . One pattern that fits you and the other atheistS like you is that you sound angry,maybe you need a little peace in your life,here let me tell you how to have peace.lol do you have a minute?lol

@ toasty; This is empirical, self replicating evidence that proves itself more than once how do you say this is not evidence of the bibles scripture, toasty? Give me little more than,"thats not evidence"?

Coral Taxi -

Firstly, I'm not "cussing at people for what they believe." I really don't give a rat's ass what you believe. Just keep it out of my science. Unless you have a proof-driven theory about the molecular makeup of these clouds, or how the stars' gravitic forces are working with the compressive "winds" released by fusion in order to form new stars, then maybe you should hold silent on your "theories" (btw, your people keep using that word wrong) and just remark how wonderful a picture it is, and how awesome it is that science has given us the technology to see it.

I've been insulted by better than you. You think I'm angry? Why don't I have the right to be angry? I see a whole bunch of morons getting pissed off that there are some atheists that are 1) mocking them or 2) existing on this thread. You say that the way we argue is insulting. We say that it is truthful. We generally keep it to mocking ideas, rather than people. You keep it to mocking people rather than ideas. There are exceptions to the rule, and yes, when I get pissed off enough, I will mock somebody. Saying things like "atheists don't exist, they're just mad at god," or, "atheists are going to hell," or some other asinine stupidity is sure to arouse my ire. And guess what, I have the right to come tell those people that they're full of crap and need to wake the hell up.

Oh, and "you're just being insultive, and bias, because you have nothing better to offer?" Please, what a load of horse excrement. Go back to writing for Jack Chick.

Alright, I'll go through them one by one. Finding writings in a once-jewish city about jewish rulers isn't surprising. It's also not evidence that their fairy tales were real.

The same with the Dead Sea scrolls. It's not shocking to find things with hebrew myths written on them in a once-hebrew region.

There was no discovery of any wooden scraps on Ararat. It was completely made-up. All six times it was claimed to have been "discovered."

And the reason we find materials on earth that appear in space is because the universe is made up of the same materials. That means it indeed is no coincidence that we are also made of these same materials, because that's all our ancestors had to work with. It's like being surprised that oxygen-breathing life forms evolved to life in atmospheres with oxygen...

Wow, janstince, I try to be fair in my assessment of the current debate, and you go and call me an @!$%# over it......

I'm not sure if you're just having a bad day, or are genuinely angry (read: sociopathic). But either way, your post was full of hate. You assume many things about me that I did not say nor allude to, and are making judgements of my rationalization based upon YOUR assumptions that I am not as intelligent or rational as YOU. My post was about how athiests make offensive statements that are meant to be offensive. Period.

Well, I guess that's the end of the argument, isn't it?? You are convinced that I must be stupid or gullible. But that's not the case, actually. I simply do not view the world in a materialistic, reductionist manner. If you can't handle that, then you have no business posting your drivel here.

Next time, dont be so quick to blow people out of the water. You misunderstood the premise of my posts. You have proved yourself to be more offensive than anything Edward could have ever mentioned.

Coral

Here's a little hint for you. The Quran contains historical events as well ... does that mean Islam is true?

No one is arguing the bible doesn't contain historical references.

@ toatsy;

There was no discovery of any wooden scraps on Ararat. It was completely made-up. All six times it was claimed to have been "discovered."

Really toasty? Your argument would be better with the dates not if it ever happened at all. Read on.

The team claims to have found in 2007 and 2008 seven large wooden compartments buried at 13,000 feet (4,000 meters) above sea level, near the peak of Mount Ararat. They returned to the site with a film crew in October 2009.

Many Christians believe the mountain in Turkey is the final resting place of Noah's ark, which the Bible says protected Noah, his family, and pairs of every animal species on Earth during a divine deluge that wiped out most of humanity.

"The structure is partitioned into different spaces," said Noah's Ark Ministries International team member Man-fai Yuen in a statement. "We believe that the wooden structure we entered is the same structure recorded in historical accounts. ... "

The team says radiocarbon-dated wood taken from the discovery site—whose location they're keeping secret for now—shows the purported ark is about 4,800 years old, which coincides roughly with the time of Noah's flood implied by the Bible.

The dates are arguable,and contamination of evidence comes into play,but nonetheless,possible evidence of an ark. The rest is a major fail,you think the dead sea scrolls are fake,and the writings on the walls also.lol

@ janstince;

Firstly, I'm not "cussing at people for what they believe." I really don't give a rat's ass what you believe

So you cuss at me in your first sentencel lol,easy girl,just make your points.I value your opinion,but not your insults,or anger.

trip*toe*fan - First, God has always been. He is infinite, we are finite, so don't expect to understand it. If you could understand everything there is to know about God, he wouldn't be God. Your explanation of the Big Bang doesn't address the origin of any matter/volume. It's a nice theory, but you need to explain where anything (other than God who has always existed) came from.

To the other poster who said that science reveals more than we could ever imagine through religion (I'm paraphrasing), speaking of Christianity specifically, it doesn't imagine anything. Christianity is based on the bible which we believe and know to be the Word of God. Therefore God gave us a written account (yes, he chose men to pen it) of creation. So anything that science reveals is a revelation of the amazing, awesome Creator. Period. You needn't believe it, but that doesn't make it any less true.

Indy Patriot -

I didn't misrepresent you, I quoted you, in context. You came on claiming that the religionists were here making nice-nice and then a whole bunch of evil atheists came in and shat on the carpet. I disagreed, and can back up my argument with evidence. My primary text was alluding to how Mr. Edward up there decided that because the name of the picture, "Pillars of Creation," had the word "creation" in it, his god was therefore the ultimate god. The unspoken assumption being, of course, that all non-believers will go to hell.

That's been made more explicit by further rantings down the thread. People bringing up Pascal's wager like that'll impress folk, people claiming that those who don't believe will regret it forever, blah blah blah. And you, coming in with your false equivalence, claiming that that's just Christians being Christians and we atheists should STFU and mind our own business. Well, science is our business.

I didn't see the atheists as mocking those believers, so much as the belief. Ideas aren't a protected class. You said they were being hurtful, and I put you straight in that your folk were being hurtful, and the atheists were retaliating, somewhat more mildly. We didn't claim you would forever regret your mistakes of not sacrificing live chickens to the almighty Science. We didn't claim you would be tossed into a burning pit for doubting our words.

Essentially, you came in and said "I believe this, and if you tell me I'm wrong, you're insulting me." Well, I hope you do feel insulted. I find your beliefs ridiculous, and posit that they have no place on this thread. See what I did there?

What about the unearthing of writings and happenings they are finding on the walls of Old Jerusalem and other lost cities,that match the names of kings,and scripture found in the bible, What about the dead sea scrolls,this is replicating evidence of the bible,the tomb of Jesus brother with his name on it that dates to the time of his death correlating with the bible,there is much more empirical evidence,wooden compartments found 13,000 ft (uninhabitable area) on mt Ararat that date almost perfectly to the time of noah. The list is growing daily. Is this sheeepherder mumbo jumbo?I think not.

These are things you can see, touch, and feel.

Elements that are found in space are also in us,coincidence I think not,was the "let be there be light" command the cause of a quantum fluctuation(something coming from nothing) maybe so....

So you are of the opinion that if some of the more mundane parts of the bible are shown to be correct based on archaeological evidence, then the numerous other parts that defy every law of physics must be correct also? Riiiiiiiiigt!

Let's just drop that for a second. You know one of the worst things you guys do. You re-post debunked news like it was the truth. The latest Chinese expedition has been shown to be a scam. Yet you bring up Noah ark stuff like it's accepted. Basically you either lie or are very uninformed. Why you guys don't check this stuff out beyond the pro mumbo jumbo web sites is beyond me.

Then you say stuff like "Elements that are found in space are also in us,coincidence I think not". I mean really, what is that? You know how dumb that sounds? You think that humans should have special elements in their body? I assure you they shouldn't. They are all in the periodic table. And you try to pass this stuff of as evidence? Geeezzzzz. You know there is no convincing people like you. And I'll tell you something else. Take away the eternal life aspect of religion and the faithful would vanish like a fart in the wind. The whole thing is just a greedy belief system based fear of death.

In many cases it excuses heinous crimes by giving the perpetrator a supernatural get out of jail free card. "Yes I murdered that woman and her three small children, but now I repent and will be saved for all eternity", Well maybe that woman didn't believe all that crap and so according to her beliefs you have just taken everything from her". But hey maybe if you are religious you are OK with that because you believe in the "afterlife". And hell, if she doesn't believe that's her problem.

So now you know why religion *IS* somewhat offensive.

@swan;

So you are of the opinion that if some of the more mundane parts of the bible are shown to be correct based on archaeological evidence, then the numerous other parts that defy every law of physics must be correct also?

When did I say that?(you atheistS are great at spinning words) I give you guys physical evidence,that you can not dispute,show me where these finds on mt Arat are debunked,the dates are arguable,other than that the finds are true. Show me do not tell me.

So you are of the opinion that if some of the more mundane parts of the bible are shown to be correct based on archaeological evidence,

Mundane,I would hardly call the proof of Jesus' brother's death mundane sir,I would hardly call the dead sea schrolls mundane sir. I do not have to prove anything the only reason I show you SOME of these facts is that you atheistS always cry for proof. I need none of this to have faith,or the holy spirit in me,I felt and believed long before knowing of the scriptures.

I do not need religion either.

There is one other kind of truth that cannot be proven or disproven by science. That’s because it is comprised of all of the other kinds of truth mentioned above mixed together: Religious truth. It does have a certain amount of overlap with science, when religion makes explicit claims about scientific fact, and when science makes explicit claims about religion. But the overlap tends to be rather small; in any case, true science and true religion, because they both aim to describe reality, can never be in conflict. (Read “Science & Religion: Conflict or Coherence?” for more on this topic.)

@ swan;

Then you say stuff like "Elements that are found in space are also in us,coincidence I think not". I mean really, what is that? You know how dumb that sounds? You think that humans should have special elements in their body? I assure you they shouldn't. They are all in the periodic table. And you try to pass this stuff of as evidence?

I will not do your legwork for you,but read this then study further,this is common knowledge,and fact,so yes I do use it as evidence that we are not mere coincidence. I do not talk out of my arse.

Many of the elements that comprise not only the Earth, but also humans and other living organisms have their origin in the beginning of the universe. Thus, the very hydrogen atoms in water molecules that we drink are ancient in age! The origin of the universe is inextricably connected to the elements that we find on Earth and in the universe because the particles that formed during the origin are related to the elements of Earth and to those in the universe. The first elements to come into existence at the universe's establishment were hydrogen and a lesser amount of helium.

Now how dumb do I really sound.lol

@ Swan; Just so I know I will not get any more argument or insult from you I will give you prime example,something you atheistS always fail to do,when you refute something.

. Then you say stuff like "Elements that are found in space are also in us,coincidence I think not". I mean really, what is that? You know how dumb that sounds?

Now read how dumb it sounds.lol

Carbon is the sixth most common element in the universe and the fourth most common element in the solar system. It is the second most common element in the human body after oxygen. About 18 percent of a person's body weight is due to carbon.

Read more: http://www.chemistryexplained.com/elements/A-C/Carbon.html#ixzz1jqzhYQts

Now how dumb do I really sound.lol

Very. You missed the point entirely. Most educated people know THAT ELEMENTS THAT MAKE UP HUMANS ARE ALSO SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE COSMOS. It's like saying the sky is blue. There is nothing supernatural about it yet you think you made some great point. LOL!

Now read how dumb it sounds.lol

Even dumber. You post these quotes like they support your position. These are things you learn in high-school? Why you think they have ANYTHING to do with existence of a god is beyond me. What, did you just take your first science class or something? ......Hey I got one for you: water is made of two Hydrogen atoms and one Oxygen atom......OMG!....... god exists!!!!!!!!!! NOT!

Mundane,I would hardly call the proof of Jesus' brother's death mundane sir,I would hardly call the dead sea schrolls mundane sir. I do not have to prove anything the only reason I show you SOME of these facts is that you atheistS always cry for proof. I need none of this to have faith,or the holy spirit in me,I felt and believed long before knowing of the scriptures.

They are mundane compared to dead people coming back to life and people walking on water. Providing evidence for anything that his within realm of reality is no evidence for the supernatural. Why should it be? Is there a point?

Many of the elements that comprise not only the Earth, but also humans and other living organisms have their origin in the beginning of the universe. Thus, the very hydrogen atoms in water molecules that we drink are ancient in age! The origin of the universe is inextricably connected to the elements that we find on Earth and in the universe because the particles that formed during the origin are related to the elements of Earth and to those in the universe. The first elements to come into existence at the universe's establishment were hydrogen and a lesser amount of helium.

And what does this mean? Nothing. It provides no evidence. It's just a quote to give the faithful a warm fuzzy like most of the rest of postings.

No, Janstince, you're simply being a jackass about it. Period.

Once again, you have taken everything I said out of context to prove to everyone that yYOU know better. Well, good for you.

You quoted a portion of my post, then proceeded to base your argument about it in a manner that had nothing to do with what I posted. And you want us to believe YOU'RE being the reasonable one?

I actually spoke out against Edward's hellfire and brimstone allusion...did you read that? Nope. You simply found the first thing that caught your eye and decided to write your offensive drivel about it.

You ARE mocking the believers, NOT their beliefs. You ARE making inflammatory statements about Christians, NOT their Christian beliefs.

I never said athiests should "STFU" as you presume. I said that it was not fair nor logical to make inflammatory, sophomoric insults just because someone shares their belief. I was just as hard on the 'hellfire and damnation' types, so don't knock me for having "false equivalency". I'm not an idiot, so don't treat me like one.

You're acting like a petulant child. You expect me to respect your opinion when you can't be bothered to even respect mine out of politeness.

Lastly, you said "Well, I hope you do feel insulted. I find your beliefs ridiculous, and posit that they have no place on this thread. See what I did there?" So, you're admitting that you are simply trying to be offensive, because you certainly didn't have a point to make.

This argument is over. You obviously cannot be bothered to debate an issue in an intelligent, respectful manner. I've tried to be fair. I haven't pushed any beliefs on you or anyone else. I've posted respectful arguments on here, only to be called an @!$%# by you for nothing. Bon soir et bon chance.

@ swan; Did you miss this part of my post,before you went into a diatribe of how common it is, first you say this sounded dumb now you say it is common knowledge, after I already stated this?WOW.

,this is common knowledge

See I already said it was common knowledge.

Then you come with this silly question.lol

Why you think they have ANYTHING to do with existence of a god is beyond me.

Ummmm because I am a Christian,and I believe God created all things, that would probably be a good reason to think that. Hello Mcfly!!

you think that humans should have special elements in their body? I assure you they shouldn't. They are all in the periodic table

You say this statement above,referring to my matching elements in humans and in space comment, I make a point that we are of the elements of the universe,then you come back with this...

Most educated people know THAT ELEMENTS THAT MAKE UP HUMANS ARE ALSO SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE COSMOS. It's like saying the sky is blue.

Why did you not say this in the first place? You are cornfusing me sir. The diatribe you wrote on this is a ridiculous retort,your caps are showing your anger which means I am being effective.lol

The point is,this shows we all came from one origin, we were created by something,we are not here by coincidence,we are here for a purpose,us sharing elements of the universe,and being of higher intelligence is not happenstance,do you get it now sir???

ie Why are we there no other carbon units(humans) in the universe,why have we not found them? Coincidence,umm no,my bet is that were created special.All the elements are there to create more life in the universe,why dont they?,you said this yourself with your "COSMOS" rant.lol

They are mundane compared to dead people coming back to life and people walking on water. Providing evidence for anything that his within realm of reality is no evidence for the supernatural. Why should it be? Is there a point

Mundane not hardly,they are just the beginning sir. As far as the miracles of Jesus,think about this,the Romans,nor phillistines,nor jews,ever denied these happenings(miracles), for if they were not true or did not happen, surely this would have came out. Some one would have cried foul they never did.Out of thousands.

The empiracle evidence I show you is hardly to prove Jesus' miracles,the reason for it is to show you that my belief in the bible is not just a fairy tale stretch,and that parts of it can be proven with hard evidence.Get it now???

The thing you need to get is that the message of the bible is the most important, this is what you should be concentrating on,not the believability of a burning bush,a great flood, a tree bearing fruit out of season. The bible tells me these things happen,o.k,great,believing this is not how I am saved,believing in Jesus as my savior is how I am saved. Get it now?

And what does this mean? Nothing. It provides no evidence. It's just a quote to give the faithful a warm fuzzy like most of the rest of postings.

I was using this for the element comment,not to give you any evidence,a "warm fuzzy",cool hope they enjoyed it.lol

My postings make perfect sense,you are just having a hard time understanding.and are twisting my words in your head,that is burning right now.

Indypatriot,

Jesus said his salvation was for the children of Israel. All NT claims to ecumenism are later insertions and interpolations by the evangelists. If they weren't Paul and Peter would not have had their argument over preaching to gentiles.

Jesus' remark about pearls before swine is a direct insult to gentiles as is his slur against the Samaritan woman... he called her a dog. Jesus was a bigot!

He tells a parable which explains why one slave can be beaten with "many stipes" and one should be beaten with, "fewer stripes." Don't you think if he were god, he should have mentioned the simple fact that slavery is wrong?

He also said he came not to make peace, but with a sword to set fathers against sons, etc. He also said unless a man hates his family, he cannot be a disciple. He also destroyed a fig tree for not having fruit on it... when the passage clearly states figs weren't even in season. Please explain your assertion that Jesus preached "unequivocal love."

Jesus also said not one jot or tittle of the law would pass away before he came back to judge the world. That law was the Law Of Moses... Jewish Law. Christians can't run from the OT... it's the same god and he threatens the same punishment for the same trivial offense.

If you readily admit there is metaphor in the bible, please elucidate for the rest of us as to exactly which parts of the bible are metaphorical and which are factual realities.

I have not taken anything out of context... on the contrary, I have reduced judeo/christian doctrine to its basic primitive elements, and you don't like it, so you dismiss it. In fact, chrisitanity is nothing more than a common garden variety death cult like dozens of others in the ancient world. I say that not to offend, but as a simple matter of easily demonstrable fact.

J/C involves human sacrifice, groveling worship of an invisible spirit who supposedly knows everything and simple reward and punishment. Believe and escape death... refuse to believe and you still escape death... but you suffer agonizing torture for all eternity. Yeah, there's lots of love in that world view.

I am not trying to change you... I couldn't care less if you waste you life bent over like a sheep... but you have no right to claim that what you believe is universal truth. You have no right to claim moral superiority over anyone, because biblical morality is a primitive bloodbath.

Unreasonable (absurd) propositions have no claim to respect. Should we respect claims that the moon is made of cheese or that the earth is flat? No... such claims are ridiculous on their face and ought to disregarded.

The same applies to cryptic nonsense like atonement, hypostasy, transubstantiation and triune spiritual beings... not to mention talking donkeys and walking dead. Apologists can't have it both ways... if there is metaphor somewhere in the bible, the supernatural claims instantly become even more unreliable.

Believers can't defend the unsavory character traits of Yahweh or Jesus and if your only excuse is it is metaphorical you have no right to claim any special moral or intellectual credentials. On the contrary, by devoting your lives to primitive superstitions you are inviting ridicule and derision.

LOL first it's Edward then Indy Patriot-1934313 comes in and tell Edward to cool it then subsequently starts spouting what he believes. OMG I don't care what you believe. I stopped reading when he start with "I believe". I don't think your comments add any value to the artical. Why are you here? Where is the ban stick? I see a couple of people that need to be wacked with it.

Ummmm because I am a Christian,and I believe God created all things, that would probably be a good reason to think that. Hello Mcfly!!

LOL! So why bother going into some diatribe about elements and the universe. Why not say "hey man there's a rock on the ground, god exists!". According to what you just said you think that's a valid argument. Sorry but it it doesn't cut it. Pointing to a dog @!$%# on the floor and saying because it exists so does god, may work in your circles but I can assure you it isn't going to convince anyone who decides to use half their brain to think it out.

The point is,this shows we all came from one origin, we were created by something,we are not here by coincidence,we are here for a purpose,us sharing elements of the universe,and being of higher intelligence is not happenstance,do you get it now sir???

It shows nothing of the sort. It shows that above the level of the atom matter is made of elements. That it. This is well know. You just want to read a lot of other BS into it which isn't there. There is no "purpose" implied and there is no necessity for "higher intelligence" shown AT ALL! You just added that yourself. The earth went along for over thee billion years with no higher intelligence. What does that mean? Your point ten million years ago is even more meaningless then it is now.

Romans,nor phillistines,nor jews,ever denied these happenings

Don't be dense. The stories were written years after the events. There was nothing to deny at the time. Who denied the Greek gods when they were in vogue? Do you have any denials of the Iliad? Why do you throw up these straw man arguments?

The thing you need to get is that the message of the bible is the most important, this is what you should be concentrating on,not the believability of a burning bush,a great flood, a tree bearing fruit out of season. The bible tells me these things happen,o.k,great,believing this is not how I am saved,believing in Jesus as my savior is how I am saved. Get it now?

So you claim, but you haven't proven it. I personally think you will die and rot just like me. The only difference is you will die thinking you are saved. Again, it's a selfish belief philosophy. You do it to be saved not because it's the right thing to do. Maybe Hitler repented and was saved. Ehhh? Even if he didn't there are plenty of hideous people that do and I bet you think they are saved, whereas someone like Gandhi going to burn because he is a Hindu. Is that right? If you are right and such a Christian god exists he's a cruel piece of @!$%#. I would rather live in a world that I die and rot.

You know you people bring your religion to a forum to discuss an article on science. Why bother? You know what's coming. I don't go to discussions on Christianity and say "BTW there is no god". I simply don't go out of my way. Of course i do agree you have the right to do it but I must assume you are simply looking for an argument. I hear some of you saying you are harassed by Atheists but it looks to me like you go looking for it.

Indeed your Lord is Allâh, Who created the heavens and the earth in Six Days, and then He rose over the Throne. He brings the night as a cover over the day, seeking it rapidly, and (He created) the sun, the moon, the stars subjected to His Command. Surely, His is the Creation and Commandment. Blessed be Allâh, the Lord of the 'Alamîn (mankind, jinns and all that exists)! Quran 7:54

@ swan;

It shows nothing of the sort. It shows that above the level of the atom matter is made of elements.

You are impossible. You choose to believe we are not connected to the universe in this way,and we are the only life forms for thousands if not millions of light years.(this does not make us special?) This shows alot more than than the make up of molecules,and atoms,it shows proof of origin all day long.

Why are there no other carbon units(humans) in the universe,why have we not found them? Coincidence,umm no,my bet is that were created special.All the elements are there to create more life in the universe,why dont they?,you said this yourself with your "COSMOS" rant.lol

Do you have any answer for this? I do,you do not. By your own words you admit the connection then come back with this"It shows that above the level of the atom matter is made of elements" what?lol Very weak sir. This does not even answer to what I am saying.lol

You just want to read a lot of other BS into it which isn't there. There is no "purpose" implied and there is no necessity for "higher intelligence" shown AT ALL! You just added that yourself.

These are my words I added nothing.

There is no "purpose" implied and there is no necessity for "higher intelligence" shown AT ALL!

No neccesity for higher intelligence? What kind of answer is that? No purpose implied? purpose for what?Once again you are cornfusing me,please explain in better words what you mean by this.How is it relevant to what I am saying?

The earth went along for over thee billion years with no higher intelligence. What does that mean? Your point ten million years ago is even more meaningless then it is now.

We are talking about origin here,. Three billion really,lol, my point is that we were created from the beginning of the universe,we are part of it. You believe there is no necessity for higher intelligence,lol you stray from my point,my point is that we are the only ones around with it(higher intelligence) for millions of light years, do you think we are just very lucky,or did we have a creator?

If we were that lucky to exist soley among billions of stars alone(and according to you for 3 billion years,lol)do the math, than we should all win the lottery weekly,once again you are twisting my words. Now do you think we are that lucky to be just coincidence?thank goodness I brought you back from your digressive behavior.

LOL! So why bother going into some diatribe about elements and the universe.

One I did not go into a diatribe, two because you said I sounded dumb saying it,then in the next post tell me how obvious it is. This article is on the universe and things far away, which goes to the question of our true origins,is that a good enough reason for you swan?

You know you people bring your religion to a forum to discuss an article on science

I believe you are not reading my posts sir, I have mentioned quantum fluctuations,in the first post to you,compared how we are related to the universe through elements,I even give you example of how science and religion can be intertwined,and you come back with a "you people" comment to suggest we are ignoring the scientific aspect,which I already adressed earlier. Here let me refresh your memory.

Carbon is the sixth most common element in the universe and the fourth most common element in the solar system. It is the second most common element in the human body after oxygen. About 18 percent of a person's body weight is due to carbon.

Read more: http://www.chemistryexplained.com/elements/A-C/Carbon.html#ixzz1jqzhYQts

Example and source.Something you have yet to offer,your using dog poop for your analogies,brilliant.

Elements that are found in space are also in us,coincidence I think not,was the "let be there be light" command the cause of a quantum fluctuation(something coming from nothing) maybe so.

Gee no scientific correlation there,lol,my opinion surely, but still related to science of cosmology.

There is one other kind of truth that cannot be proven or disproven by science. That’s because it is comprised of all of the other kinds of truth mentioned above mixed together: Religious truth. It does have a certain amount of overlap with science, when religion makes explicit claims about scientific fact, and when science makes explicit claims about religion. But the overlap tends to be rather small; in any case, true science and true religion, because they both aim to describe reality, can never be in conflict. (Read “Science & Religion: Conflict or Coherence?” for more on this topic.)

Yes no discussion about science here just religion,WOW, you are something else to make that comment.

Shows that you are not paying attention,no wonder some of your retorts befuddle me.

Yes I come here to debate, atheistS remarks do not bother me they empower me. you are fullfilling prophecy sir,without even trying.

So you claim, but you haven't proven it. I personally think you will die and rot just like me. The only difference is you will die thinking you are saved. Again, it's a selfish belief philosophy. You do it to be saved not because it's the right thing to do. Maybe Hitler repented and was saved. Ehhh? Even if he didn't there are plenty of hideous people that do and I bet you think they are saved, whereas someone like Gandhi going to burn because he is a Hindu. Is that right? If you are right and such a Christian god exists he's a cruel piece of @!$%#. I would rather live in a world that I die and rot.

Those who believe in Jesus' for the simple fact of being saved are not doing the right thing,the bible even speaks against this being the only motivation. So you are very wrong there.

Again, it's a selfish belief philosophy

Not by any means,Christians are the most giving self sacrificing people on earth. Missionaries at this moment are risking injury,death,capture,to bring meds to those in deep jungles that have none. Teaching villagers proper sanitation,in most countries they can not proselytize,without risk of death or imprisonment,they risk this just to deliver toothbrushes,and vital needs. Teaching them how to read and write.

We are taught to give more than recieve,we are taught self sacrifice,to be humble and not be puffed up,if it were the other way I would of embarrssed you to no end on your ignorance by now, trust me.

Is that right? If you are right and such a Christian god exists he's a cruel piece of @!$%#. I would rather live in a world that I die and rot.

That is your choice to make,not mine,I only offer perspective,and some enlightenment to the truth that is often skewed by athiestS.

Let me clear it up for you,obviously this sticking point upsets you,understandably,lol,is that a word.lol

You can not purposely sin all your life and at the last minute be saved,if you had never been able to truly repent,God knows your heart,and this does not fly,it would be insincere. If you have sinned all your life and bring it to a halt,and repent,and make an effort not repeat the same sin over and over then yes you can be saved.

ie You can not go axe murder people then the next day ask for forgiveness,just to be saved,go out do it again,ask to be saved the next day, this would be for yourself,and not giving your heart to Jesus.ie you must walk the walk,before you can sincerely talk the talk. I am not saying the axe murderer could not be saved,just that it is not likely,and it does not work as easy as turning on and off a spicket.

You can not get there by being a ghandi either, none of us ,no matter how good we try to be can escape sin,which is the whole point of a savior.

You are impossible. You choose to believe we are not connected to the universe in this way,and we are the only life forms for thousands if not millions of light years.

I never said anything about being the only life forms for thousands if not millions of light years. YOU DID just now. Making stuff up again I see. I also never said anything about not being connected to the universe. What do you mean by connected? If you mean we are made up of the same elements as the rest of the universe, yes than we are connected. Of course NONE of this provides ANY evidence for a god. So again what is your point?

Why are there no other carbon units(humans) in the universe,why have we not found them? Coincidence,umm no,my bet is that were created special.All the elements are there to create more life in the universe,why dont they?,you said this yourself with your "COSMOS" rant.lol

Are you claiming to know their is no other carbon based life in the universe? How would you even know? We can barely travel to the rest of our solar system with probes much less travel to another solar system. You can't know one way are the other and neither can I. We can only guess. More straw man arguments.

These are my words I added nothing.

What you added is a bunch of unjustified conclusions given the evidences hand. For instance the evidence does not demonstrate humans have some special innate purpose for existence. That is YOUR conclusion and is unsupported.

Gee no scientific correlation there,lol,my opinion surely, but still related to science of cosmology.

If everything in the universe is made of elements of course humans are made of elements too. That's simple logic. That still has nothing to do with the existence of a god (or non-existence for that matter). You keep quoting simple facts kids learn in high school chemistry and biology classes like they are significant to your point. It's like if I were to say "Tree leaves generally green, that proves there is no god". Yet it doesn't prove anything of the sort, it's just a simple fact. I'm sorry but your are making the most idiotic arguments. In fact they aren't arguments at all because their is no logic in them.

Yes no discussion about science here just religion,WOW, you are something else to make that comment.

So you quote yourself, write something about it that doesn't make sense, and then claim I wrote it. I don't know quite how to respond to that. LOL!

Those who believe in Jesus' for the simple fact of being saved are not doing the right thing,the bible even speaks against this being the only motivation. So you are very wrong there.

Again, it's a selfish belief philosophy

Not by any means,Christians are the most giving self sacrificing people on earth. Missionaries at this moment are risking injury,death,capture,to bring meds to those in deep jungles that have none. Teaching villagers proper sanitation,in most countries they can not proselytize,without risk of death or imprisonment,they risk this just to deliver toothbrushes,and vital needs. Teaching them how to read and write.

We are taught to give more than recieve,we are taught self sacrifice,to be humble and not be puffed up,if it were the other way I would of embarrssed you to no end on your ignorance by now, trust me.

Yeah and you are so modest too. NOT!. In any case I'm sure it's pretty easy to do all this when you think you are going to live in some paradise for eternity. There are also plenty of atheists who help to help the less fortunate too and they aren't looking for some grandiose reward at the end. When you add all the wars and death that have been instigated by religion to the mix, The belief in god becomes a clear negative. Again your belief system would be gone like dust in the wind if you didn't think you would get rewarded with eternal life in the end. It's selfish.

You can not go axe murder people then the next day ask for forgiveness,just to be saved,go out do it again,ask to be saved the next day, this would be for yourself,and not giving your heart to Jesus.ie you must walk the walk,before you can sincerely talk the talk. I am not saying the axe murderer could not be saved,just that it is not likely,and it does not work as easy as turning on and off a spicket.

But again as you said (and most Christians would agree) if you ax murdered people for 20 years and then sincerely repented and professed belief in Jesus before you die you are saved. Where as say the best atheist, Muslim, Buddhist or Hindu family man who helps the poor for his entire life get's the burn in hell for eternity. LOL! Yea right. As I said, your god if he did exist would be a piece of @!$%# twisted masochist. That's obvious to anyone with any moral values who doesn't stick their head in the sand. Yet still I notice when I bring it up all you guys try to do is change the subject or blame the non-believer (as if that should be a crime) himself even though there is no escaping the fact that an all powerful god by definition controls everything including the torture of wrong-believers.

You can not get there by being a ghandi either, none of us ,no matter how good we try to be can escape sin,which is the whole point of a savior.

So Gandhi get's tortured for eternity right? Yes or No? You know I wouldn't prescribe that punishment to my worst enemy much less a good man. That just shows how sick and twisted Christianity is.

Atheists put way too much effort into trying to convince people (themselves?) that there is no God. Being an atheist would be way too tiresome for me. Just let me believe :)

@SWAN;

I never said anything about being the only life forms for thousands if not millions of light years. YOU DID just now. Making stuff up again I see. I also never said anything about not being connected to the universe. What do you mean by connected? If you mean we are made up of the same elements as the rest of the universe, yes than we are connected. Of course NONE of this provides ANY evidence for a god. So again what is your point?

Who said you did? These are my words not yours, that you are denying you said.lol I used that as a point to show we are not that lucky to be coincidence,once again you twist it around. This is a fact(not making anything up) we are the only ones until we are shown different. I already made my point on the connection to the universe,you are impossible,if you are asking me what my point is again. But because I am a patient man I will put in your face again.

We are talking about origin here,. Three billion really,lol, my point is that we were created from the beginning of the universe,we are part of it. You believe there is no necessity for higher intelligence,lol you stray from my point,my point is that we are the only ones around with it(higher intelligence) for millions of light years, do you think we are just very lucky,or did we have a creator?

Shoudnt you play the lottery and win weekly if we are that lucky to exist out of billions of stars?

We do not because it was not luck,sir.

Are you claiming to know their is no other carbon based life in the universe?

I am claiming that we have yet to find them for millions of light years away,until then it remains a fact more that we are alone than that we have neighbors in the universe the same as us.

So you quote yourself, write something about it that doesn't make sense, and then claim I wrote it. I don't know quite how to respond to that. LOL!

Your joking right? I answered to your we only bring religion and disregard science statement when talkng on this post I responded with three examples of how I used science in this discussion,then you turn it into me claiming you wrote something you did not,I do not play that way,and you are mistakinly using my words as your own, get a clue sir.

Yes no discussion about science here just religion,WOW, you are something else to make that comment.

These are my words to your ridiculous comment that I had not used science in this discussion, these are not your words. This is a prime example of you twisting what I am saying to you around,your age is showing.

Yeah and you are so modest too. NOT!.

Sir, if I were pompous I would not be wasting my time with ones such as yourself,that skew what people say, as long as someone is listening I can continue for weeks talking about God,and overlook your callous,cursing responses,and non responses.lol

There are also plenty of atheists who help to help the less fortunate too and they aren't looking for some grandiose reward at the end.

Oh really,name one individual or atheist group that travels to dangerous places,or responds immediately to major disasters,that is not government related. I can name dozens of Christian ones,I bet you can not even find 5 that are atheist groups.lol Christians already have reward sir, they go to the jungles,and war zones to help others less fortunate not for some"grandiose" reward, but because the word tells them it is their duty to help others unselfishly.

Name one,not saying you can not,just want to see if you can,I have never heard of any atheist group that helps others in time of need that is not government related,do not digress just answer.

AthiestS believe in nothing or noone,so do not use buddhist,hindus,and the like.

The belief in god becomes a clear negative. Again your belief system would be gone like dust in the wind if you didn't think you would get rewarded with eternal life in the end. It's selfish.

Not at all sir,I knew and felt my creator long before knowing of eternal life. We were meant to be perfect and have eternal life from the beginning,that plan was changed by those that fell from the grace of God,the plan of salvation was the only way to make those that can not be holy, holy again,without destroying all that was created to rid the earth of immorality and sin,God chose to spare the lives of those that fell from grace,hence redemption,nothing selfish about it at all. Just the way God wanted it to be.

You can argue the point with him that it is selfish,but I surely will not.lol

But again as you said (and most Christians would agree) if you ax murdered people for 20 years and then sincerely repented and professed belief in Jesus before you die you are saved. Where as say the best atheist, Muslim, Buddhist or Hindu family man who helps the poor for his entire life get's the burn in hell for eternity. LOL! Yea right.

I do not believe your heart would be pure ever if you were living a life of exorbiant,unrepentful sin for most of your life. The ones that are saved are those that sin,and have regret then try not to repeat that sin, eg Checking out every woman that goes by,looking at porn, stealing from a coworker,lying on an application,we are all guilty of these types of sins and can not escape that fact.ie We will never be worthy of heaven no matter how hard we try,without having them washed away by being saved.

Being good will not get you into heaven,no man or woman would ever be truly sin free,not possibe for Ghandi,Buddah,or any other person. Only one way. If you believe in Christ.

So Gandhi get's tortured for eternity right? Yes or No? You know I wouldn't prescribe that punishment to my worst enemy much less a good man. That just shows how sick and twisted Christianity is.

Actually it could be to the fact that torure is reserved for Satan and those that are of him,in whatever form. Hell can not be truly defined either,it could be that you are not ressurected,and are just cast into nothingness,no longer existing. Noe of us will know until we are there,I hope I never will get there.

The lord knows your heart,if Ghandi rejected him and his message,then he willl not recieve eternal life,is he being tortured,I do not know,as we did not know his heart,only he did.

Christianity makes perfect sense of itself,it is the only religion that can prove itself. Whether you believe or not, the message is clear as crystal,and the choice is yours.

Christianity makes perfect sense of itself,it is the only religion that can prove itself.

Really? Would love to hear that proof.

trip*toe*fan -

I believe the proof goes along the lines of "The bible says that god exists. The bible is the word of god, because it says it is. If the bible is the word of god, it must be true, therefore the bible is true and god exists. QED, Atheist scum!"

I've heard it before. They apparently can't tell a line from a circle (technically, a bug on paper wouldn't know the difference unless it looked up, either). But they just keep walking that circle.

Coral Taxi -

All your mumbo jumbo, happenstancial evidence that SCIENTISTS (read: not priests) discovered is in no more way a proof for god than it is a proof for the invisible pink dinosaur in my garage. What, you haven't seen it? Then you must not BELIEVE hard enough. As for the "evidence" on Ararat (who the hell said that 13,000 feet was uninhabitable? People can breathe up there, would make a great watchtower for a nearby settlement, etc.) They found a few scraps of wood that looked to have been taken from a lower altitude. And? You can find that in the Himalayas, too. In fact, they still live up there in the Himalayas.

Indy Patriot -

Bon voyage. You did chastise Edward with the same tone as you chastised atheists, in the beginning, ergo the false equivalency. Edward came out saying that Jesus is the true god and all must bow before him (reread his post). Atheists came out and mocked that idea, citing examples of previously worshipped gods who also never appeared in historical accounts. Then, you came along and claimed the atheists were being "unfair," and that Edward was entitled to his opinion without all the atheists coming and saying "get religion out of our science!" I put you straight on that in emphatic terms. Then, you went into a long drivel about how your beliefs are such and such (some new-age woo that I don't really care about), and that anyone who mocks them are hurting your feelings and don't have that right. You offered up this drivel without a shred of evidence to back your claim. You made a baseless assertion, and I called you out on your incorrectness.

Let me ask, where is the right to have your feelings protected in the constitution? Why is it more important to protect the feelings of religionists than of atheists? That's what you're arguing, that religionists should be allowed to condemn everyone they don't like to fiery torture for eternity, but that atheists can't argue back or mock them because that would hurt their feelings. And you have the temerity to lecture ME on tone?

Just one thing left to say: BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

@ janstinc;

All your mumbo jumbo, happenstancial evidence that SCIENTISTS (read: not priests) discovered is in no more way a proof for god than it is a proof for the invisible pink dinosaur in my garage. What, you haven't seen it?

lol,you are funny. What I am giving is different perspective,do you think I believe that I am proving God exist with actual evidence?lol I wish. My points and ideas are all plausible,especially the comparison that we should win the lottery weekly to have been so lucky as to be the only life out of billions of stars and planets.

Can you not grasp the fact that if we are not that lucky(and we are not),than something put us here on purpose?

Also that Gods command of "let there be light" could of created a quantum fluctuation, plausible yes, provable umm, no.

The fact that we have the same elements as the universe,but are the only higher intelligent life for many light years.ie if the mix is out there in space why has there been no more creation of life.

Head scratcher, right?

Yes there are people that live in the Hymalayas around 13,000 ft,the part of Mt.Ararat we speak of is pretty much uninhabitable. These villages in the Hymalayas are cut off from the world 7 months of the year,and it is required that "fun pilots" flying over 12,000 ft use oxygen. Even though there are some remote villages, to most this area would be uninhabitable.

My point was that there were not people taking up residence here,the jury is still out on the validity of the wood,the fact still remains that wood was found int the area, not considered housing, and was frozen into place in a way it could not have been transported there.

@janstinc;

I believe the proof goes along the lines of "The bible says that god exists. The bible is the word of god, because it says it is. If the bible is the word of god, it must be true, therefore the bible is true and god exists. QED, Atheist scum!"

When has a Christian called you "atheist scum" I truly doubt this happened,because a true Christian would never say such a thing, I have deep feelings for atheistS I know,I even went to an atheistS funeral,kind of weird but to each his own,I paid my respects, he knew he was going to pass and gave me his ward robe.

He was my neigbor for many years,I even did his tree work for him when he was sick with lou gherigs.

I never preached or talked about God to him, I knew better,so do not come off with this opinion that Christians are hating on atheistS ,as a matter a fact in this vine the atheistS are the ones cussing, using caps, giving callous angry answers, so look inward and not outward dear,you might have an awakening you needed for a long time!

You are obviously jaded, by what and why I do not know,but it is coming through loud and clear,this means you do not have total self control over your emotions,as they over ride your ability to reason without sarcasm or insult.

janstinc; Here read this this willl show that people did not inhabit this area.

Representatives of Noah's Ark@ Ministries said the structure contained several compartments, some with wooden beams, that they believe were used to house animals.The group of evangelical archaeologists ruled out an established human settlement on the grounds none have ever been found above 11,000 feet in the vicinity, Yeung said.

During the press conference, team member Panda Lee described visiting the site. “In October 2008, I climbed the mountain with the Turkish team. At an elevation of more than 4,000 meters, I saw a structure built with plank-like timber. Each plank was about 8 inches wide. I could see tenons, proof of ancient construction predating the use of metal nails."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/27/noahs-ark-found-turkey-ararat/#ixzz1jxo4Xvpz

@ trip toe fan. Do not confuse proving our religion is valid to proving God exist,no other religion has the replicating evidence of Christianities past. We have text over 2000 yrs old,that is still relevant today.

This backs up our faith with scripture.

Chew on this foir awhile,you seem to be a smart cookie.

'everything which begins to exist, must have a cause.' For arguing that the universe must have began to exist I like the argument of the impossibility of an absolute infinite past. If the universe had an infinite past, we could never have gotten to a 'now.' I use the illustration of an 'eternal, cosmic video camera.':

"Imagine, if you will, that everything that ever happened in the universe, was recorded on some sort of eternal, cosmic, video machine and you wanted to watch the tape from the beginning to see how you got to be sitting in front of your computer. Unfortunately, since this tape is of an infinite past, with no beginning, once you hit the rewind button, the machine would never stop. You would get to see nothing because an infinite past would have no future. I imagine the only suitable snack for such a viewing would be a bowl of just-popped-into-existence-corn."

The creation of the universe must have been by an entity which is beyond time, or eternal, exactly how the Bible describes God.

This is a fact(not making anything up) we are the only ones until we are shown different.

Your statement is so incredibly stupid. LOL! Somehow in your mind one answer to an unanswered question becomes a "fact". Chalk one up to bible belt logic.

Three billion really,lol,

Yes as I said the earth is over three billion, in fact it's more like 4 billion+. You find that fact funny some how? You didn't learn this is high school? Did you even graduate high-school? You seem to be missing some basic information here.

Your joking right?

No that's exactly what you did. You replied your own quote. I have no clue what else you were trying to do and still don't given your highly incomprehensible writing style.

Oh really,name one individual or atheist group that travels to dangerous places,or responds immediately to major disasters,that is not government related.

Atheist don't have separate aid organizations they work in secular organizations. such as UNICEF, Doctors without borders, etc. On top of that aid is given without pushing religion on the recipient.

You can argue the point with him that it is selfish,but I surely will not.lol

I might if he existed but since he doesn't and can't walk, talk or rock it's impossible.

Being good will not get you into heaven,no man or woman would ever be truly sin free,not possibe for Ghandi,Buddah,or any other person. Only one way. If you believe in Christ.

Which is completely irrelevant to anyone but a Christian because they don't hold to your belief system, and you can't prove your beliefs are true.

Noe of us will know until we are there

I'm shocked, you claim to know just about everything else but not that? I don't see the difference.

Christianity makes perfect sense of itself,it is the only religion that can prove itself.

Yet you haven't been able to prove anything in pages of posts.

I'm sorry my four year old is more logical than you. You just make claims and say you have proved something. It's like talking with a child because you don't employ critical thinking. I'm done.

Coral: You didn't answer my question.

no other religion has the replicating evidence of Christianities past. We have text over 2000 yrs old,that is still relevant today.

Really? Provide that evidence. Show me how Christianity proves itself. If you want to be taken seriously, you need to put up evidence to support your claims.

@ trip toe fan; First off an atheist taking a Christians words seriously is an oxymoron, so I really do not expect that to happen,but as my words are read it does offer new and different perspectives,that neither janstinc,or swan,had anything to say about.eg My we are not just coincidence, how God could have created the quantum fluctuation that could have started the universe.Universe having the mix to continue creating life but does not. Of course these are short versions,more explanation in my posts above.

Secondly, Do you not understand that I am giving perspective,not trying to prove anything,just giving "plausible theories"I believe what I am saying,that does not mean I can rightfully expect you take it as fact. Christianity proves itself through archeology that matches scripture. No other religions writings were used as true history as the bibles were. Does this mean I proved the existence of God and our savior,umm no. Our religion can prove itself over millennia,with repeating evidence over time,I will not list all of them look them up yourself,I have given examples already.

Please check this out if you do not know of it already trip toe,very interesting and not easy to argue,but this is where I am coming from.

http://www.perrymarshall.com/articles/religion/godels-incompleteness-theorem/

This is for all three of you,part of the this theorem page that I like.

Faith and Reason are not enemies. In fact, the exact opposite is true! One is absolutely necessary for the other to exist. All reasoning ultimately traces back to faith in something that you cannot prove.

WORD UP!!

Coral Taxi -

Faith and reason are inherent enemies: reason is the ability to use evidence to come to a logical conclusion about the state of things, while faith is the rejection of evidence in holding to a pre-decided worldview. Couldn't be further from each other.

You just come out and claim that Ararat's findings are the real Noah's Ark, and expect us to believe it because you've said it? Who was the research team? An independent archaeological team? No, it was "Noah's Ark Ministries," a couple of amateur archaeologists that found some structures that were worked wood. Wow. Chalk one up to the "herp derp" crowd. Where's the proof that these were inhabited by thousands of animals? Where's the proof that they were deposited by a worldwide flood? Not really forthcoming. Won't be convincing unless confirmed by outside sources. Most likely, outside sources have already debunked that crap, as that seems to be the MO of many "Christian archaeologists": decide ahead of time that what you think is right, and ignore any evidence or anyone who disagrees with your "findings." Seriously, saw it happen with ID, saw it happen with "creation science," seen it happen at other sites, like the old Noah's Ark sites, Mt. Sinai, etc. Why have they still not been able to find THE Mt. Sinai, anyway?

As for "Jesus' Brother's Tomb," they found a sign on it that said James (or the Aramaic equivalent). Was there nobody else at the time with that name? How would they know? It's not like they actually took the census talked about in the NT (Romans were good with records, they kept everything around). And they certainly didn't make everyone go back to their birthplace. That would be a displacement of millions, would bring a halt to commerce, and would not be an accurate reflection of population distribution. You know, completely invalidating the point of a census. Not to mention, all the lack of evidence of a mass exodus of Jews from Egypt. Or the lack of evidence of a massive number of Jews in Egypt to begin with.

And you think the Vedas have no historical relevance? The Baghavad Gita? The Greek Myths? The Iliad? The Norse Myths? All of those stories, and more, have historical relevance. Some are based on actual history, some are allegorical and metaphorical, and some are just moral values of the times.

Not only that, but consistency in the bible is anything but. You have 4 different gospels, 2 that claim that Jesus was the son of YHWH, and 1 that traces his father's bloodline. What father's bloodline? Joseph wasn't his father, supposedly. Not only that, but different times for the birth, life events, and death. Different accounts that repeatedly contradict each other in supposedly factual narratives. Come on, read with a critical eye. That's what you're accusing us of not doing, but the beam in yours before the mote in ours, etc.

As for your understanding of quantum mechanics, I find it severely lacking in detail or, well, understanding. So is your understanding of time, if you think we can follow time out to "before" there was a universe.

I keep telling you and the other apologists that @!$%# gets real down there, or rather virtual, on the subatomic levels. Probability rules, possibility becomes endless. You don't understand, and that's fine. What's not fine is that you pretend you do understand, and in the places where you have gaps in knowledge, you substitute "goddidit" when the proper response is "I don't know." Not fine. Many mathematicians and physicists have worked and continue to work really hard to figure out answers. Most of the crap you spew has already been negated, but you plod on because you're ignorant of that (or don't want to believe it). Just like Dembski and Wells. And you blindly lead others down that path, which is bereft of knowledge and the search for truth. And then you demonize atheists.

As for demonizing atheists, a perfect example right here and now is what is happening to Jessica Alhquist. Jesus-freaks wanted their banner to say Heavenly Father and Amen so much, they completely ignore the rest of the message, about treating others with respect and dignity, and also ignore the idea that the ACLU was willing to settle if the idiots in the school board had agreed to just delete those words and leave the rest of the motto. Instead, they choose to send death threats and rail against the "evil little thing" (quoted from the RI Representative). Atheists are hated right up to the level of rapists in this country. Outspoken atheists get death threats from all sides. We are the most hated minority, beyond Muslims, beyond blacks or hispanics, right next to felons. This is verifiable poll data, not just pulling out of my ass.

Now, you may see cussing as "bad words" and only something to be done when really angry. I'm angry at you and your whole idea that truth doesn't matter, only "feelings." I'm angry at your inane prattling about subjects of which you know nothing, and how you get support for that prattling as if you're some wise man. I'm especially angry that people will look at some proselytizing jerkoff who comes up with another inane "proof of god" and tells all non-believers they will burn for eternity unless they agree with him, see a few comments mocking the idiocy, and then conclude it's the mockers who are to blame, instead of the instigator, and also conclude that free speech should not apply to atheists, because they're mean and deluded and hurt your feelings.

Feh. Enough feeding the troll.

@ swan;

I'm sorry my four year old is more logical than you. You just make claims and say you have proved something. It's like talking with a child because you don't employ critical thinking. I'm done.

Ive offered interesting topical ideas,and theories,all you have offered is critiscism. Ive given example and source,not once have you done this,and you say I lack critical thinking?lol Name one time show me where I say I have proved something,you sir are the one with flawed comprehension, either that ,or you are just trying to be antoganizing,and you compare me to a child?

Your done?lol face palm

So show me,do not tell me any longer,where I have claimed to have proven anything,that I have not.

You will not.

Coral:

Do you not understand that I am giving perspective,not trying to prove anything

But you said Christianity is the only religion that can prove itself. You haven't presented any evidence to back that claim up.

I don't have any desire to debate with you. Either support your claims, or don't expect others to take you seriously.

There are plenty of Christians on here who can offer support for their claims. I may not agree with their argument, but at least they can debate their points.

@ triptoe;

You as the others just disregard what I say,once again, an atheist will never take a Christian seriously, so you are beating a dead horse by repeating this again.Yes I said that, Cristianity is the only religion that can prove itself with example,can you not see them in my previous posts?

Christianity proves itself through archeology that matches scripture. No other religions writings were used as true history as the bibles were. Does this mean I proved the existence of God and our savior,umm no. Our religion can prove itself over millennia,with repeating evidence over time,I will not list all of them look them up yourself,I have given examples already.

I asked you to look for yourself,at the empirical evidence of Christianity,obviously you fail to do so.

@ janstice;

you just come out and claim that Ararat's findings are the real Noah's Ark, and expect us to believe it because you've said it?

I am starting to believe you guys are just scanning my post and seeing what you want to see,if I was saying it as the gospel,or that I am 100% correct would I have wrote this that was directed right at you to show there are still questions to be answered.

Here read again,before you accuse me of expecting you to believe anything I say is truth,this is where you being jaded becomes a problem.

My point was that there were not people taking up residence here,the jury is still out on the validity of the wood,the fact still remains that wood was found int the area, not considered housing, and was frozen into place in a way it could not have been transported there.

When I say the jury is still out what would that mean?hmmmm

Greek myths,lol where is your empirical eveidence of any of those you mentioned. There is none because they were not real.

@ janstinc;

I'm angry at you and your whole idea that truth doesn't matter, only "feelings." I'm angry at your inane prattling about subjects of which you know nothing, and how you get support for that prattling as if you're some wise man.

I believe you are just angry period.

You are seriously mistaken mam. I do not claim to be a wise man,but thanks,I offer plausible theories of how things could of happened,I do not state them in ways that they are facts to you,even if I believe them. Of course I state the evidence of the scriptures that we are unearthing daily as fact,but not my theory that the command of "let there be light" could of been a quantum fluctuation as fact,or anything else actually do I state as fact,only the empiracle evidence of the scripture,at least you looked some of it up which is more than the others.

As for your understanding of quantum mechanics, I find it severely lacking in detail or, well, understanding. So is your understanding of time, if you think we can follow time out to "before" there was a universe.

I have not explained any quantum mechanics too you,I know that when most people see this they google it immediately because they have never heard of it. I have listened to quantum physiscist and have read extensively on the subject, I doubt you have.

Did you even check out the website in my post 1;80, this will show you where I am coming from.

Most of the crap you spew has already been negated

I am bringing my own ideas and theories to the table,you have negated none of them,as far as our origins,and why we are the only carbon units for as far as we can see. Please tell me what have I mentioned that has been negated by anyone if they are my own ideas?lol

I am waiting for discussion, all you and the others seem to offer is critiscism.

Let me help you, you could say,

Well that is your theory,but I believe that it really could of happened this way. Instead I get 'Tthe crap you are spewing" I have been at this for years and you guys are just using an avoidance tactic when you can not argue the points I am making.You turn to digression,and insults,angry responses,and the like.

Your responses are more textbook atheist responses than you even know,believe me.

So show me,do not tell me any longer,where I have claimed to have proven anything,that I have not.

You make it so easy

Christianity makes perfect sense of itself,it is the only religion that can prove itself.

There is no proof that Christianity is true yet you claim it proves itself but don't explain exactly how. Then you add a bunch of illogical BS:

Christianity proves itself through archeology that matches scripture. No other religions writings were used as true history as the bibles were. Does this mean I proved the existence of God and our savior,umm no. Our religion can prove itself over millennia,with repeating evidence over time,I will not list all of them look them up yourself,I have given examples already.

If Christianity can be proven to be true then god has been proven to exists since that point is at the very core of the christian belief system, so your whole diatribe above contradicts itself. Irrespective of that the fact that the bible may be accurate in places does not mean the whole thing is true. Is the Iliad 100% true because they dug up Troy? Does that mean the Greek gods came down from Olympus walked around talked to the combatants and interfered in the conflict. Your logic says they did. According to your logic if any part of a book is true the whole thing is true. It's silly and stupid. See ... mind of a child. You fail to employ simple reasoning.

It is pointless to reason with someone who can't follow simple logic.

I am bringing my own ideas and theories to the table,you have negated none of them,as far as our origins,and why we are the only carbon units for as far as we can see

Are you really that dense? There are countless billions of star systems and we have seen ONE up close and that only partially. That's a pretty weak sample to start making conclusions about the rarity of carbon based life don't you think?

If Christianity can be proven to be true then god has been proven to exists since that point is at the very core of the christian belief system, so your whole diatribe above contradicts itself.

Proving God exist is not at the core of Christianity,ie if it were proven God truly exist than the whole premise of a "faith based religion" would be thrown out the door.We would no longer need faith to be granted the grace of God, get it? And by grace we are saved,(if you believe) so proving anything is far from the point sir.

I do these back and forths with atheistS because it keeps me sharp,one, two, I have an audience of atheist interested in the existence,or non existence,lol, of God,or that can argue our origins,or the bible, with me,my pursuit is not to prove God beyond a reasonable doubt, but to give a different perspective than what you are used to.

The religion of Christianity is the only one with replicating,empiracle evidence no other religion has this.with scripture to match the past(factually),which we are finding more and more of everyday.Period, do not put norse gods,greek mthology in front of me,that is like comparing apples to oranges.

According to your logic if any part of a book is true the whole thing is true. It's silly and stupid. See ... mind of a child. You fail to employ simple reasoning.

I do not understand how you come to this conclusion,once again as I told you earlier,the message of the bible,egFollowing the ten commandments,(Gods law), believing Christ died for you,are far more important than the realization of a burning bush. a man living in a whales stomach for 3 days,the bible says this did happen. I did not live back then so who am I or you to deny it. The message of these happenings, that are foretelling(story of Jonah) are what you miss in your effort to disprove or not believe them, because they leave your realm of logic, and that is understandable.

It is pointless to reason with someone who can't follow simple logic.

What logic have you offered?lol Up until the last two post which I give you credit for with the exceptions of the insults,and callousnesss behind it,I could actually answer to,you finally made a counterpoint,to one of my theories. Very good sir. But wrong.lol

Are you really that dense? There are countless billions of star systems and we have seen ONE up close and that only partially. That's a pretty weak sample to start making conclusions about the rarity of carbon based life don't you think?

Within 50 light years of earth there are 1400 star systems sir. Comparing us being alone among billions of stars is pointless? To show that we are not mere coincidence,or came to be by luck,if we we were so lucky we would win the lottery weekly dont you think?

ie It stands more (at the present) that we were created,according to these insurmountable,or truly inconcievable odds to the contrary, that we just came to be out of nowhere, with no motivating factors.

Galaxies or milkyways are actually enormous swarms of suns.
Just like in
our own solar system the individual stars with their planets form a solar system
based upon gravity and motions.
These
planetary systems are in balance with one another and so form the star system or
galaxy. The galaxies vary drastically in size, they comprise between 10 billion
and 1 trillion stars.

1 known planet with life, out of a possible 10 billion,or 1 trillion,wow,I am going to play the lotto,and the power ball tonight,I am feeling mighty lucky.lol

I said Christianity can prove itself, and the message is sensible,I did not claim I proved it

And the difference is zero. Pointing out something has been proven buy someone else and proving something your self amounts to the same thing. The proof is still there. However since you haven't given us ANY proof either yours or anyone else, as far as anyone can tell the proof doesn't exist. You like to avoid the real questions don't you? That's the only way a Christian can stay in a debate with an atheist. Don't give a real answer to anything.

Proving God exist is not at the core of Christianity

And who said it was? I said god's existence (not proof of) is at the core of Christianity. If you dispute that you don't know your own religion. Furthermore if Christianity has proven itself (i.e. a proof of Christianity exists) then that proof would necessary include a proof of god since gods existence is at the core of all monotheistic religion. This is why your whole position is completely illogical. I don't expect you be able to follow simple logic however since you have failed to so far.

I do these back and forths with atheistS because it keeps me sharp

Emperor's new cloths comes to mind here.

Within 50 light years of earth there are 1400 star systems sir. Comparing us being alone among billions of stars is pointless? To show that we are not mere coincidence,or came to be by luck,if we we were so lucky we would win the lottery weekly dont you think?

Again a compete straw man arugment. I'll assume you data is correct. Do you know what's in those 1400 star systems? No? Maybe 10 of them have carbon life. So what's the point? Why do you bother bringing up points that don't further your positon? Also if there was carbon life in 1 in every billion star systems that still leaves many billions of systems with carbon life. I'm not sure what coincidence you are talking about.

1 known planet with life, out of a possible 10 billion,or 1 trillion,wow,I am going to play the lotto,and the power ball tonight,I am feeling mighty lucky.lol

It's like you have a bag with a trillion marbles and you pull out one and it's blue. Then you assume no other marble is blue even though you haven't checked any other marble in the bag and you think the one you pulled out is special. That's completely retarded. They could all be blue, or one in 10 could be blue or one in a billion could be blue. You have no idea. LOL!

@ swan;

It's like you have a bag with a trillion marbles and you pull out one and it's blue. Then you assume no other marble is blue even though you haven't checked any other marble in the bag and you think the one you pulled out is special. That's completely retarded. They could all be blue, or one in 10 could be blue or one in a billion could be blue. You have no idea. LOL!

We are the special blue one sir,you just keep denying it to yourself,lets see how many "marbles" can we see 40,000 light years away. Chances are better that I am right at the moment than you are sir. Neither of us can say for sure.

Oh, and we have an idea alright.

Scientists have been actively searching for extraterrestrial intelligence in our galaxy for the last forty years. The search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) has extended out to 40,000 light years from earth (in comparison, the galaxy is 100,000 light years across).² To date, no signal from any extraterrestrial stellar system has ever been detected.

Thats alotta marbles sir.LOL right back atcha.lol Although the marble analogy was a good one it is flawed,because we can see into the universe to look at other "marbles"but your analogy does go to the ambiguoty of the universe. Very good. But we are checking the "marbles".

Why do you bother bringing up points that don't further your positon?

I bring up this point to show how wrong you are that we can only see one star system, not in a demeaning way such as you use,but in a corrective manner.

Furthermore if Christianity has proven itself (i.e. a proof of Christianity exists) then that proof would necessary include a proof of god since gods existence is at the core of all monotheistic religion

Sir Christians do exist without absolute proof of God,do they not. I already explained this to you,but let us try it this way. God does not want to be proven to disbeleivers,nor does he wish to reveal himself at this time, this would destroy the whole basis of faith,for the third time,do you not get this concept sir?

Yes God exists to Christians, to me he is as real as the keyboard I am typing on, to you he is the "flying spaghetti monster", my religion can prove itself back milenia sir,no other can with true evidence you can see touch and fell,none!

Through faith,and belief, we recieve grace,through grace we are saved,very simple. Without faith there would be no basis for our religion,get it now,sir?

At least now we have discussion,finally.

I have found something that states my point exactly that I have been trying to get through.

When considering the vastness
of the universe, containing in all probability many millions of planets,
it is difficult to imagine that our planet is the only one that harbours life.
However, If that unlikely possibility should turn out to be the case, then it
would perhaps be only reasonable to assume that it must be impossible for life
to form by the process of natural development, but rather that it must have been
uniquely created. To take the opposite view, that life formed spontaneously on
only one planet in the entire universe, is pushing the laws of probability to
virtually unlimited bounds. I would suggest therefore we have only two realistic
options to consider. 1) Life was created exclusively on this planet by God. 2)
Life has formed on many planets spontaneously.

Exactly,we should all win the lottery weekly if we are this lucky.

Coral Taxi,

lol,you are funny. What I am giving is different perspective,do you think I believe that I am proving God exist with actual evidence?lol I wish. My points and ideas are all plausible,especially the comparison that we should win the lottery weekly to have been so lucky as to be the only life out of billions of stars and planets.

This is funny, you assume we've checked these billions of planets for life. You know what's even funnier, the stars that are around the billions of the suns like ours that we can't even see or study because of interference and blindness, we JUST found a way to discover them (by the wobble of their sun(s)). How do you assume to know there isn't life on any of those planets? You can't, unless you're just gullible.

Also, a planet doesn't need radio signals sent out into space to contain life on it! Just because we haven't heard signals doesn't mean they aren't there either. Also, consider it takes how long for a signal to reach another planet, let alone another solar system, and who knows if space would somehow bend or fray a signal. Would we ever get one back?

These questions are left to someone better educated in reality and science then someone that spouts BS from some deluded beliefs. Do you believe in Astrology as well? I mean, those myths have been around aeons longer.

Bleh one more question, you think we are the only ones, the lottery winners, yet answer me this. How many planets do you know that have been fully investigated? I mean, there is even the possibility still that there could be/have been life on mars...Name me some planets that you know 100% that don't contain any form of life carbon or non. If you think we 'know' the certainty there is no life within the 40,000 light years that we can somewhat see with telescopes, again, you're lying to yourself, because we don't know.

Sure there have been lots of discoveries, but hardly anything has been investigated 100%. I would bet my life we'll find life on another planet, long before I'd wager anything on a belief in a deity that cares about the people of this world in general and all he wants is to hang out with his good Christian slave flock for an eternity.

Thats alotta marbles sir.LOL right back atcha.lol Although the marble analogy was a good one it is flawed,because we can see into the universe to look at other "marbles"but your analogy does go to the ambiguoty of the universe. Very good. But we are checking the "marbles".

Again you switch your position when you are losing. Life does not only mean life with human level intelligence. Rats don't send out signals. We can't check any other system than our own for life so we have just checked one marble and that's it. In fact we haven't even fully checked our marble. The Cambrian explosion was 530 million years ago yet if anyone pointed a radio telescope at our system from even our nearest neighbor up until the last century they would have gotten nothing.

As for SETI, which is the search for intelligent life, it assumes a lot of things. First it assumes other civilizations are sending signals out. Maybe they aren't advanced enough for radio. Maybe they have gone beyond that and don't use radio any more. Maybe they never did. Maybe their signals aren't strong enough or are directed and their is little leakage. Maybe advanced civilizations inherently kill themselves (like we may) There may be a tiny window in time that a civilization goes though where it is detectable in this way. Also if on average there is only one intelligent race in each Galaxy that still leaves billions of them.

Sir Christians do exist without absolute proof of God,do they not

Is that what you are tying to prove, Christians exist? LOL! OK proven! Christians exist. Muslims exist too. So does my neighbors dog. Is their a point? I though you were tying to prove Christian beliefs are true. You can't prove that without proving god exists. period!

@ excel; Did you not read the first part of post 1;91.?

We are the special blue one sir,you just keep denying it to yourself,lets see how many "marbles" can we see 40,000 light years away. Chances are better that I am right at the moment than you are sir. Neither of us can say for sure.

See the last part of the paragraph,implies that I am not being completely conclusive. I also state that "at this moment"(implies this could change) I am more right than you are as long as we are alone so my stand is much truer than yours at present.

Is this a fair statement?

If we were that lucky to exist soley among billions of stars alone

Notice the if, I do not say we are so lucky to live soley among a billion stars. I am more on the side that we are alone,it truly looks that way for as far as we can see,or on the other planets and stars we can examine

This is funny, you assume we've checked these billions of planets for life. You know what's even funnier

Yes I do, how atheistS tell me what I think or "assume" that we have checked billions of planets and stars,and do not see the , the "neither of us can say for sure" words in my post you just read, or the "ifs" or the "at the moment" in my earlier posts.

I cite very thoughtful reasoning in my posts,most go unadressed,,in the last post a statement that at the end gives 2 different theories of origin,of course I believe the first(until I am shown different),and I believe you guys would like to believe the second. I cite source,and example in my posts then you come back with "Im lying to myself"?

These questions are left to someone better educated in reality and science then someone that spouts BS from some deluded beliefs. Do you believe in Astrology as well? I mean, those myths have been around aeons longer.

Questions better left to the educated? How about educating yourself sir,form your own opinions,do not let others form them for you,I learn as I go,debating on the vine,motivates me to learn,think,get new perspectives. Asking me if I believe in astrology,is a snide remark,and a very ignorant question of one who professes to be a Christian.

You are sticking to the textbook atheists reponse I refer to earlier. Why the callousness,why the anger from all of you?(maybe you need God in your lives.lol) Im full of it,I am delusional,I have the logic of a 4 yr old,my words are retarded,etc,etc. I do not expect you guys to believe what I say,but it would be nice to be rebutted respectfully. My faith has empirical evidence of its existence dating back thousands of years, do you have thors hammer,medusas head umm no, do I have replicating evidence,evidence from different time periods that supports itself,yes I do.

Do I have archeological finds(more being found daily) that back up scripture that was once considered myth in the bible, yes I do.

You excel manage to keep up the pattern of insults,snide remarks, the reactions with anger show that you as the others are bothered by what I say. This shows effect,which shows I have given you pause,which makes it worth every minute of I spend here.

@ excel;

Sir Christians do exist without absolute proof of God,do they not

Is that what you are tying to prove, Christians exist? LOL! OK proven! Christians exist. Muslims exist too. So does my neighbors dog. Is their a point?

Yes there is a point,you are just coming in late,the point is that we do not have to prove God to justify our Christianity. I put it very simple for swan.(so i can see the humor you are getting out of it) No the point is not to prove only that Christians exist,the point is that our religion is proven over time,more than any other,ie we are the only religion that can prove itself,with replicating evidence. That is the point.

I though you were tying to prove Christian beliefs are true. You can't prove that without proving god exists. period!

Here let me enlighten you so you can understand.

We truly believe wich makes our beliefs a real and true thing. Does our belief system itself,have to be supported by factual proof of God,umm no because then we would not need to believe any longer ,it would become realization,then we would not need faith anymore either,and havng faith is the basis of our religion, and part of Gods plan. If you are a true Christain this is what you believe.

Would the definition and premise of Christianity change once he is revealed to Christians? The answer I believe is yes, because faith would be replaced by worship,and praise. Things we believe that happend in our scripture are being pieced together more day by day, so proof of God unequivocally is not necassary to bolster or prove our premise of faith that we have in the validity of our bible.ie

Some of what we believe is and has been proven.eg Names of kings inscribed on walls that match the times in the bible,lost cities mentioned in the bible that are being unearthed as we speak. The tomb of Jesus' brother,that dates to the time of his death in the bible. This is just scratching the surface believe me.

Please excel take the time to read this page,it also has atheistS responses on it, Drives my point home of the odds home perfectly.

http://www.science20.com/news_releases/the_mathematical_probability_of_life_on_other_earth_like_planets

Here is a funny excerpt from this site,goes to show we could argue this til the cows come home.

"oh and the reason we come up with such ideas as god and religion is to try to offer an explanation to all these questions that the human mind is not capable of answering as you said. the truth is you overcame incomprehensible odds to be born, so you should enjoy the time you have here as an intelligent being that can think and ponder these questions. if you were an animal you wouldnt know there was a universe. hopefully that made sense im kinda baked."

This would not go into quote blocks,he puts up a good argument before he says this.lol

The beginning of post 1;94 should be directed at swan,thought it was excel sorry.

@ swan;

Again you switch your position when you are losing

Again? I have never switched my position on anything to begin with,you guys seem to be creating them for me.lol

It is like you are saying "when I want your opinion I will give it to you".lol

Losing? Sir this argument could go on for weeks and there would be no true winner. These discussions could lead to new ideas not thought of before,they open our minds to ways of thinking that are"out of the box" they help us gain more knowledge on our origins.

We can check the planets around us for life(none found),I am talking about higher intelligence,not ameobas,and lower life forms. Like I have said until we do find "life" on other planets my stand that we are alone has much more merit than yours, because this is the truth at the moment. Does not look good that we willl find any in our lifetime.

Again? I have never switched my position on anything to begin with,you guys seem to be creating them for me.lol

Of course you did. You were talking about carbon based life then you went to intelligent life (ala SETI). There is a vast difference. Even if I had accepted your crazy idea that just because we haven't picked up radio signals from intelligent extra terrestrial life in the few years we have been searching, no such life exists; it says NOTHING about the existence any other worlds that have non-intelligent life. In the case of the earth intelligent life as only existed a tiny fraction of a % of the Earth's existence. Yet you seem to still think you have some valid point.

Yes there is a point,you are just coming in late,the point is that we do not have to prove God to justify our Christianity. I put it very simple for swan.(so i can see the humor you are getting out of it) No the point is not to prove only that Christians exist,the point is that our religion is proven over time,more than any other,ie we are the only religion that can prove itself,with replicating evidence. That is the point.

You don't have to prove anything. There is no law that says you do. However if expect to convince people who wasn't raised in the bible noose that your religion is true (i.e. not just a figment of your imagination) you have better have something other that "we have faith". That's not to say you can't talk weak minded people into it, or people who are looking for some cozy social network. Also you keep saying Christianity can "prove itself" yet you won't even pin down what prove itself means. So far I have determined by your own words it has nothing to so with Christian beliefs being factual, so at this point it seems of little value.

@ swan;

Of course you did. You were talking about carbon based life then you went to intelligent life

And before seti nonetheless.

When I said "carbon units"(nerdy pun for humans) I was implying humans. Also all the way back in post 1;71 I wrote this below, go check it yourself,so do not say I changed my position.once again we are stuck in a mire of you twisting,or diregarding my words, and me defending them,now here read again so you will be convinced that I did not change position.

From 1;71 ;You believe there is no necessity for higher intelligence,lol you stray from my point,my point is that we are the only ones around with it(higher intelligence)

I say it plain as day,once again I have given like the fourth example of you doing this,twisting my words,or misquoting. Getting old,sir.

You don't have to prove anything. There is no law that says you do. However if expect to convince people who wasn't raised in the bible noose that your religion is true (i.e. not just a figment of your imagination) you have better have something other that "we have faith"

One must convince themselves,salvation is a personal thing,and each has different feelings. The message is spread,not forced,like the old saying goes ,you can lead a horse to water,well you know the rest.

I have not broke out with verse,as usually with atheistS I can battle without it, here is a couple so you can see through my bibles words the message I am trying to get across.

Ecclesiastes 7;24

That which is far off,exceeding deep,who can find out.

Far off means,things that God has done already,that go beyond the realm of our uinderstanding,and logic.

@ swan; exceedingly deep, means the the long lost wisdom of God that we could once percieve perfectly,but lost that ability once we fell from grace.

ie The reason you have doubts,and believe God is just a "flying spaghetti monster" simply because you can not grasp it,neither can I or any man,there will come a day,if you believe,that these things that are"far off" will be revealed.

This goes back to my point(that you probably glossed over) the message of the bible is much more important than you understanding the happenings in the O.T that defy our logic of today.

John 20:29

New International Version (NIV)

²⁹ Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

You see the point is far from proving God,in our religion. My goal is to get closer to the truth of our origin,or how it happened not who made it happen.I personally know who did that.
Now even if you do not believe you should understand Christianity better than you did when we started.

@ swan;

I do these back and forths with atheistS because it keeps me sharp

Emperor's new cloths comes to mind here.

Really,because I wish to stay current,and keep my mind sharp,I am vain? Not hardly, you have a lot of nerve accusing me of being the pompous,one,after you have retorted to me in a demeaning insultive manner, a pompous manner,twisting my words. The last few sites I give you show both points of view,with some good arguments from your side,not just mine, so do not accuse me of trying to be self righteous. My kids have been taught from an early age,that their life is just as valuable as others,no more no less.

They are taught that they are not to good to die for their country when we talk of joining the service, ie Do not feel the soldiers that are dying at present,should be the ones and not you. They are taught to put others ahead of themselves,even when the other could be ignorantly in the wrong. They see me put this in action in public, they are reminded not to look down on those less fortunate. They have been taught humility, for this is how I roll.

Being well informed satisfies me,it does not glorify me.

Slaves were looked down upon in the ancient world (cf. Rengstorf 1964b), and Peter cannot stand the thought of his teacher doing the work of a slave (13:6). It would have been appropriate for one of the disciples to have washed Jesus' feet, but the reverse is intolerable. In the Greek both pronouns, you and my, are emphatic. This response expresses Peter's love (cf. Chrysostom In John 70.2), but his is a defective love. It lacks humility, which is one of the essential attributes of discipleship according to this Gospel. Indeed, humility is the very thing illustrated in Jesus' present action. In Peter's response we see the pride and self-will that is at the heart of all sin and that is the very thing for which the cross will atone and bring healing. Peter is working from a worldly point of view, and not for the first time (cf. Mt 16:22 par. Mk 8:32).

This is how I roll sir, maybe you can take a lesson from it,and ya know what. you do not even have to believe in God to get the point,and use it(lesson of humility) in your life.

Coral Taxi -

Firstly, I'm not a "girl" or a "mam" (I believe you meant the colloquial "ma'am," short for "madam"). I would be a "sir," to you. If I insisted on the formal mode of address, which I don't. However, I find it funny that your first instinct was "whoa girl." Nice way to attempt to illegitimize my content. Standard misogyny. If not, still an age-ist approach, attempting the argument from authority from an age level, treating me as an insignificant child.

Now, firstly, your definition of the word "theory," as inferred from your context, is wrong. Period. You are using the discrediting common-speak form of the word. In a scientific discussion, however, a theory is something that has evidence, a logical support of that evidence, and has not yet been disproven. You are correct in assuming that the god theory has not been disproven (how can it? every time the religionists get their particular "theory" disproven, they move the goalposts). What's more interesting to me is that none of the religionists can come up with a coherent, clearly defined definition of what a god is. They say things that have no meaning, like "I am that I am," or some nebulous force that we have not identified that is holding everything together, and use "quantum" as a byword (once again, incorrectly) to displace criticism of their theory as being unscientific. Quantum theory, also known as the Standard Model, actually has a lot to say on how our particles interact on the very small level. It has not been disproven, and a whole lot of evidence is available to point towards its veracity.

Then you wander in. You come with your pretenses to formality (despite the rampantly bad grammar and mispellings), act like the "civilized one," and generally display a whole lot of ignorance about science. You display certain archaeological discoveries that could possibly have a place in biblical history, and discount any evidence that contradicts it or hypotheses that could explain it from an alternate view. Then, you discount the historicity of other myths. So, what happened at Troy? We have more evidence for the Iliad being historically accurate than we do for the Christian bible. We have more evidence for the existence of Agamemnon and Achilles than we do for Jesus, regardless of the stature of holiness of the individuals. So why is the Iliad regarded as myth while the bible accepted as true? It couldn't be the dishonesty displayed by apologists and ignorance of those in thrall to the myth, could it?

I'm an atheist. I accept the proposition of the null hypothesis: in the event of a lack of evidence for a positive claim (god exists), the claim can be discounted without evidence. In other words, it is not up to me to convince someone that god does not exist. I came to that conclusion over years of experience, study, and listening to and observing others. I came to the idea through an opposition to most of what the religionists say and do. Then, I came to the realization that the reason they say and do so much that is wrong is because they have founded their beliefs on an incorrect premise. Instead of evidence first, they have ideas first, then look only for evidence that supports it. When that evidence is stripped away in the pursuit of truth (science), they either a) move the goalposts, b) "reinterpret" the evidence so it supports their side, c) pretend the evidence doesn't exist/is countered by "better evidence," or d) revert to the shell of faith. Which is why faith is the enemy of reason. Reason can change ideas. Faith only makes them hold harder.

Now, as to the rest of it, I have to wonder why you even bothered showing up. You profess to be offereing evidence both for and against Christianity, but I don't see much evidence against, and the for I have taken the time to dismantle. You spout out these nonsensical phrases like "God said 'Let there be light," and then a quantum fluctuation caused the universe to come into being." What does that even mean? If we have a naturalistic process by which the universe came into being, why god? Why is it needed? What's it for? What purpose does it serve? Historically, god has been a code word with several uses, the most prominent being:a) political divisiveness/appealing to a popular base, and b) an end to an argument/search for truth. That was the purpose of "Intelligent Design." They were attempting to push god into the science classroom, and thereby stifle opposition to their model by claiming that certain things just were not possible and, therefore, not worthy of discussion or investigation. The lack of investigation is what really galls me. And I'm not saying this is all godly-folk. Certainly, religious people have made great contributions to science, and have denigrated those who wish to hold science back because of an antiquated worldview. But they are torn, torn between a world in which science perpetually makes the realm of god smaller and smaller and a realm in which god is responsible, somehow, for all things.

Oh, and pay no attention to those neurologists, please. It's not like they have anything illuminating to say about the religious experience phenomenon that so many people report. Nope, nothing to see there, let's all just ignore it, okay? Okay. Hey, you! I told you, don't look behind that curtain!

@ Janstinc; First off my aplogies sir.

I find it funny that your first instinct was "whoa girl." Nice way to attempt to illegitimize my content. Standard misogyny

Jan is a girls name short for Janet,and I do need to turn my spellchecker back on.lol No argument there. Why would considering you a girl illegitamize your content, people mistake my name for a girl also,rarely do I correct them,so I would say your comment makes you more of a misoginst than me.

If not, still an age-ist approach, attempting the argument from authority from an age level, treating me as an insignificant child.

If this were true I would not read your long post sir, or give thought to them. I crack jokes,and use sarcasm at times, so how am I trying to come from a place of authority, I am just sharing my thoughts and reasoning on the universe and God.

What's more interesting to me is that none of the religionists can come up with a coherent, clearly defined definition of what a god is.They say things that have no meaning, like "I am that I am," or some nebulous force that we have not identified that is holding everything together, and use "quantum" as a byword (once again, incorrectly) to displace criticism of their theory as being unscientific.

Correct.you must of missed this in my last post

The reason you have doubts,and believe God is just a "flying spaghetti monster" simply because you can not grasp it,neither can I or any man,there will come a day,if you believe,that these things that are"far off" will be revealed.

Anyone who professes to know what(form,shape)that God truly is,is sadly mistaken, no man can comprehend God in his perfect state, in their imoperfect state,get it now?

You profess to be offereing evidence both for and against Christianity, but I don't see much evidence against, and the for I have taken the time to dismantle. You spout out these nonsensical phrases like "God said 'Let there be light," and then a quantum fluctuation caused the universe to come into being." What does that even mean?

This is just one of my ideas of how things could of started, a quantum fluctuation can show that something can come from nothing, my belief is that there was a something. Of course it is nonsensical, I am thinking outside of the box,do you think I am convinced that I am 100% correct on this idea?lol

Did you not look on the sites(comments part,that have counterpoints on them)that I posted in my last few post,they give a much better argument in your favor than any three of you could ever wish to. It gives both sides not only mine. Check them out,you will learn something trust me.

I value your opinion,and do not dismiss it, I do not come on here holier than thou,with a closed mind that all I say is right,and you wrong,not even close. I do believe what I believe,just as you yourself.

@janstince;

Firstly, I'm not "cussing at people for what they believe." I really don't give a rat's ass what you believe

So you cuss at me in your first sentencel lol,easy girl,just make your points.I value your opinion,but not your insults,or anger.

This was way earlier in our "debate" then you come back way later and say I am dismissive,and treating you like a child, after I tell I value your opinion much earlier,but not your insults,and you misquote me,I said "easy girl",after I was cusssed at,so my response was meritted not masoginistic.

@ swan; Here is a happy medium that goes to the heart of our debate. Although it does back my point more,that at present,it is more likley we are alone.

"Although life began on this planet fairly soon after the Earth became habitable, this fact is consistent with … life being arbitrarily rare in the Universe," the authors state. In the paper, they prove this statement mathematically.

Their result doesn't mean we're alone — only that there's no reason to think otherwise. "[A] Bayesian enthusiast of extraterrestrial life should be significantly encouraged by the rapid appearance of life on the early Earth but cannot be highly confident on that basis," the authors conclude. Our own existence implies very little about how many other times life has arisen.

Two data points rather than just one would make all the difference, the researchers say. If life is found to have arisen independently on Mars, then scientists would be in a much better position to assert that, under the right conditions, the genesis of life is inevitable.

You must admit this covers the base of both our arguments. The article is available, under the Life on venus false story, currently on msnbc.

Coral Taxi -

I admit, I've been known to say things like "whoa, easy girl," etc. That was before I understood how it actually does illegitimize what the person is trying to say. Most, if not all, of the grown women I know would object to being called girl. Not only does it reduce their status to that of a child (ignorance is assumed), it objectifies them by associating them with a phrase that is commonly understood to be used for animals. I don't pretend to speak for all women, but the ones that have explained that to me have made their point clear, and I respect that. You dig?

Now, as far as what YOU have been writing, you are clearly arguing the premise that god exists. When called on it, you back away and say it was an idea or that you're merely expressing a difference of opinion or thinking outside the box or whatever catch phrase you feel like. We, and by that I mean myself and swan, mostly, are applying evidence-based argument and critical thought to your "ideas," picking them apart, and, at least in my part, determining that they have either already been disproven, are completely unnecessary and therefore useless to furthering scientific discovery, or actually harmful in attempting to silence scientific inquiry, depending on which idea you refer to.

Now, I don't consider site links that have comments a worthy counter-argument (unless you quote the comments you are considering yourself). Just throwing a link to a site does not constitute an argument. It can be a good way to counter trolls, but that's only if they have already proven they are just trolling. Link-spam away, I say. But in moderated forums, the trolls don't generally get to far before being ban-hammered. So say what you want to say, rather than merely posting a link to a site. Use quotes (which you seem apt to do anyway) to highlight the parts that you find support your argument.

However, I feel that enough time has been given to picking apart your arguments, particularly since you seem to be saying the same damn thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over (ad nauseum). You dress it up in different words, but it is still the same concept.

The god hypothesis, through the Enlightenment and the advancement of science, has been shown to be unnecessary countless times. Not only that, but it has proven harmful and antithetical to scientific inquiry. It doesn't really matter what religion you are talking about, from Christianity to Buddhism to Raelians, scientists have felt the sting of it all, in one way or another. And yet, science has given us true progression, true advancement, true understanding of nature, where the others have not. I'd say that's a pretty good track record for science. In the limited time since the advancement of the scientific method by Francis Bacon, we've gone from horses as the primary mode of transportation, to airplanes and automobiles. From leeches on veins to antibiotics and vaccines. From wondering where our next meal will come from to restaurant chains. From communicating by letter through travelling merchants to nigh-instant communication across the world. From looking at the sky through crude telescopes to setting human feet on the moon.

Seriously, which has been better for humanity: science, or god?

janstice;

it objectifies them by associating them with a phrase that is commonly understood to be used for animals.

Well in this case it was aimed at stopping the cussing at the one you were talkng to(me). I understand your analogy,but it does not apply in this response, I am not talking to a horse,and I did not say "whoa" I said "easy girl",as in easy on the swears. You dig?

You just had your words reversed back on you.lol But I get what you are saying.

Now, as far as what YOU have been writing, you are clearly arguing the premise that god exists. When called on it, you back away and say it was an idea or that you're merely expressing a difference of opinion or thinking outside the box or whatever catch phrase you feel like.

I do not back away from anything,when I say these are my "ideas" or "theories" it is not "backing away" from whether God exist,I am talking about our origins,or how we came to be,through God. I give a little on my "theories" because I do not want to come off as saying they are fact, so it is not backing away it is just showing that I am flexible to other theories,and ideas of the beginning.

You guys have really not called me on anything,except with your opinions.I have backed my points up with other examples,math.science, above and beyond my own words, that better explain them than I can.

You nor swan have done this once. Not that I noticed anyway.

We, and by that I mean myself and swan, mostly, are applying evidence-based argument and critical thought to your "ideas," picking them apart, and, at least in my part,

What evidence? Evidence of what?LOL. Do you have evidence of other life other than we? Umm no. We are alone for many light years,this is fact, at the present. Do you have evidence my scripture is not valid? umm no, do I have evidence that parts of my scripture are valid, ummm yes.(with more coming)

Do I give you mathematic examples of my "we are not just coincidence" theory? Yes

This is more a speculative debate(God,the universe' origin) than one justified by evidence. on either side. So when you say you are applying an "evidence based argument" it does not hold merit. evidence of what? You have not "picked apart" anything, you have been critical and have shared your opinions, but have not supplied any support to your arguments,other than your own words, Which is fine,but do not define them "evidence based" without citing source,or example, which neither of you have used once,to back yourselves up. I have.

However, I feel that enough time has been given to picking apart your arguments, particularly since you seem to be saying the same damn thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over (ad nauseum). You dress it up in different words, but it is still the same concept.

LOL you are funny guy.

Yes it is called staying on point and not digressing. Sometimes things have to be explained in a different way for people to understand.

Seriously, which has been better for humanity: science, or god?

Those that claim to have God in thier life,sincerely are happier,and more secure than those that have no religion. AtheistS angry,callous,jaded, responses on this vine compared to the Christians makes this point shine through clearly. Science informs me mentally,and gives me conveniences,and entertainment,does not do much for the soul,or your essence, or ie your inner being.

Science can not help you through the loss of a loved one,or a heartbreak,or tragedy after tragedy that has befallen your life,through no fault of your own. Science can not give you true inner peace, or integrity,or moral values,or teach you humility, or help your neighbor in time of need.

My God is a rock to cling to through all of these storms. The bible can help you through all of these things whether you believe in God or not science can not.

When you think about it science has created a world in which we can destroy it a hundred times over, as far as nuclear weapons.

God(if you believe) has taught us to love one another, turn the other cheek, something I have done on this vine at least 10 times.lol

I would say God(if you are a believer) for the simple fact that he gets us through the roughest of times,death,injury,debt,divorce, my scriptures(even without being saved) again will help you through these things,much better than any science ever could.

I would much rather be spiritually fullfilled,than fulfilled with equations, or mathematic conclusions, of course this does not include healing science,ie Curing disease, prolonging life, better quality of life,physically, these are the positives from science for humanity, so both are actually needed,but I will still go with God.

Where was/is your God, 1937 thru 1945 as 6 millions Jews prayed while they were being led off to be murdered by Hitler a Christian, and blessed by the Pope in Rome.

Where was he on Feb 13, 1945 as tons of bombs rained down on Dresden Germany a christian town as they prayed to be saved from the firestorm of bombs.

I could on and on throughout history, basically if you pray to God your chances for a desired outcome will not change either way, whether its to save a life, heal the sick or to win a Football game. Prayer is useless...

The Religious Nut Job will tell you,"your reward comes in the afterlife".

WHY, the afterlife...?

Because like everything else related to religion, it can't be proven or disproven....

@ Chuckline;

Where was/is your God, 1937 thru 1945 as 6 millions Jews prayed while they were being led off to be murdered by Hitler a Christian, and blessed by the Pope in Rome.

Hitler was hardly a Christian whether he professed it or not. He might not of been an athiest, but he was surely anything but a christian.

In all honesty, I find the anyone who believes Hitler to have been a
Christian is living in the heights of self-deception. Sure, he occasionally
claimed Christianity, but nothing in his life reflects a true belief in Jesus. I
have never seen anything that suggests that Hitler continued to attend church
(church membership being something far different than being active in the church
-- ask any pastor), or anything that suggests Hitler made himself accountable to
a Pastor or Priest in anyway. In fact, his execution of Christian pastors, like
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, should be enough to convince anyone with half a brain that
he was not a Christian.

Many claim to be Christians but few even know the truths about their own religion,and only profess Christianity for their own gain. Hitler was in the Catholic church alll the way up to his suicide, his last act went against all Christian beliefs,(that over all the writings and controversey that exists over this), is convincing enough that he was not a true Christian. A true Christian woukd not take their own life. Period

Where was he on Feb 13, 1945 as tons of bombs rained down on Dresden Germany a christian town as they prayed to be saved from the firestorm of bombs.

Well if they were true Christians then they were saved to begin with whether or not they were bombed by evil.

One thing about God you should understand is that he gave life and he can take it away,should we be angry with God every time someone dies? Your grandma,brother,wife,son,daughter. We would all be angry at God all the time. Death is inevitable at some time or another,no matter how much you pray. Blaming God in angry way for casualties of war is ignorant,people die,unfortunately some before their time. Our God will not stop disasters, or casualties of war, so blaming God with animosity over the inevitable becomes a moot point.

Nor will he grant touchdowns.lol

God never promised us a rose garden here on earth. Blaming God for the holocaust is ridiculous. Last time I checked the Jews were still worshipping God, for they follow the same philosophy as I have offered above, so why should you be so angry at God, if the ones of the millions that were killed still worship him? Let it go,or it will eat you up.

The Religious Nut Job will tell you,"your reward comes in the afterlife".

WHY, the afterlife...?

Because like everything else related to religion, it can't be proven or disproven

Having an afterlife is the reward sir. You continue the pattern of calloussness, and insults. AtheistS all go back to the proof, proof is not what our religion is about.

The claim is sometimes made that Hitler was a Christian - a Roman Catholic until the day he died. In fact, Hitler rejected Christianity.

The book Hitler's Secret Conversations 1941-1944 published by Farrar, Straus and Young, Inc.first edition, 1953, contains definitive proof of Hitler's real views. The book was published in Britain under the title, _Hitler's Table Talk 1941-1944, which title was used for the Oxford University Press paperback edition in the United States.
All of these are quotes from Adolf Hitler:

Night of 11th-12th July, 1941:

National Socialism and religion cannot exist together.... The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity.... Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things. (p 6 & 7)

10th October, 1941, midday:

Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure. (p 43)

14th October, 1941, midday:

The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.... Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse.... ...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.... Christianity the liar.... We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State. (p 49-52)

19th October, 1941, night:

The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity.

21st October, 1941, midday:

Originally, Christianity was merely an incarnation of Bolshevism, the destroyer.... The decisive falsification of Jesus' doctrine was the work of St.Paul. He gave himself to this work... for the purposes of personal exploitation.... Didn't the world see, carried on right into the Middle Ages, the same old system of martyrs, tortures, faggots? Of old, it was in the name of Christianity. Today, it's in the name of Bolshevism. Yesterday the instigator was Saul: the instigator today, Mardochai. Saul was changed into St.Paul, and Mardochai into Karl Marx. By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea. (p 63-65)

13th December, 1941, midnight:

Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery.... .... When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let's be the only people who are immunised against the disease. (p 118 & 119)

14th December, 1941, midday:

Kerrl, with noblest of intentions, wanted to attempt a synthesis between National Socialism and Christianity. I don't believe the thing's possible, and I see the obstacle in Christianity itself.... Pure Christianity-- the Christianity of the catacombs-- is concerned with translating Christian doctrine into facts. It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind. It is merely whole-hearted Bolshevism, under a tinsel of metaphysics. (p 119 & 120)

9th April, 1942, dinner:

There is something very unhealthy about Christianity (p 339)

27th February, 1942, midday:

It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors-- but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch Uin the next 200 yearse will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.... My regret will have been that I couldn't... behold ." (p 278)

Ok, you've convinced me Hitler was not a true Christian.

If an almighty, all Powerful and Loving God can't/won't protect millions of people praying to him to save them over a nearly ten year period.

Why would or should anyone believe that this Almighty, All Powerful and Loving God exists.

I firmly believe that the lack of proof of an existence of a God, any God, is much much greater than any proof for an existence of a God.

The fact that there are no benefits to be had as a believer until after you die is just more proof of how ridiculous and what a waste of time going to church and saying prayers is...

Does anyone really believe that there is a God that can hear 7,000,000,001 people all whispering to him at the same time and further that there is any possibility that this God can answer and ultimately help these whispering 7 Billion + believers...?

@Coral Taxi -

You haven't backed your claims with proof, you've merely backed them with assertions. Assertions that the archaeological findings actually mean what YOU say they mean. Evidence, that is not. It's like linking to TimeCube or AIG and arguing that because somebody else says it, they must know what you're talking about. Without peer-reviewed research (and credible peer-review, at that), it means absolutely nothing.

Your "mathematical" assertions also fail the test. You claim we are the only life forms for light-years. Firstly, how do you know this? This point was addressed before, and you never answered, other than to say no life has attempted to contact us since SETI was first founded. a) That means that no life has answered us because either it cannot communicate on our frequencies or with our modes of data (for the record, SETI is not as overbearing as you assume. It cannot simultaneously monitor all possible radio frequencies - the ability to monitor large swaths of radio frequencies has only been recently added to its capabilities), whether that life is too primitive or too advanced and has developed other forms of communication, or b) that they have not answered us because they do not wish to. Also, there is the idea that, hey our radio transmissions into space have only gone out for about 80 years now. 80 light-years is a pitiful amount of distance considering the sheer size of space, and the above constraints also apply to this light-cone. If the aliens were not advanced enough to receive our signals in that light-cone, or had advanced beyond the use of radio frequencies, then the point is moot. We would not be able to tell.

However, thanks to advances in science, we are now able to detect planets that are Earth-like: resembling our planet in size and mass, and soon we will be able to detect the make-up of those plantets' atmospheres. The number of exoplanets discovered already, coupled with our still-limited ability to detect them, points to the hypothesis that planets far outnumber stars in our galaxy, and the evolutionary models for planet formation suggest that this is fairly common between galaxies like ours. Since we haven't actually observed the origin of life as we know it - yet - in a natural environment, you can't really say anything about how likely it is that life will evolve naturally. Even if the number is exceedingly small (as all creationists claim, without regard to natural laws of chemistry and physics), my argument is that it only needed to succeed once. Once life started, evolution takes over. Done with. And the idea that the exceedingly small number must mean life did not come about naturally is a phallacy that has been shown over and over again to not mean anything when considering the very high numbers of possibilities where it could occur.

In essence, the probability argument would be bunk if we ever find any kind of life or evidence for life anywhere else in the universe at any time. Ever. The necessity of god will be destroyed. Think hard, do you really want to put your argument in that basket? Swan was right, your assertion that we are the special marble is unfounded, particularly in light of the new evidence from Kepler. Several thousand exoplanets, with smaller ones in our known habitable zone being isolated from the data all the time. The universe is much, much bigger than you posit. You should look into that before making these bald assertions without credible evidence.

Now, as to the whole swearing issue. Personally, I wasn't swearing at people, I was swearing. That may be to you a difference of semantics, but to me it's a difference of courtesy. I swear. I swear often. I swear about projects, I swear at my computer and software, I swear about damn near everything. But I don't cuss at people often. Many people fail to see that difference, but I have found that I can't stomach most of those people anyway. When I do cuss at you, you'll know it, and you won't have to make any equivocations to convince me about it. I'll do it to insult you deeply and offend you. In which case, you can be sure that you've done something to particularly piss me off. Not only will I swear at you, though, for to me that's just icing on the cake in the form of breaking a taboo of polite culture. I will find your weak spot and thrust the knife deep, metaphorically speaking. I will cast aspersions on your actual character, your family, your parenting skills, and whatever else I can find out about you. In this case, I only question your critical thinking skills and discernment of good information from bad. That's called debate, or argument. I personally don't see cursing or cussing or swearing or anything like that as a flaw, and if you try to convince me about it, I have read several works by John Cleese, Stephen Fry, Christopher Hitchens, and others about the wonderful action of swearing that is an absolute divinity in terms of writing. But that's neither here nor there, as I'm not going to try to convince you that swearing is not inherently bad because, frankly, I don't give a damn what you think about it.

My point in the "easy girl" portion was not that you thought you were talking to an animal, but that you were treating a human being as if they were an animal, in order to make it appear to others that that person's ideas could be discounted as being less than human. It's delegitimizing through an attack on character, rather than substance. Not quite an ad hominem, but in the same general area. As for Jan being a nickname for Janet, Janis, or even just a woman's name, so what? My pseudonym is Janstince. I never made any gender assumption about you, because I don't care about your gender. I made my arguments against your arguments, not your person. All you've done is swept aside my arguments with some grade-A handwaving about how "you haven't addressed my arguments, I wasn't arguing that, and anyway, look over here."

You claim that I haven't provided any evidence (though I did) because I haven't linked any sources. I could link sources until my eyes bled, but that isn't necessarily evidence, as I pointed to you up there. Stories in the news generally held to be common knowledge generally don't need to be linked. The Kepler Satellite findings I think are general knowledge, easily found with a quick google search. Your sources, I have attacked. They are full of misrepresentation of the facts, misunderstandings of mathematics and probability, and, occasionally, just plain old lies. I have detailed those above. I don't need evidence to discount that which is proposed without evidence. Once again, the null hypothesis. If you can't come to me with credible evidence for the existence of gods or god, then I don't need to justify my dismissal of your claim. Easy as that.

Now, for the whole "comforting" idea of god, that's a security blanket to you. Fine. Don't push it on me, don't proselytize, don't use it as an argument for why you must be right and I must be wrong, don't base your laws on it, don't use it to harm others. You claim that god teaches only "love and understanding." Horse crap. God has been used to justify everything from a feel-good groovy sensation to bloodlust, rape, and murdering children. Look up the child witch hunters led by Helen Ukpabo (spelling may not be accurate). That horrible excuse for a human being is using good old Christianity to rile up the populace against innocent children. Right out of Leviticus. And, according to the Gospels which are supposed to be the fount of all knowledge, Jesus did not throw away the Old Testament. Jesus claimed he came to enforce the OT laws. All that tribalism found in Leviticus, Numbers, and the rest of the Pentateuch. There were several examples of him refusing to enforce them, such as the whore that was thrown before him by the mob. However, that is an old Jewish story that actually had two parts: one where the rabbi asked anyone who had not sinned to cast the first stone, and all refused, and the woman was let go; the second was where the rabbi asked anyone without sin to cast the first stone, and all refused, so he threw a stone and killed her; when asked if he had not sinned, he said something along the lines of, "I have sinned, but if anyone we asked to enforce the laws was required to be without sin, we would have nobody to enforce the laws." I say this as a point that you can't rely on the bible to be an accurate portrayal of history. Myths and messiahs abounded at the time. There were many wandering "prophets," and the miracles, death, ressurection, persecution, and so on of those individuals became legendary amongst their followings. Read up on the story of Mithras. Same story, same tale, about 200 years before Jesus. Almost the exact same sayings and plot lines. Same @!$%#, different decade, basically.

The only thing Jesus had going for him (assuming he did exist among the multitude, which is a big assumption), is Paul. Paul is what made Christianity into its modern form. Paul is the one that said to reject the OT and live only for Jesus. And there are doubts that there even was a Paul. Many believe that it was Timothy writing for Paul, as Plato did for Aristotle. There is certainly some convincing argument there.

The point is, however, that a security blanket is fine for those who want it. However, you cannot expect the rest of us to believe it. You cannot expect us to "respect" it when it is not founded on truth. There are many others out there that have their own preferred myths. And there are some of us, and our population is growing, that prefer the truth over any varnish. We feel safer dealing with reality as it is, rather than propping up some arbitrary construct of imagination. And we don't appreciate it when you take our stuff and try to twist it for your own malign purpose. We don't appreciate it when you claim it for your own, and we definitely don't appreciate it when you use your majority influence to try to bully the rest of us into professing we believe, or at the very least shutting up about how wrong you are.

In summation, you have no proof for your beliefs. I have discounted your claims because they are without evidence. You build your ideas from the top down, first assuming there is a god that acts in certain ways (I won't go into the hypocrasy of claiming you must praise god for all the good while denying his hand in anything bad that happens, other than to generally mention it here), and then trying to twist the facts into something that supports your argument. We build our knowledge of the universe from the ground up, taking observation and basing our theories upon those observations. And theories can change with time, if they are disproven or other evidence comes along to alter them. But most of the scientific theories that have withstood the test of time have done so for a reason: all arguments against them have faltered, and all evidence has supported or only slightly altered them. Your use of the word "theory" in the colloquial sense is misguided at best, and downright deceptive at worst. A scientific theory is not remotely the same as the way you use the word, but you conflate the two in order to lend your ideas more weight. It's deceitful and wrong.

A dedicated belief in Science will fly you to the Moon...

A dedicated belief in Religion will fly you into a Building...

And, "We are family, I got all my sisters with me." God IS hope.

Christ is your salvation - and I'm glad that he has guided you through your life. But it's not polite to assume that god is everyone's salvation, I've chose not to live a life following a book written by man hundreds of years ago and translated multiple times in an era where there was no regard for human life. I'd prefer to use the collective education of some of the most brilliant people in humanity that have painstakingly used experiments and factual evidence to help understand what is happening all around us.

Can you hold your breath while waiting for your salvation please?

MT, until mankind understands all of everything on even the most fundamental level, my guess is as good as yours. If u were somehow at the big bang when it happened (even tho there was no way exist then) and could somehow see every force, type of energy, the energy itself, all of matter and everything that makes the universe and still have no proof of God or a god THEN ill admit you are right and there is no such thing as a god or God. After all, our brain with the senses that feed it evolved to SURVIVE our direct surroundings not understand everything about the universe.

100 years ago dark matter was "proven" impossible. But apparently now we need it. Imagine that.

Im not saying ur wrong, but im not saying i am either and theres nothing either one of us could do about that... YET.

mt,

"Idiots"

I think that's an appropriate word for those who think science is God. I'm not a believer, but I recognize the limitations of science and that it is only one method for investigating the world we live in. There are many questions the human mind is capable of asking that science cannot and never will be able to answer.

I'm sure there's a universe out there somewhere in which God is real, and science is all make-believe. But we live in THIS universe...

Actually, if we manage to become advanced enough we should eventually be able to answer any question. Its a nice thought and I realize that but impossible? nah. Unless of course the universe turns about to be infinitely complex or something.

aha nice one doug. If u know so much about THIS universe please enlighten mankind. Id like to kno if extra dimensions ACTUALLY exist or not. Or if there even really is multiple universes. Seeing as no known experiment can prove this, it looks like u indulge in imagination. :o

I can see mt has little tolerance for other people's religion. Why do those who assume their "educated" have to act like such fools.

No one even knows for sure if the universe is even mathematical. Math is great for macrocosms, but math deals in constants. Not in a universe that can change in more ways we can even comprehend.

Edward

So you are the only ones with "hope". And that hope is based on very old writings that some men decided centuries after they were written which of the old writings would be the Bible.

The book of Genesis was written by a person about which we know nothing, not even his name, but we assume it was a man because women were not educated in those days. This author of Genesis never reveals anything about himself, his education, how God gave him this information and why it was believable. He wrote about men who lived for many hundreds of years and about a worldwide flood that occurred before technology gave humans the ability to travel, view the Earth from a distance or even communicate with others in different places. In fact, it is unlikely that the author of Genesis ever traveled more than a hundred miles from his place of birth during his entire lifetime.

What do we have as evidence that Genesis was telling the truth? He wrote it down and said that it was the word of God. You justify your rejection of science by your faith in God. In truth, your faith is not in God but in people .... Genesis who wrote the words, the translators who have interpreted the words many times over many centuries, the religious leaders who, for reasons of their own, taught that those who believed those words would be "saved" and have everlasting life in heaven while non-believers would suffer in hell. Your parents and other adults in your life brainwashed you into believing these writings and that if you were faced with evidence based on observations that disputed your religious teachings your were to reject rational thinking and rely on "faith". As a believer I am certain that you credit God for your brain, such as it is. As a curious person I wonder why God insists that you do not use your brain concerning issues discussed in the Bible.

You think your faith is in God. You actually place more faith in man than in God by believing the stories you have been told and succumbing to the threats that you must believe or admit to being a sinner.

Such faith is harmful because it kills curiosity. You believe you have the answers to questions involving the creation of the Universe and life and you reject any rational argument that counters those answers. You teach your children that they must reject certain scientific ideas and by doing so you limit their ability to think critically and rationally ...... and that ability to think is the absolute most important aspect of education. Parents who brainwash their children with threats of eternity in hell for failure to believe in the impossible are guilty of a very real form of child abuse.

Learn to hyphenate, for crying out loud!

The hopeless god believer making something of nothing - just like their make believe cloud riding magician.

Try "god-believer", "make-believe", and "cloud-riding"

And just enjoy the photos without making a religious statement.

mt - You better hope to God you are right. Forever is a long time to regret your lack of faith.

it looks like u indulge in imagination. :o

U bet I do. U should see how big my wiener is in imagination - why, it's practically god-like! :O

I think I can agree with don97524 in a way. While I do believe in God or something similar, i still keep an open mind and embrace other ideas and concepts. I do not say for fact that there is OR IS NOT a God or try to force belief (or lack thereof) in one, but its strange how hypocritical people can be... on both sides.

Cool story doug. U like it when u talk about ur dick to another man?

Ur such a cutie-pie ryan. i didn't know u were a 'man'

Is your imaginary wiener as small as your imagination, Doug?

Wow, another hater.

From a modern english translation:

"For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world's creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable; because although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings....." (Romans 1:20,21)

Whether we believe in science,

Whether we believe in God,

Whether we believe in no God...

Can we all agree, in the very least, that these images are incredibly gorgeous and just leave it at that for this moment in time? Just enjoy and let it inspire wonder.

Doug,

"I'm sure there's a universe out there somewhere in which God is real, and science is all make-believe."

I did not say that science is all make-believe; only that it has its limitations. Science is a great and wonderful thing within its own sphere, but those who truly understand the philosophy of science such as Einstein, Alfred North Whitehead, Heisenberg, and the other great minds of science are aware of those limitations. The rest are mere practitioners of science.

Yeah. "Hopeless God idiots." Well I'm a believer. If I'm wrong, I've wasted a lifetime. If you're wrong you've wasted eternity!! Who's the idiot?? So, if you're wrong, would you want to know? If not, well....

Mickey,

Nothing you've said changes the obvious fact that people made up God and religion with far less regard to observable phenomena than the people who make up the theories of science. That's pretty much all I'll ever really have to say on the subject.

YesVirginia: So here's a situation for your to consider.

Someone comes to your door and tells you that they've developed a pill that will allow you to live forever and never age or get sick. You just have to take one pill everyday. He says the pills cost $200 per month.

So if you shell out the $200/month and he's wrong, you only waste the money. If he's right, you live forever and never get sick.

By the logic of Pascal's Wager, you should pay the man. The wager says that if you can't know the answer to the question "Does God exist?" then you should believe in God, because doing so will give you an infinite reward: eternity in Heaven. Well the man provides no evidence that his pills do what he claims, but he is offering you an infinite reward. Therefore, you should believe him, right?

Well doug, I dont know that many people of the female gender with the name ryan. Theyre out there but you would have been safe guessing anyways.

Well ryan, what about jeri ryan? U know, 7 of 9? there's a female specimen if I ever saw one.

@ mt;

The hopeless god believer making something of nothing.

The hopeless one who does not do his homework(see quantum fluctuations). Something can come from nothing. This does not mean God,our creator,did not cause this to happen.

None of us were there so faith or no faith in a creator is what we are are left with. Creation,or happenstance,coincidence . I will go with we were created.

Yeah. "Hopeless God idiots." Well I'm a believer. If I'm wrong, I've wasted a lifetime. If you're wrong you've wasted eternity!! Who's the idiot?? So, if you're wrong, would you want to know? If not, well....

What you fail to realize is your chances of being right are almost nil. Their is no supporting evidence for you claims. Secondly for all we know even if their is a god you picked the wrong religion or alternatively he's going to cast people who didn't use their brain for critical thinking into some eternal hell, so you may indeed burn while I am saved. l. Not that I believe this but it has as good a chance as your claims.

Doug,

"Nothing you've said changes the obvious fact that people made up God and religion with far less regard to observable phenomena than the people who make up the theories of science."

I said nothing about either God or religion; only about the limitations of science. The difference between a great scientist and a mere practitioner of science is that the great scientists understood the philosophy of science; its methodoly and its limitations and were themselves philosophers of science. That's what the philosophy of science is all about: What is science and what are its methods, assumptions, and its limitations? Most of the philosophers of science were scientists or mathematicians themselves.

Sorry Mickey, I've lost interest. The guy, Edward or something, started in on God and religion, so I knew where the thread was going, and put in my two cents (times 5 or 6). have a good day

Doug,

"have a good day"

Same to you, friend!

I can only speak for myself, I think anyway. I suspect all of mankinds religions are "bullsh^t grounded in someones need for power over others. I also suspect Science is a quest of factual reality. Accordingly, what is believed as fact today may prove erroneous tomorrow. I do somewhat suspect the force of life could be designed by some power. Lot of inter-relation going on there, yet I find Mr. Darwin quite logical. I must conclude that I don't know a damn thing. I do know my name from my parents, but I concede, they could have lied to me.

@Yes, I don't think it is fair of you to call the non believers idiots! The way i see it is that u may be wasting your lifetime with a belief that is based on a book that was written over thousands of years ago, which was written to create a religion, You can all believe in religion if you want, Your God has been the center point for wars and hate and anger and mass murders, just take a second and look at our world...So while you waste ur lifetime with that, us idiots will enjoy our life time with our loved ones.!!!!We have been force fed this religious jibber jabber since we were children and we too have a right to voice our opinions so get off your mighty high horse and let us believe what we want to believe and we will let you God- fearing people do the same! I, for one, wouldnt want to fear the being whom i am to spend eternity with...

MacForrester,

"I must conclude that I don't know a damn thing. I do know my name from my parents, but I concede, they could have lied to me."

Now there is a true skeptic! :)

YesVirginia2011

Yeah. "Hopeless God idiots." Well I'm a believer. If I'm wrong, I've wasted a lifetime. If you're wrong you've wasted eternity!! Who's the idiot?? So, if you're wrong, would you want to know? If not, well....

Everyone wonders about "how it all began". Scientists have some answers but not the complete story, and there will always be varied opinions about where the original matter came from, and what came before what we can prove. Curiosity is healthy. It is the driving force behind most of what we know about the Universe.

The mistake made by many, even most, Christian "believers" is that they equate belief in the Bible with belief in God. The Bible is clearly created by man. The only reason to believe that the Bible is the "word of God" is that people convinced you that this is true. Christian believers have "faith" that someone a long time ago received the word of God a long time ago and wrote it down. Therefore, your faith is in people .... not in God.

To accept the Bible as the word of God without question requires departure from rational thought. To believe absolutely without real evidence is unreasonable. What God would require a person to set aside their (God-given?) ability to reason as a requirement for entrance into the "Kingdom of Heaven"?

Fundamental faith is a curiosity-killer. Fundamental belief in the Bible requires one to believe not just without evidence, but in spite of evidence contrary to the stories of the Bible. Furthermore, because of the many contradictions in the Bible, people are required to ignore the inconsistencies and refrain from questioning multiple explanations of the same events, including the birth of Christ.

Refuting one of the cornerstone theories of life science, the Theory of Evolution, makes no more sense than to deny the structure of the atom, cell theory, plate tectonics, or any of the other fundamental building blocks of science. You would be just as rational to depend on a faith healer to care for your medical needs or visit an astrologer for your weather predictions.

Fundamentalist believers in any religion consider it reasonable to discount real evidence because they know the answers without evidence. Should those people even be considered for jury duty? If I am an innocent man standing trial for a crime I want rational, critical thinkers on the jury deciding my fate. If I am guilty, please fill the jury box with fundamentalist Christians who are willing to discount evidence and believe what they want to believe regardless of proof to the contrary.

To the philosophizing agnostics: well, what's important is that you've found a way to feel superior to both sides (from XKCD).

Also, I always find Pascal's wager hilariously apt in the argument for religion. Like most claims of creationism, ID, and the other wedges to get myth taught as science, it was disproven about 5 seconds after it was uttered, yet they still plod on as though nothing is wrong with it.

The reason I believe in God is not based off christianity or any one religion. I believe in God because God is the only other concept (by itself) offered to explain existence. the universe either just happened (somehow?), always was and will be, or some type of all powerful force (or even a being) did it. There's already overwhelming evidence that there is a sixth sense, and it's accepted by even a decent portion (almost the majority) of the scientific community at this point. Theres more than enough documented unexplained incidents having to do with "ghosts." Obviously I cant tell you if these "ghosts" are just left over bits of energy or actual beings BUT it's there regardless. God could just be some type of "force of life" or "all" consciousness if you will.

If something like the 6th sense is just now being accepted, when it could have been so long ago by mankind as a whole, then being completely bound by what you can see right in front of you may not be the best approach understanding the universe anyways.

The "face-value" dogma of atheism should not be followed SO close. It is after all nothing more than the observation of an "advanced monkey" that is limited to 5-6 senses stuck on a rock (for the most part) constructed by brains that evolved to SURVIVE even if the brain doesnt understand why.... If it's so natural for mankind to believe in God or a god, then ur doing it wrong. Not to mention the only truly unbiased logic while considering ALL unknown factors about the universe is that no one really knows if there is or is not a God, but there MOST LIKELY is not a God based on what we have discovered so far. Even though recent discoveries do not suggest a god, they do suggest MUCH more than what we can observer. How can you pretend that science MUST have covered even the majority of what existence could consist of? Really?? (Thats to those who pretend "know without a doubt" that there is no god despite the obvious unknown.

Observe*

Shorter Ryanb21 -

"I've been reading Deepak Chopra, and everything he's ever said is right, so therefore WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

Seriously. You need to read more science and less twaddle. Science, that thing that people work at. Not twaddle, the thing that people make tons of money over telling other people that "dreams can come true if you wish hard enough." The "sixth sense," ghosts, the "something came from something" crap. Seriously, you haven't ever cracked an in-depth paper on physics, have you? There's some really, really cool stuff going on in the world. The real world. Much more interesting than Oprah or anybody who is some variation of a shaman would say (or likely know). The world gets crazy on the subatomic scale. Crazy as in we have the mathematical knowledge to describe a lot of it, but even then only a handful of people can truly understand it. Same thing with macro. We evolved on the scale we are in. We are adapted to operate at our scale. Science has allowed us to go from the very small to the very large scales, and keeps increasing its range. Meanwhile, god's hiding places keep getting smaller and further away.

The point being, just because something "makes sense" to you doesn't mean it's true.