Atheism vs Christianity Why I don't believe in God response

[KatTheFrog]

well you can see a speedy evolution in the form of a virus cell. because they have such short lifespans they can mutate and evolve extremely quickly, visible effects can be seen within a year. this is why super bugs are created. normal infections evolve to become resistant to antibiotics.

[ineverythingpray]

say your laying on your death bed at age 22 because of cancer or some incurable disease. your thinking "I'm too young

To die"" what will happen after I'm dead" And "what if Christians are right?" "what if heaven and he'll are real places and the choices iv made in this short short life will land me in eternal damnation in hell" imagine how scary that would be. Don't wait until your dead to find out. Atheist,please,give your hand to the faith your fighting

[ineverythingpray]

the only question I have for atheist is "what do YOU believe is after death?" answer that for me

[7thMaggot]

I don't need any religion because i can control myself. So you are Christian and you need a rule because you cannot control yourself which means you are dumb!

[DjCaaLUM]

HAHA OMFG NEARLY EVERY SINGLE STATEMENT YOU MAKE IN THIS VIDEO UNDERMINES ITSELF ..YOU SAID WHO IS THE CREATOR OF THE CREATOR OF THE CREATOR.... WELL THE SIMPLE ANSWER TO THAT IS ..THEIR WAS NO CREATOR ..YOU COMPLETELY CONTRIDICTED YOUR OWN ARGUMENT ... ALSO ..WHEN YOU SAID THE BIBLE SAID THEIR WERE OTHER PEOPLE BECAUSE KANE WENT AND MET HIS WIFE? ..YEAH ONCE AGAIN...THE SIMPLE ANSWER IS ..THIS IS A LARGE FLAW IN THE BIBLE BECAUSE IT NOWERE STATED THAT THEIR WERE OTHER PEOPLE .. GENISIS FAILS

[LunarLogie]

@DjCaaLUM The Bible was written by humans, of course it has flaws. None of that proves there isn't a God. You cannot disprove it and you cannot prove it. The entire reason we were given free will was to decide weither or now we wish to believe in Him or not. What sort of test would there be if the answer was in front of you?

[DjCaaLUM]

@LunarLogie but thats basicaly just christians excuse ...think about it ..if god loved his people and wanted them to be with him ..would he realy want to test them? ..

[LunarLogie]

@DjCaaLUM If you want to create a free creature there has to be tests, otherwise you're making their choices for them and they're not really free. If people choose not to believe in Him then there's nothing He can do about it but just let them live without Him. Again, the choice is up to them. My personal experiences gave me the proof I needed, so I made the choice to believe.

[MrPetezajot]

Yes! god is so nice and loving that if you fuck up you spend eternity in hell, that doesn't sound very nice and loving

[LunarLogie]

@MrPetezajot He's is nice and loving, if you don't return the love then He'll forget about you and leave you in Hell. Why bother wasting time on someone that doesn't want to love you?

[nusucker]

You sir, are a douche for saying evolution dosen´t exist, you wan´t prove? Ask your church to stop demonstrating against the evolution museums some museums are actually open, go on... get some information, if you know what that means, look at the skulls fossils we found, look at the skull of an modern human and a skull of an "past" human.

You´r theory is bull. You say even though nothing exist, it still has to be true that nothing exist, what the fuck?

[nusucker]

Show prove (Scientific one) that God exist. You can´t use the Bible which is a book and no one was there when it was written, secondly, you using reference out of the bible which is like i said, you can´t rely on the Bible which is like a Mickey Mouse Children Book not proven at all, there is no scientific prove that snakes can talk, there is no scientific prove that eden existed and that evolution is wrong.

[oswaldzimen88]

@nusucker

If it was scientific prove that evolution was wrong scientist would not believe in it (we would actually be happy cos then we are closer to the truth). they would try to find a better fitting theory. science is all about trying to find a explanation that we cannet prove wrong. i cannot see why a lot of religios people thing that non-belivers "belive" in evolution like its a religion. we'll i for one believe cos it explains all the variation better than any other theory :)

[nusucker]

@oswaldzimen88 Well. Probably because they think it "can´t" be that simple. Or probably because they lived in a religious family and got a some sort of brainwash, since if you get told you need to believe in it, or you go to hell or you would sin or whatever, then of course you would stand for it. There are many reasons, but evolution can´t be disproved by a book. FACT. ;)

[dylan111291]

Also ,..you say that people back in the day have had spiritual experiences...

It seems to me that your just going by how people thought about things back then to infer that that's how everyone is, which is not true..people back then had no way of knowing what was going on around them they did not have science ..so they used their imagination...

[dylan111291]

what about the Roman's forcefully converting people to Christianity? Forgot that? They've killed people who did not convert. here's how I will prove Evolution against a god...

Here ...I'll prove evolution..

no one can be born without a sperm cell finding it way into an ovum.

all humans have a tailbone

since humans reproduce to make more humans it would make sense that there would be no god because if a god made us then he could keep making more of us.

[pokeguy742]

am i the only one who knows that this isn't real?

[chaksa]

genesis and the bible are fiction books!

[Jason29n]

Believe me, when you stop making excuses and rationalizations for god, then you will realize what you believe is complete nonsense. Wherever you were born is what religion you believe. If thats not enough to make you question it I dont know what is. If you were born in India you would be Hindu. SIMPLE. Open your eyes brother.

[Tozhg]

I stopped listening at "...who was actually born of a virgin" When did YOU stop listening?

[RODikUlus]

Also, Wicwire answered your task to prove evolution, as it can be attested to that species (rats, insects, etc) DNA structure will evolve in order to survive. This is not something that these species consciencely change...it's their makeup. Ours is much the same as humans. How did Eskimos get such thick skin, and short stocky bodies that are perfect for retaining heat?

You should bone up on some cdk007, potholer54, & other scientific vids explaining these things.

[concrete1213]

you gotta admit he has alot of good points.

[advines]

i give u a few points but then you lost it all after you coulndt explain the creato creator creator thing

[thislesbianslife]

pompous asshole.

[Xpistos2]

Love you, brother. Keep the Faith.

[futisman1]

IF jesus did exist he had 2 dads and 12 boyfriends :)

[nevs555]

wow 2 mins in the vid and u already throw quotes at us wow...

[Wicwire]

And lastly, I'd like to comment on your remarks about atheists, 14mJustice. If you truly believe that every atheist and agnostic lack morals and compassion, then by your understanding I should be a thief or murderer. After all, I don't believe in God, Satan, Heaven, Hell, Purgatory or Limbo. So then, what prevents me from committing acts of brutality upon my fellow man? The answer is I follow the ethic of reciprocity, which means "do to others what you would like to be done to you." The end.

[Wicwire]

The Sumerians also worshiped the sun and moon, as well as planets such as Venus, all copied by later civilizations. I can understand why this practice was so popular, as one can actually see these objects in the sky. Put simply, religion was a way of explaining the world around them in a time when not much was known about the universe. I'm glad to hear you believe the Bible is not to be taken literally, 14mJustice, but i fail to understand how you can say that yet still believe in God.

[Wicwire]

Your supposed proof of God's existence is rather weak to say the least, 14mJustice. After all, religious beliefs can be traced back to the very first known civilization: the Sumerians of ancient Babylonia. They believed in many deities, and included their king amongst them, a tradition latter copied by the Egyptians and Romans. The Book of Genesis is an updated version of Sumerian beliefs. Their chief god, however, was "An", which in Sumerian means "sky".

[Wicwire]

I can prove evolution to you, 14mJustice. The use of insecticides on crops to prevent damage by insects, which forces insects to evolve into new strains which are more resistant, thereby leading to the development of newer insecticides. This example is known as an "evolutionary arms race". In biology, evolution is defined as a change in the genetic material of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. Thus, the insect evolves a resistance to the insecticide to survive.

[oswaldzimen88]

@Wicwire

Funny thing about not believing in elolution is that it looks like lot of religios people reject it withoug knowing what it is about. I had a discussion once. I said: "do you believe that offspring will have some variation (haircolor for one thing). He said yes. "Do you believe that animals living different places eat different stuff. do you believe that the ones bet fitted survies cos they are able to get food". Yes to both, but I don't belive in evolution he said. Stupid i said :p

[Wicwire]

If you want to get into specific religious wars, 14mJustice, I can name several. The Islamic conquest of Persia between the Muslims and Zoroastrians, the Byzantine-Arab Wars between the Christians and Muslims, the Spanish Reconquista and Ottoman Wars in Europe, the Crusades and Inquision between the Christians and Jews, the Mongol Invasions between the Shamans, Buddhists, Taoists, Muslims and Christians, and the Muslim conquest of the Indian subcontinent with the Hindus. Just to name a few.

[Wicwire]

Also, 14mJustice, World War II was, in part, a religious war, because Nazi Germany targeted Jews, gypsies, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Freemasons before and throughout the course of the war.

[Wicwire]

Now, just to clarify a few things, 14mJustice, when you say that communists are atheists, which communists exactly are you referring to? If you mean the Russians, then you forget that many Russians belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church, which is a form of Christianity. Now, Stalin did purge these followers during his reign, until Germany invaded Russia in 1941. He then backed Orthodox religion because it was good for morale to help defeat the Nazis.

[Wicwire]

First of all, 14mJustice, if you want to debate an issue, especially one you are very passionate about like religion, drop the sarcasm and theatrical performance. Hollywood won't come calling, and viewers will take you more seriously.

[megan132]

i am going to try to hit on the big bang thory a bit. i kno there are 2 main ones so i am going to talk about both. for the sake of argument lets say all of spce is in here --> O. well the first theory says that there was nothing and it expanded into something...how is that possible, cause basically that is the christian religion, there was nothing, and now there is something.

[SenariXarn]

Secondly, the strawman argument that you provide gives you reason to use a non-sequitur and conclude that god=big bang.

Thirdly, your entire misrepresentation of the theory as per my first point completely disregards other theories of cosmic origin.

I'd suggest you google the aforesaid theories so you can better educate yourself. That way, you wouldn't have to post on YouTube with a collection of half-truths and misinformation only to have your comments spat back at you in disdain.

[megan132]

the second theory is that in space (O) there is a tiny little dot about the size of a needle head that contains energy and everything in it, at one point it could not take any longer, so it expanded into the universe, how did that tiny bit of energy get there? if you believe in something else, please respond with your theory

[megan132]

when you think about evolution, you have to think how your body depends on other parts of your body. if we came here be morphing from creatures to humans, that is impossible. for we need parts of our body to rely on other parts, and with parts of animals, that is physically impossible.

[SenariXarn]

Actually, by that logic, parts of pig organs should not be easily transferable into the human body, yet we can still--and do so--transplant things like heart valves and the like from pigs to humans.

Honestly enough, we do not spontaneously grow livers or kidneys; however, the organs that these evolved from differed in almost all conceivable distinctions for the sole reason that they may or may not have been used in the same context back then.

Take the appendix in example of this application.

[blicksflicks]

Good video. 5 stars!

[madguitarist911]

and you waste away your life praising jesus...

[zukuris]

i'm sorry my friend uses my account and he is pretty ignorant and obnoxious. I myself am an athiest and just had to do something after i saw the comment he posted.

[madguitarist911]

ok, tell your friend not to be so rude

:)

[SenariXarn]

Evolution is a scientific theory. Scientific theories are such because they have been proven time and time again through various mediums. This is why we have Music Theory, Germ Theory, Gravitational Theory, etc.

Religion has been a justifying force for violence since its inception. The absence of such would form a simple (albeit untrue--though not through your logic) dichotomy of the absence of justifying force.

Spirituality doesn't exist. Look up Sapolsky on Religion.

Go educate yourself.

[megan132]

its the Music law, Germ law, and Gravitational law, and there is the Scientific theory

Theory- a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact

Law- an act that seems to be consistent throughout nature, still conjectural, but more of a fact.

[SenariXarn]

Actually, your reference to gravitational law is false. There is no gravitational law when one's environs shift to the incredibly small or incredibly large. If you're willing to rebrand gravitational theory into law, then you must be willing to doubt the existence of both the microverse and the macroverse.

Your explanation as it transfers into music and germ is also hodge podge.

Music theory is the structure of musical songs, given properties, and is a poor initial analogy I'll admit.

[SenariXarn]

Germ theory is not a law. The process that germs go through is not an act that seems to be consistent throughout nature, it varies based on the organism in question.

They are all theories as it relates to both the macro and micro-scales of the universe, as well as the scale that we associate with best.

As it pertains to evolution, you must be willing to discount countless evidence from fossils, vestigial organs, etc.

If you're so interested in disproving it, look at the evidence first.

[megan132]

it has been mans nature to rle over the other one, even if there was no religion, every man would still want to have power, i do not know why atheists use this concept, but they have to understand that it is wrong and easily disproven.

go educate yourself.

[SenariXarn]

If you would have spent any amount of time in school in a philosophy class, it would become distinctly clear that humans don't have a "nature", but rather their "nature" is derived from the general consensus on what it means to be human.

Human nature is as much understood to be greedy as it is to be self-sufficient and non-servile.

With such differing opinions as to the truth behind human nature, it comes naturally to disregard it entirely and work on a case-by-case basis.

[megan132]

actually, there are two differing opinions none of them can be proved or disproven, because the tests would have to rely on a baby, and i am pretty sure no one wants to give their baby to science

but anyway, i was not tryings to be non-sequitor or anything of that nature, that is my belief, i am sorry that you took it that way, and having astrawman argument, i just explained a broad explanation of the big bang theory, if im wrong please tell me how it worked.

[SenariXarn]

In your attempt to illustrate the "Big Bang" Theory you presented both a strawman argument and a non-sequitur.

Firstly, the big bang theory is the simple idea that the universe once was a singularity of sorts, and that some unknown event caused it (or it "anti-collapsed" as per a white hole) to rapidly expand.

The generation of electrons and protons, atoms, basic elements, stars, heavier elements, and galactic systems followed.

The big bang theory only explains the origin, nothing thereafter.

[megan132]

actually, tell me everything you believe, write down to every pin point, so that i would be better prepared with my arguments

and please dont say that it would take to long, because that is what all the other atheists tell me.

[SenariXarn]

Well, I believe in anything that has sufficient evidence for its truth. Sufficient evidence is something that is peer-reviewable and able to be reproduced, not solely eyewitness account or testimony.

That being said, I have no reason to believe in anything without the aforementioned criteria.

That's not too long and it's a general guide to a good belief system.

That being said: abiogenesis, evolution, psychology, sociology, all of these things I believe yield accurate and testable results.

[megan132]

no, i mean, down to how the big bang theory works, and how evolution works, no atheist has ever answered that question for me, and i owuld like to know straight from an atheist.

[SenariXarn]

Given that I am not an astronomer or biologist, my response will be limited. Keep this in mind.

The Big Bang Theory is the postulation from microwave background radiation analysis that the universe was, at one point in time, a very small point, if not a singularity. It is the white hole hypothesis that allows the Big Bang theory to allow for a cyclical and eternal universe, one that eventually collapses upon itself only to expand itself upon accumulation of enough matter.

This is a highly...

[SenariXarn]

theoretical field and we are doing more accurate tests involving gravity waves presently to understand how the universe looked a few seconds after the supposed time of its original expansion (the Big Bang).

The Big Bang theory, in and of itself, is an incomplete explanation of a phenomenon which we've hardly an inkling of knowledge towards; however, this isn't to discount its merit as it's the best natural explanation of the event that we have, and shouldn't be cast aside for the supernatural.

[SenariXarn]

Evolution, on the other hand, is the fact that life builds upon itself, becoming ever more complex and adapted to its environment. Laboratory tests have already conclusively proven that evolution takes place through speciation over long periods of time.

An easy way to describe evolution is taking a group of 100,000,000 salamanders. Half of this group winds up staying on the mountainside due to ease of access of food, while the other half must move on because of the food supply.

[SenariXarn]

Those that stay on the mountainside wind up with very little variation from generation to generation due to the sheer supply of food and absence of need to change to accumulate more food.

Those that have to move on because of the initial half that stayed and ate them out of house and home had to adapt to their new environments so that they could survive the change of food supply and temperature/weather of the area.

Apply this over and over to the increasingly different populations over time.

[SenariXarn]

Those should be roughly sufficient descriptions.

The main idea here is not to disregard a science merely because one may not understand it fully, but to become increasingly inquisitive and seek new information on the topic so that one may be more informed on the matter and make a more informed decision regarding topics relating to the subject.

One shouldn't put down evolution as false chiefly because their biology teacher in high school never explained it well enough to completely understand.

[megan132]

you used that animals have to adapt to their enviroment, well lets say that if you put a large family of siberian huskys in south florida, over generations will they grow shorter hair and adapt to the heat, or will their hair stay long?

[SenariXarn]

That is roughly like putting fresh water fish in a salt water system, but I'll go along with the thought experiment.

In order for the initial family of huskies to live in the more tropic environment of southern Florida, members of their "family" would have to develop shorter fur coats and more tolerance to heat over the generations.

More than likely one can expect a large amounts of heat-induced deaths and shorter generational gaps. Shorter generational gaps allow for more mutations over time.

[SenariXarn]

More likely is the case that the "family" of huskies (I prefer the term "population", as it is less connotative of a anthropomorphized humanesque relative) will migrate north into a less tropical climate. These migrating packs would stay nearer to the shore due to the cooler environment therein.

You see, a population isn't restricted to a zone, it is free to migrate.

I can only guess the intention of this was to mock the idea of the transition in evolution of water animals to land. /shrug

[YTargain]

Truth is a human concept used to explain their surroundings. its not a rule its a guide. evolution can be proven by looking at the dna of a string of evolving species, we can see with each minor change there is also i monor difference in the dna, so if we say the begining dna is ababd then it changes to abadd then it ends up slolwey over thousands of years at dbabd. the chrisitian darkages hindered scientific devolopment by several thousand years. if religion grouped people up, it escalated...

[YTargain]

the crusades making it. maybe not wholly at fault. but mostly. riligions where able to start charitys because they had money, they had money from all the people who donated to them, they donated to them because they where scared of hell, ergo they where extorted. here you are. i have provided my argument against all the points you have made. although personally i dont beleive we should care what people do or dont beleive in terms of religion. i felt the need to set the record straight.

[LordfishKeke]

hey dipshit, you make all these claims but your can't prove any of them or even provide evidence. Stupid braindead shit.

[SirBamf]

So wait, your saying god created some humans... then decide hey fuck it dont put it in there? Fail

[CauseIHadToAsk]

What parts are to be taken literally and what parts are not? Maybe the very concept of god is not suppose to be taken literally?

[UberLogic]

If you don't take it literally then who decides what is REAL what is not??

I will give you my nonliteral analysis of the bible.

If you don't take the bible literally then every part that sounds like magic is fiction.

No genesis, no eden, no original sin, no talking snake, no living in fish, no great flood, no smiting, no imaginary friends telling you to kill everyone that doesn't like him, no jesus zombie, no god.

It is a vague history book with a bit of "soap opera for the ages".

[I4mJustice]

People have alot of interpretations. This is why Christianity has something called rational theology, where you apply reason to scripture to further discover the nature of God.

"I will give you my nonliteral analysis of the bible."

-I think you need to read the bible first.

The bible is not a history book. It is a book about moral truth and the nature of God.

[Archivian01]

Just an additional note:

I have read the bible b4. Sevral times, but not for a while now.

If it is a book about "moral truth and the nature of God", why is it a religion? There are alot of books that talk moral truths, that dont demand addition ritual other than treating people well, arent prejudice, dont demand a specific god or additional fear/bribry tactics of supernatural punishment. Many of these books are not Religious in a biblicle ritualized sense.

[Archivian01]

Also if u can take or leave parts of it, fact or fiction? how do u know what bits are right? what should be fact? If you can pick and choose; is it not a religion of convenience? Does it really have substance?

[RODikUlus]

@I4mJustice "applying reason to scripture" doesn't allow you to further discover anything, other than discover how to make excuses.

If the bible wasn't meant to be taken literally, then why do you believe that a serpant talked, & that Adam was an actual man who lived more than 900 years? Also, why would there actually be a geneology from THE GOSPELS ( mind you) to show the lineage of JC? Is this geneology literal?

Also, why couldn't the universe create itself, just like your God did?

[LunarLogie]

@UberLogic YOU decide what is real and what is not. That's the ENTIRE point behind it. In my belief, God gave humans free will, to give them a small lead and let them decide if they're going to go out on a limb and love something they cannot see. Other wise, why create anything more than his angels? Who already loved him unconditionally.

[UberLogic]

@LunarLogie Reality is real. Your opinion does not affect gravity. There is an objective reality the question is what do the ramblings of desert nomads that were admitedly hearing voices have to do with anything relating to the formation of the universe?? "gods" are not THE answer they are not AN answer. It is a vaporious concept that allows some people to never have to grow up.

[LunarLogie]

@UberLogic Then what is the answer behind the workings of the universe? What logic dictates that a sentient force couldn't be pulling the strings? We haven't even figured out our own planet, let alone the laws that govern the entire universe. And honestly, with all of the natural disasters whipping around, we won't really have time to prove who's right and who's wrong. So now, our opinion does make it.

[UberLogic]

@LunarLogie OMG -- you are arguing against reality itself just to support your opinion that the ramblings of a certain set of desert nomads is right and ALL the other stories of magical creation are wrong . . .

Seriously your story has no more bearing on reality than the stories of Zeus or Ra . . .

[LunarLogie]

@UberLogic I never said a thing about Christianity after you started this argument. I simply stated there could be a sentient being who created and watches over Creation. I'm not arguing against reality if there really is something there, you don't know if there's not, and no other being does. We don't know what runs this universe, either it be a sentient being or this mess exploded from no where and 'magically' rearranged in such a precise manner. There, argument closed.

[UberLogic]

@LunarLogie My original comment that you RESPONDED to on was talking directly about the bible and how it relates to history. Since then you have been conflating two issues. One -- the bible is demonsterable proof of a magical creation and through it we know a magical bearded sky man. Two - there could be some unknown/unknowable thing that created the universe that we have no evidence of it existing. Pick one and try to be consistant.

[Archivian01]

Separate question, what is your opinion of the soul? Does it exist? what is it? How do you know it is there? What is its purpose? Is it precious? if it is, Why?

[I4mJustice]

I have a soul, do you?

Yes, it does exist.

It is the spiritual part of us.

I have free will and intellect.

"What is its purpose?"-wtf it IS YOU. What is your purpose?

Yes, it is precious, unless you don't think that you are precious, and even then it is still precious.

"Why?"-Because it is you? Without the soul you are just an animal.

[Archivian01]

Well that was the hardest thing for me not to believe in. Honestly, i dont know if i have a soul. But i do hope i dont have a biblical soul.

The reason is b/c its the most pubilic, private property that isnt even tangable. This precious "U", is a victim to the whims of the devil or god, you have no power over it, it will either go to heaven or hell. Somone can approach you and say your soul is damned for X reason and can only be saved for Y reason. Thats it you have no power.

[Archivian01]

It is a symbol of the self empowerment that your giving away, or having taken away. No matter how much romance you give it, it was never urs, u never had power over it. Its something that cant be proved or disproved in a physical world sense (at least not now). Everyone else has power over it but you, soley b/c they can save/condem it by saying so. You dont have to believe them but you cant be sure they hold less power than something or someone else.

[Archivian01]

If solid evidence could be produced by science that god didnt exist or that jesus didnt exist, would you believe it? Would your faith be able to encorporate that? Would the religion assimilate that information, adjust, change and then move on? Or at least provide equal or greater solid evidence that didnt come from believing in the religion in the first place or from the bible.

[I4mJustice]

Sure I would believe it. And my faith wouldn't exist anymore. And life would be pretty pointless because I would be a blob of matter that exists merely by chance and has no purpose and will die and go six feet under the ground and turn into shit and be forgotten.

[Archivian01]

Also to claim one of them to be right would be to claim the others were wrong. But what proof could u offer that the others were wrong or that urs was right? The evidence for your particular religion has to out weigh that of the others, and has to be presentable to others for them to understand it.

[Archivian01]

I agree that wars a lot more often than not are basically based on resources and territory. But thats not what they have been done in the name of. Many of those wars are done in the name of religion, dying for their god etc. I cant think of a war (off hand) that was fought in the name of atheism or agnostacism.

Existence is as much a proof of god as me saying my hairy ass is actually god. Can you prove me wrong? No. In fact based on this kind of argument my ass is awesome.

[Archivian01]

Ur idea of Atheist morals is a joke. Religion did not build a single hospital ever in the existence of anything. People did. And the claim could be that they did it in the name of religion (like wars) but it served a social function. Morals are an ideological construct largely based in religion. You dont build a hospital because its good, or coz ur religion says you have to, you build it because its needed.

[I4mJustice]

"Religion did not build a single hospital ever in the existence of anything"...explain why there are so many Catholic, Christian, Jewish, etc. hospitals out there. You build hospitals because they are needed, yes, that is true, its funny how the religious people just happen to have the most hospitals/charities. Do ya think there is a connection between religion and helping people?

[Archivian01]

Religion didnt build anything. As i said before, people did.

Do you think that because the majority of the world is religious and going further back a higher percentage of the world was religious, do u think that it might just be that because there were more religious people in the world its likely that they built more hospitals. Its really commonsense.

Also not once did i say that religions did not have a connection with helping ppl. But you dont need it to have religion to help ppl.

[Archivian01]

1.Buddah was born a virgin. He had parents but a white elephant from a dream that entered his mothers womb was the spunk monkey.

2.Zeus was a god and fathered Dionysus.

3.Dyaus-Pitar who was the father of Indra & was THE SKY!

Krishna seems like it was birth by mortal means, but was a devine birth and was foretold by a deity (sounds a little like Gabriel there). I need to read more on that.

4.I couldnt make out the name of the last one u said.

doesnt it similar to birth of jesus?

[Archivian01]

Creationist Christians seem to be pretty solid on the idea that the earth is only 6000 years old and there seems to be a rather sizable number of them. I agree that it was not meant to be taken literally, but if it isnt then it is even more open to interpretation and holds even less ground.

Evolution has a massive amount of evidence to back it up. Visit a museum (natural history) and it will offer you evidence. Lots of it. Lots and lots of it.

You prove ur claim that evolution is unproven.

[Archivian01]

1.Buddah was born a virgin. He had parents but a white elephant from a dream that entered his mothers womb was the spunk monkey.

2.Zeus was a god and fathered Dionysus.

3.Dyaus-Pitar who was the father of Indra & was THE SKY!

Krishna seems like it was birth by mortal means, but was a devine birth and was foretold by a deity (sounds a little like Gabriel there). I need to read more on that.

4.I couldnt make out the name of the last one u said.

does this not seem similar to jesus?

[I4mJustice]

Not really...Jesus was God, he already existed, so he did not need a father, just a human mother so that he could more fully experience humanity and come down to our level. Just being born of a virgin is not everything about Jesus, so its not copying. There are alot of similar aspects about religions, so how does one similarity make the religions false? Not to mention the belief in "virgin birth" is not as common as you would make it seem.

[Archivian01]

1)So Jesus was not the son of god?

2) Your right Jesus is not all about helping the virgin birth. But apparently (i will have to read more on it though) many other aspects depicted in the bible (eg. 12 followers) are also in other faiths and past faiths.

3) Similarities dont falsify a religion, but it can put it into question. Also it doent mean that it was coppied just coz its similar. But where did the similar trend orginate? what is a likely common cause? Is there evidence for common cause?

[I4mJustice]

1) Jesus IS God, he is the "Son of God" because he was God incarnate.

2) Yes, read more on it. Christianity is a very unique religion.(That is why it gets attacked so much, if all of these religions where the same is it, why bother attacking it?) It is actually the only religion ever to have rational theology (applying reason to scripture and the idea of God) and so more is discovered about the nature of God.

[Archivian01]

When you say applying reason to to scripture. Do you mean looking for things in life that reflect EXACTLY what was written long before? Or finding reasons as to why something was written, so basically interpreting what was written, which woul imply what was written was unclear.

Or do you mean the taking in evidence to see what parts of the bible has evidence. Coz if thats the goal i dont think that happens much.

If not what do you mean?

[Archivian01]

Also there are many religions with similar aspects that came long before Chritianity. So its possible it could have coppied them or one of them.

But also you could assume that what was coppied was also coppied from an older religion etc.

And what if they werent coppied? why are they similar? so again look for a plausable common sauce, that would fit within the context of the time. What could be common to all these religions and have significance. And then move from there and build a theory.

[I4mJustice]

1) Name a few.

2) If religions are similar, and they weren't copied, it could be because they are all actually worshiping the one true God.

[Archivian01]

Other religions do have equivalents to heaven and hell, apocolypse, virgin births, christ like figures with followers (apparently), God creating the universe, emphisis on similar symbols (i think the cross was pegan), I think the holy trinity, idea of it at least was also in hinduism but i will have to check that again. The flood is pretty well known, god and anti-god figures. and pretty much all say treat each other well, Christ/Buddah apparently similar in philosphy.

[I4mJustice]

3) I don't really see all of these similar traits. But if they are than maybe it is because they are actually all worshiping the one true God?

[Archivian01]

Thats a possiblility that needs to be considered. But as much as they have similar aspects, like you said they are different. At best only one can be doing it right. Or none are doing it right or There is no God. all 3 are possibilities. But lets assume there is a god, other than the major common traits of treat each other well, and the soul, and to "worship", there is nothing to hold any religion up above another.

Lets include a non re;igious perspective now and remove god from the equation..

[Archivian01]

Rationally it makes sense to treat each other well, to better onself (i dunno if u can link that with an idea of a soul), and a sense of worship (worship is probably way to strong a word) with respect to keeping the earth/environment healthy so we can survive.

Basically these 3 traits can be common throughout without the need for god and so dont justify his/her/its existance. Dosnt mean god dont exist, but dont prove it either.

imhp, much more than that without evidence creates problems.

[I4mJustice]

I believe that God planned everything. It is not really in conflict with evolution. Evolution could be God's plan. A lot of people never question evolution and just take it as absolute truth. I am just stating that it is a theory that hasn't been proven.

[mindwis3]

"I am just stating that it is a theory that hasn't been proven. "

Evolution has/is (been) observed. that's why i am asking you to lay down what you consider 'unproven'.

Really dude,you're free not to believe in it, that's fine.

But if you make claims like 'unproven', perhaps just say 'I think it's unproven'. (and discard the evidence it has in support).

Please google: 29+ evidences

That should take you to talkorigins. Please read the doc before judging without.

[kuhkoowee]

@mindwise are you blonde....... "down there???"

[TheWilsonGentry]

.... I am a christian and i do believe in God, but i also believe in evolution... You can't prove evolution ever happened, but the christian church even stated that you can believe in evolution as long as you believe God was behind it. Your pretty much being an "atheist" of evolution.

N00B. Muffins are better than chalupas. :)

[mindwis3]

4)

"evolution has never been proven".

What do you mean with "evolution", you mean random mutations leading to differentiated offspring leading to differentiated chances of having offspring?

Or that humans and apes have a common ancestor?

What do you mean "prove' since it's a mathematical term.

Do you mean "proven beyond reasonable doubt" like courts of justice do?

Why would you say evolution is not proven? i don't understand how you can make that claim.

Proven to you personally or something?

[I4mJustice]

Evolution is a theory. Prove that the theory is correct.

[mindwis3]

"Evolution is a theory."

The fact it is a scientific! theory is 'proof' in a sense.

Are you asking me to give a complete rundown of the evidences etc?

Theory is the highest possible in science,...higher then laws (which are a subset of theories), it's built on facts.

I'm still not sure what you are asking here, have you studied biology? do you understand chemistry?

I'm just asking since i'm not sure where to begin.

[I4mJustice]

theory: a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena

No, a theory is not any proof at all. Prove that the theory of evolution is correct.

[mindwis3]

Wrt evolution, besides everything else, there are these things called "Human Endogenous RetroViral remnants/markers"

If you accept paternity testing, i think you'd have to accept evolution because of HERVs

You can deny it if you like, but you risk sounding like someone denying GPS without understanding satelites etc...

It's not up to me to teach you, and you're still young, perhaps learn about what you are talking??

Perhaps try the youtube channel MIT and follow genetics?

Rgds,

[mindwis3]

(3)

Solving 'everything needs a designer' by 'something that does not need a designer' (i.e. "eternal") is hardly intellectually honest.

God also says "i am the beginning and the end" <- this cannot be if he's eternal.

Since you say 'don't interpret the bible literally', i assume you don't believe a virgin birth, if you do, why?

On to 4 ;) not to 'the hatred' yet ;p

[I4mJustice]

God would not be God if he was not eternal. Maybe He is the beginning and the end for us?

God cannot have a beginning because if he did there would have to be someone to create him, and someone to create the creator and so on.

[mindwis3]

"God would not be God if he was not eternal"

- Because?

"Maybe He is the beginning and the end for us?"

- and maybe he IS the beginning and the end,

"God cannot have a beginning because if he did there would have to be someone to create him"

-that's an arbitrary line you draw at god.

Why can't god have been created by an eternal being?

That solves it just as well, the line is just drawn at a different place..

Why can the matter/energy of universe not be eternal?

Tnx for reopening the comments

[I4mJustice]

The unmoved mover (God) must have always existed, or else he would have had to have a creator, and then he would not be the unmoved mover. If you are saying an eternal being created God, than isn't that eternal being really God?

"Why can the matter/energy of (the) universe not be eternal?"

Matter has to be acted upon in order for it to do anything, and obviously matter in the universe is doing something. So we go back to the unmoved mover.

[mindwis3]

"Why can the matter/energy of (the) universe not be eternal?"

According to physics matter and energy are eternal.

You are going places no physicist can go, and that is before PlanckTime 1, and building assumptions from there.

"than isn't that eternal being really God?" why? because you would call that god?

In the beginning 'Elohim ' is used, this is plural.

[mindwis3]

Hi IamJ ;)

2)

The cain story..

Scripturally, the wife of cain can only have been a descendant from A&E, unless it was Eve herself.

And even if there were other humans (which is 'un'scriptural (if you will)) it's irrelevant to the count puzzle since A&E would still be the first people in creation week, so that still leads to +-6000 years.

Not taking genesis literal obviously solves that and i am happy you say you don't.

[mindwis3]

There are actually different versions of Krishna's birth, the one in 'Bhagavata Purana' does tell of a virgin birth (via mental conception).

I don't follow your reasoning wrt Dionysus..

But more importantly, why would you believe in ANY virgin birth ?

It's certainly not 'prophecized' in any Hebrew version of the OT (like the Dead sea scroll version, arguably the oldest there is).

It's only prevalent in (much older) greek translations.

Why discard 'mistranslation' as an option?

[I4mJustice]

Dionysus: you can't be born of a virgin if Zeus is your father.

[mindwis3]

Hi IamJ,

Thanks for the response, but you're basically repeating what you said in the video.

"Dionysus: you can't be born of a virgin if Zeus is your father."

Zeus is a God (according to mythology).

I mean, i'm not saying he was born of a virgin, i just do not follow your reasoning?

Let me show what i mean by applying it to Jesus:

"Jesus: you can't be born of a virgin if God is your father".....

[I4mJustice]

Jesus technically is God, so he already exists. He does not need a father. All he needed was a physical mother to bring him into the world. Sure he could have just appeared, but then he would not be living the human experience.

[mindwis3]

Hi iamJ,

??

Virgin birth dictates immaculate conception, and since that's a miracle a god needs to be involved.

"but then he would not be living the human experience."

Why not, are you saying Adam and Eve could not have lived the human experience?