Basis for Faith

But the creator can allow a sinner to come into Heaven. Only by the blood of Christ are we washed clean and freed from our sins and it is Christ who will stand at the bar of God and assure our admittance into the Kingdom of Heaven. Even the lack of religious exposure is no defense for the atheist because the glory of the Lord screams from all of creation and they will be held accountable. It takes a lot more faith to beleive that all of the universe happened out of thin air than to accept some form of deity. Yes, your body returns, ashes to ashes - but without Jesus Christ, your soul will be cast into outter darknes where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.

you are not discussing anything darling, you are simply trying to force people to become christians. if that is your intention, i suggest you stop posting.

I didn't mean that it is impossible to be an Atheist as much as I meant that it makes no rational sense, I find it impossible to understand. There is far less evidence to support the notion of no God whatsoever than for any other theology. In fact I believe that it requires even more faith to believe that mind could come from matter, and further, where did the matter come from?

Something can not come from nothing, except God who is eternal, both past and future. There is no possiblity of there existing more than one God because God can lack nothing and if there were more than one god, it implies that one lacks something that the other does not.

There is en extermely strong case to be made to believe in the Christian God, and Occhams Razor would suggest that it is easiest to believe in the God of Christianity because the God of Christianity tells us that we can trust and believe in Him. What could be simpler?

To truly believe that we came from nothing, live an enjoyable existance,(though pointless), and then return to nothing is without question the weakest position that I have encountered to date. If that is really what you believe,excuse me, if you base your FAITH on such a theory, explain why you think that you can trust in it.

God may be complex, in that being finite, mortal beings, we can not fully comprehend the infinite; God is not unknowable.

You claim a position that is not based on evidence, logic or facts and yet you think that this is a position that is closer to truth than Christ. WHY?

Rather than profess unsupported ideas that make little sense, let's examine what happened to cause your split from the truth of Jesus Christ. That would be of value. Was is a split with Jesus? Why? Or merely the disenfranchisement with a demonation?

"In fact I believe that it requires even more faith to believe that mind could come from matter, and further, where did the matter come from?"

That is a good question- but when you choose to believe that the answer is God, you stop looking for the answer. Atheists believe it is not the answer, because there is no reason to believe it is. I cannot speak for all atheists, but I disagree that it requires "more faith" to believe the mind comes from matter. I don't have any faith at all that it comes from matter, because I do not know where it comes from- and neither do you.

I agree with you that something cannot come from nothing. That is why I think it is more rational to believe that existence always existed- rather than an undefinable, unprovable deity.

When you say that "Something cannot come from nothing, EXCEPT God who is eternal, both past and future..." you are making an assertion. You do not know this. There is no reason for anyone to believe you, just because you say it is so. I am aware that you believe it is true, but I do not think your belief is based on evidence. (I just want to mention that this is not a criticism of you, it is a criticism of the logic behind your position.)

Your argument against Occham's Razor, if I understood you correctly- is that believing in God is the simplest because God tells us we can trust and believe in him? Surely you don't think a non-believer will be convinced by that. God does not tell anyone anything. The Bible is a book, and there is no reason to believe that it is the word of God. If the Bible is what you were referring to (I'm assuming you don't talk to God directly), then it is circular logic to say God exists and use the Bible for evidence, and then say that we should believe the Bible because it is the word of God. Does that make sense?

I hope that you misread or misunderstood my position, because I do not see how you could have done differently. I never said I believed that we came from nothing, or that existence is pointless. I certainly don't believe we will return to nothing, since I don't think we came from nothing. I do not have faith in any theory.

I think that the position of atheism in regards to the Christian god is the correct position. Until there is positive evidence for the existence of anything, belief in it is irrational. Surely you do not believe in unicorns? Why do you choose not to believe in gods of other religions? Why do you not have the same trust in the words of other holy books?

How was religion presented to you as a child? Was it presented to you as fact? Was the practice of religion prevalent in your home? Are your parents religious people?

Thank you for reading my posts. I understand that this is a touchy subject, but we can keep it civil. I respect you for arguing for what you believe in, so please to not take my posts as an attack on you. I look forward to your response.:-)

You begin by contradicting your self. You say in this post that you do not believe that we return to nothing, but in your prior post you say, "I think that when a person dies, that's it. Nothing happens." Which is it? Really, pick a side of the discussion and stay on it!

The reason that a person stops looking for answers is because the answers are found in the truth. Once you're there, there is no need to search further. Now, I will unpack the reasons why I do know the things you claim that I only assert, and why my logic, (which does indeed seem circular on it's face), is anythiong but.

The following research was published in Science Speaks, with this foreword..."The manuscript for Science Speaks has been carefully reviewed by a committee of the American Scientific Affiliation members and by the Executive Council of the same group and has been found to be dependable and accurate in regard to the scientific material presented. The mathematical analysis included is based on principles of probability which are thoroughly sound and Professor Stoner has applied these principles in a proper and convincing way."Dr. Stoners original question was, "What are the odds that anyone, besides God Himself, could fulfill the more than 300 Biblical prophesies of the Old Testament?" The assumption was that if it were God, the odds would have been 100%. The numbers quickly became so large that the question was restated in such a way as to only consider 8 prophesies. The answer came out to be....
100,000,000,000,000,000 to 1 That's one hundred million billion to one. This is the equivelent of covering the state of Texas 2 feet deep in silver dollars, marking one coin, mixing them up and having a blindfolded man pick the right coin on the first try. But again, that's for 8 prophesies, and Christ accurately fulfilled each of over 300!

So then, If Christ was who He claimed to be, and He was crucified for blasphemy because He made Himself equal to God; and if He says that we can trust Scripture..."All Scripture is God breathed...", then it makes perfect sense to believe that you can believe the Bible because Christ/God says that you can. In fact, it's mathematical insanity to not believe it.

I don't want anyone to believe anything that I say BECAUSE I SAY IT. But all I'm saying is that which God has told me to be true.

As for you, Why when I ask the reason that you left Christianity do you hedge? You, instead of answering, ask me about my background. Poor form! I was not raised in a religious home. I was churched up to the age of 7 and then not again for 40 years. I was lucky to know the Christmas story! I used to be a Reiki Master before I renounced my credentials in favor of the truth of Christ.

There is EVERY REASON to believe that the Bible is the Word of God. You claim that until you have positive evidence that sonmething is true, that it is irrational to believe a thing, and yet you profess Atheism. Where is your evidence to support that claim? In your rush to run from the truth, you make up some silly platitude that your own professed belief fails to meet.

Where is the Atheist's Anti-God Handbook Scriptures that give you even one shred of hope that what you profess to believe could possibly be true? There is a world of difference between attempting to pick a hole in my theology and justifying your own.

You're going to have to better than that!

Fund,
My best friend of 30 plus years is an atheist, His mother was full Indian and his father was just as he says just some great man of the white race. "which his dad was super", however,he lost his mom when he was in his early age and from then on, his mom taught him the spirit of the world, and his father I believe just did his thing, but at the end was saved.
My friend, has never stopped any of his children or wife, to follow Jesus, He says, how can a God, be so powerful, and yet, take a life, and as he sees life as growing by oneself, and not by a God, but by Mother Nature, What comes around goes around, and love one another, He cannot believe that the world was created by God, and that a God exist.

We are friends for we believe to agree to disagree, He knows where I stand and I know where he stands., we use to have long talks about the subject when I was younger, He never tried to change me, He just let me be, and I remember he use to smile at me. I pray someday before he dies that he meets Jesus, but until then, he only believes life is and was and going to be. nothing more nothing less.

This type of a response usually comes, from my experience, from a person who doesn't really want to consider the 4 fundamental questions of life. Day to day is enough for them, yet some day these questions become the only ones that matter.

1 - origin
2 - morality
3 - meaning
4 - destiny

OK, But before this goes anywhere, the question has to be, "Do you want to try to have it make sense?" I have a sound, logical, even scientific process that can help lead you where you say you have trouble going, but I don't want this to be a discussion that everyone says is being crammed down anyone's throat.

If you are serious, let me know, but keep in mind, no half way!

Sorry, I have no interest in religion. I studied it for 13 years while in Catholic school. I've had enough to last me a lifetime. You can NOT make someone believe it. Either they do or they don't. I can no more believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy then I can believe in a god.

There is NO logical sense to a creator, especially the one in the Christian Bible that constantly contradicts itself.

If it is the picture of a Catholic God, I'm with ya! No one should try to believe the idolotry and perversions of truth spewed by the popists of Rome. I can't make you believe, it's true, but don't think that popery and Christianity are the same thing, they aren't.

This post contains content of a mature nature. You must be Signed in or Registered to have the option to view this content.

So many points to disagree with! The Catholics have perverted the faith to the point that they teach that it's OK to worship idols, that you can buy your way in to Heaven and have foisted so much corruption on the name of Jesus Christ that it would not surprise me to find out that there is a special section in Hell set aside for popes and cardinals. The professed Christian denominations are not all the same.

As for control, read the New Testament all the way through and tell me who profits from following the teachings in it. Who gains? Even if it were all a load of hooey, which it is not, who is hurt by it? Just because you, in your undoubtedly infinite wisdom, can not make sense of something does not mean that it is untrue. Why shoulod God have to justify Himself to you? That's absurd!

If I'm wrong, it doesn't matter because we all win anyway, right? But if I'm right, then you are in for a world, a netherworld, or hurt for all eternity! It's a huge gamble to take on something that you admit, you don't understand.

Monster... actually you are wrong it did not start with the Catholics, in fact the Roman Church only dates from the 11th Century when, in a fit of peek, the then Bishop of Rome split from the Orthodox Church and declared himself Pope.

all the best urban

Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox...same thing up until the 11th century when they started to disagree on stuff then they split apart from one another. Before that they all believed the same thing.

What amazes me most about Christians is how they argue amongst themselves over this stuff. Who is right, who is wrong, who is more Christian then the next denomination. It cracks me up.

And who gains from control? Who ever is in control, the head of the churches, the government, whoever. They gain a lot. The more control the church has over the people the more money they give to the church.

The Christian god makes as much logical sense as Santa Claus or fairies. I've never seen a fairy...doesn't mean they don't exist but I choose not to believe they do exist since I have no proof.

There have been hundreds if not thousands of gods before and since the Christian god was thought up. Why don't YOU believe in any of those gods? What if you are wrong and Zeus is the true god and he is sitting atop Mt. Olympus shaking his head because you are dooming yourself to hell for not believing?

What, that is illogical, Zeus doesn't exist, he is just a myth...funny how that works.

What about the hundred of other things you believe in that haven't seen?
Thought, belief, time, the planet Jupiter, atoms, electrons, etc?

all the best urban

Where in Greek mythology does Zeus condemn anyone to Hell?

Just because, "you," can't prove something has no bearing on the truth of the thing being examined. I have also been on both sides of the fence, though I did always allow for the probability of a supreme being.

It does require an amazing amount of faith to truly be an Atheist.

You, if you will deny God, MUST believe that mind was randomly produced from matter. Further, you can not explain the origin of that matter without God.

You ask what there is to suggest that deity was involved in creation. I won't accept the defensive role just yet. YOU tell ME, how can you account for creation without God. Scientific enlightenment bah! God created the substance of science. Science is merely the attachment of probable explanation to the mysteries of the created universe. Knowing that if you drop a rock it falls to the ground is scientifically explanable but it does not reveal why gravity functions at all. You can easily understand a result without a clue to the knowledge of the workings.

Destiny - you only gave half the answer and even that is scientifically lacking. True, you told me what you think happens, but not why you have any reason to believe that it is so. "Science says!" I hear you professs. This might, (and it is a HUGE might), be feasible IF we were no more than our bodies, but we are.
On a very simple level of understanding it must be seen that we are composed of both physicality as well as energy, (and I use this term to remain in the folds of scientific thought - though soul or spirit are better terms). If this were not so, an amputee would die to a degree at the removal of a limb.

Science shows us that energy can neither be made nor destroyed but only transformed. The potential chemical, (chemicals were made by God, by the way), energy constrained in 2 D-Cell batteries is released and transformed into light energy which travels forever into space, though it becomes too faint for the eye to perceive at some point. It is still there. So with that in mind, what happens to YOU - not your mortal body - at your death AND why do you believe it to be true?

What does the prospect of no God carry with it that is better than that of accepting God? That is, besides doing whatever you want with no price to pay. In fact, if you truly are an Atheist, which I still doubt, you can not even be angry with me if I were to, (but I'm not), call you a flipping idiot for the things you espouse! Why not? Because morality can not exist without God! If there is no God, then there is no standard of right and wrong to be measured against.

Your turn - and God Bless!

"Just because "you" can't prove something doesn't mean it has no bearing on the truth of the thing examined".

Perhaps not, but when many people have been unable to prove, much less find evidence for, the existence of something, it calls into serious question whether or not said thing even exists. It takes more faith to say something DOES exist, when there is no real evidence of it, then to just go with the evidence we have (which is none), and believe this thing does not exist.

Furthermore, in terms of figuring out how matter got here, you're limiting this down to a black and white situation, and making sure your belief is placed in the position of ultimate answer. This is a logical fallacy at it's finest. What proof do you have that a God is the only answer to this? You're opinion, or physical evidence? Existence of matter does not mean existence of God, any more than existence of easter eggs means the existence of the Easter bunny.

I can tell you how we got to be as we are, and the road which we took to get here, but I can not definitively tell you how it all started because I do not pretend to know. I will not, however, blindly assume it was a single thing that got us here without a shred of evidence to back my claim up.

I never gave you any answer regarding why 'destiny' exists (in your mind), nor has science attempted an answer, because such a thing is foolish. Destiny is a man-made construct that exists only in our minds. You asked what happens after death, and I gave you the most objective answer one could give. Any more than that is pure speculation from imaginative minds. You're personality-or rather, what makes your personality the way it is - and everything that makes you the way you are dies with you.

Furthermore, the energy we are made up of is simple and non-cognitive. That is what is released when we die. You're hinting at what happens to a spirit after death, without first bothering to ask if such a thing exists in the form your hinting at. Spirit, in it's most objective definition, is consciousness - yours dies when you die. That is what happens. If your looking for a supernatural answer to a supernatural question, I have none to give.

What does having no God have that makes it more appealing than a God? It doesn't have any such qualities. You assume that atheists are so because they fear judgement. We don't. Unlike you, we do not need the ever present threat of an all-seeing, all-knowing creator that will torment you forever if you're naughty, to be good or "moral" people. We can manage quite well our own. You see, there's these things called "conscience", "responsibility", and "accountablity", that every person should be(and usually is) made aware of. Morality is no more than a set of rules of behavior. A God is not needed for such things. Those of us who have no God understand right and wrong not because a book told us, but because we know how we would expect to be treated, and to be fair, treat other the same way. The Golden rule can work for everyone.

Atheists are atheists because they have looked around, and come to the understanding that there is not a shred of evidence - no recent observations, tests, or even a simple "God was here" written on the side of a mountain - to indicate that Gods exist. A pretty sunset, a successful birth, surviving a situation you should have died in - these are all wonderful things, typically cited as "evidence" for a God, but these things have better explanations. Some people can't fathom things existing or happening without something to make them exist or happen, and others can. That's really all there is to it.

Thank you for your clear thinking and clear expression. I recently joined, and am developing mixed feelings over joining these goddism vs athiesm discussions. They're good exercise, but, as the published record shows,for decades, is the other side really listening? I certainly do believe in tolerance of other viewpoints (if only out of enlightened self-interest), but....maybe I'm getting tired and grumpy...I have less patience with "the other side" than I used to. I used to be on the other side, but I didn't use the self-fulfilling conviction and inconsistent use of science concepts that I see used in these pages. I (and you, I imagine) put a lot of reading and rigorous thought into reaching our worlview. How can we summarize it in a post? But please keep on trying. I will, too. Just needed to complain for a minute. btw, my first post on MyLot was about the phrase I came up with to summarize my (our shared?) scientific materialist wordview: "Neurotransmission occurs, therefore I am."

Well, I expected this, "I just don't have supernatural answers to supernatural questions."

So then everything just always was and that's that. I can cite studies, approved by the American scientific Affiliation that show that the odds of Jesus being anyone other than God are astronomical. Just in fulfilling 8 of the Messianic prophesies the odds are 1 to 100,000,000,000,000,000 in favor of Jesus of Nazareth being the incarnate God. What's more, Jesus didn't fulfill only 8 prophesies, it was more than 300!

You still have not accounted for the disposition of the spirit at physical death because it is an impossibility that it ceases to exist, laws of physics and all.

Since it is more than a mathematical certainty that Jesus is God, (you have to understand trinitarian thought for that one), then I believe that when He says that we can trust the Scriptures, that we can. Further, once you make that decision, then you can trust the reliability of what the Bible tells us, regardless of how bizaar the accounts can sometimes be.

You can never hope to acount for the things that occur in a supernatural world through the application of natural sciences and laws.

There is no evidence of the things you claim as truth and again, I need not defend God. If you wish to continue, then you need to prove the non existance.

Good luck with that!

>>>So then everything just always was and that's that. <<<

There's always that possibility.

>>>I can cite studies, approved by the American scientific Affiliation that show that the odds of Jesus being anyone other than God are astronomical. Just in fulfilling 8 of the Messianic prophesies the odds are 1 to 100,000,000,000,000,000 in favor of Jesus of Nazareth being the incarnate God. What's more, Jesus didn't fulfill only 8 prophesies, it was more than 300!<<<

Of course it was approved by the AFA - they're a Christian organization. I don't see the importance of an un-scientific study approved by a Christian organization in this matter. It proves nothing.

>>>You still have not accounted for the disposition of the spirit at physical death because it is an impossibility that it ceases to exist, laws of physics and all. <<<

If you were paying attention, I told you I can not give you a supernatural answer to a supernatural question. I would have to believe in a spirit before I can even guess at what happens to it after physical death. As it is, I do not, so don't expect an answer. I did, however, explain what happens to the energy that makes up our bodies after we die.

>>>Since it is more than a mathematical certainty that Jesus is God, (you have to understand trinitarian thought for that one), then I believe that when He says that we can trust the Scriptures, that we can. Further, once you make that decision, then you can trust the reliability of what the Bible tells us, regardless of how bizaar the accounts can sometimes be. <<<

You first need to prove that God exists to have any certainty that a person could be him. We've been waiting for that proof for thousands of years.

>>>You can never hope to acount for the things that occur in a supernatural world through the application of natural sciences and laws. <<<

Yet you cite a bogus study about the supernatural approved by a "scientific" group as if it meant something. Clearly science applies only when you wish it to.

However, anyone who knows anything about science could easily tell you that the supernatural isn't touched by science because it can't be observed nor tested.

>>>There is no evidence of the things you claim as truth and again, I need not defend God. If you wish to continue, then you need to prove the non existance. <<<

I think you need some schooling in logic. You can not prove a negative. Prove the existence of your God first before people try and disprove him.

>>>Good luck with that!<<<

Why should I waste my time trying to disprove something that hasn't been proven? Good luck finding evidence for the existence of your God.

I don't expect this to happen, but...

There isn't enough time of space to completely educate you in theology but if you read "Christian Apologetics," by Dr. Norman Geisler and/or "New Evidence that Demands a Verdict," by Josh Mcdowell we might actually have a meaningful discourse.

If I look at a tree, I can say, "There is evidence of God." Granted, you won't accept it, and that's fine, but I can hold up any part of creation and make that claim. Prove to me that it does not show evidence of a creator. You can not.

You can not prove what you claim as false, and I am not compelled to prove what is before you as true. Accept it or not, but you will never be able to say, on the day you stand before the judgment bar of God, that you didn't know - that you weren't warned.

If God has not yet opened your eyes, then there is nothing that anyone will be able to do to make you see the truth that you so adamantly refuse to acknowledge. You may continue this, or not, but I will get this in at the very least...

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved, it is the power of God." 1 Corinthians 1:18

>>>If I look at a tree, I can say, "There is evidence of God." Granted, you won't accept it, and that's fine, but I can hold up any part of creation and make that claim. Prove to me that it does not show evidence of a creator. You can not. <<<

So if I hold up a little green hat and say "this is evidence of elves", you can't prove me wrong either. However, for all I know, that hat was made by a chinese sweat shop worker for a company who makes dog costumes, and it fell of a dog's head before I found it. I only choose to believe it belonged to an elf, that doesn't mean it was. Your analogy is much the same - you can say any part of "creation" is evidence of a creator, but that's only because you choose to believe that. Creation has not been proved, and neither has a creator.

>>>You can not prove what you claim as false, and I am not compelled to prove what is before you as true. Accept it or not, but you will never be able to say, on the day you stand before the judgment bar of God, that you didn't know - that you weren't warned. <<<

I don't have to prove anything to you until you try to prove something to me. So far all you've done is insinuate that I'm less intelligent than you for actually understanding that it is the person who asserts the existence of something that must first prove their stance, before the naysayers even lift a finger to disprove them. Which is all fine and dandy with me. I know you can't prove your God exists, any more than I can disprove him, because there's no evidence for either side. So you can continue on with your belief, and I'll sit and wait for the day that evidence actually does show up which indicates a God exists.

>>>If God has not yet opened your eyes, then there is nothing that anyone will be able to do to make you see the truth that you so adamantly refuse to acknowledge. You may continue this, or not, but I will get this in at the very least...

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved, it is the power of God." 1 Corinthians 1:18<<<

So in other words, you can't prove anything, so you quit. Fine by me.

Hi, Latrivia. Do you know of the book "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins? (From the way you write, it's likely that you do, but....so many books, so little time...) It's a recent classic in the field, by a fierce proponent of Darwin. It addresses the question "Does a created object (hat, tree) imply a Creator"? The example used for a couple of hundred years was a pocket watch found on the ground, which implied a watchmaker, even if you couldn't see him. The Rev. Paley came up with that one. You may have heard of it, FundamentalCharlie. Anyway, Dawkins summarizes very well how Darwinian evolution can create complex items...ferns, trees, whales...without needing a designer/creator. And yes, I know the Intelligent Design community has come up with many fierce objections to Dawkins...none of which I find well based or convincing.

I haven't had the chance to read it, though I have seen Dawkins speak about it on a NOVA episode, I think. It was a very educational episode, that one.

But there is no model, apart from God, that accounts for the origin of matter, and it is unreasonable to assume that, "mind," somehow randomly appeared from nothing without a creator being involved.

>>>But there is no model, apart from God, that accounts for the origin of matter, and it is unreasonable to assume that, "mind," somehow randomly appeared from nothing without a creator being involved. <<<

There are scientific explanations which account for matter, as well. Even if there weren't, that wouldn't automatically mean it's a "God dunnit" situation. You only assume it is because that's the only answer you can come up with. Much like the analogy of the elf hat, just because that's what you want to believe, doesn't mean it's true.

You're suffering from the belief that all things that exist must be created. There's no proof supporting this belief, however. It is merely a choice to come to this conclusion each time because it's what feels familiar to you.

Sorry, I can not yet yield. It is not a matter of it being the only thing that I'm familiar with. I also have never heard of ANY scientific explanation for the existance of matter that did not end in an infinite regress. Big Bang? What caused it? I do not assume that everything had to be created, if I did I could not maintain an infinite God. I DO insist that everything that has been created must have had a creator though.

In God's word He tells us that everything was created by Him and for Him and that nothing that was created, was created apart from Him. God also stated that He alone is God and besides Him, there is no other. If you seriously have a reasonable explanation of origin, apart from God, please share it. There may yet be hope of a civil discussion if you are willing to present the material that you depend upon to form the opinions that you claim as truth.

If you are not willing to do anything but sweep all the presentation off the table as invalid, and not even espouse a case for your own convictions, then this will quickly become an excercise in futility, as if arguing with a three year old. It is not enough to SAY that there are scientific explanations, you must state them! Please take this in the nicest possible way - Put up, or Shut up.

>>>Sorry, I can not yet yield. It is not a matter of it being the only thing that I'm familiar with. I also have never heard of ANY scientific explanation for the existance of matter that did not end in an infinite regress. Big Bang? What caused it? I do not assume that everything had to be created, if I did I could not maintain an infinite God. I DO insist that everything that has been created must have had a creator though. <<<

It is a matter of familiarity, as well as a matter of peace of mind. Everything you say indicates you want an answer to something, to give it a feeling of resolve. Why must it be a God? Where's the proof that anything was created at all? How do you know it hasn't always been? Science does not have the answer to everything right now, so you have turned to something that does. Something far easier to fathom, and that doesn't require much study.

>>>In God's word He tells us that everything was created by Him and for Him and that nothing that was created, was created apart from Him. God also stated that He alone is God and besides Him, there is no other. If you seriously have a reasonable explanation of origin, apart from God, please share it. There may yet be hope of a civil discussion if you are willing to present the material that you depend upon to form the opinions that you claim as truth. <<<

Like I said before, you don't like not having an answer to something. You don't really know if there is a God, but you choose to believe so because you feel more comfortable thinking that you have an answer to one of your questions.

This entire time the only things I have claimed to be true is lack of evidence on your part for the claim that a Creator exists. Everything else I have only pointed out because they are alternatives to your beliefs, and some of them carry with them more evidence than your own. For example, while we don't know the specifics of the big bang we do have evidence for it. See here for a general descripition: http://en.wikipedia.org/w...

>>>If you are not willing to do anything but sweep all the presentation off the table as invalid, and not even espouse a case for your own convictions, then this will quickly become an excercise in futility, as if arguing with a three year old. <<<
What is there to sweep off the table? An empty claim with no evidence to back it up? It would be different if you actually set down some evidence besides "it had to be created". That's not evidence, that's opinion.

>>> It is not enough to SAY that there are scientific explanations, you must state them! Please take this in the nicest possible way - Put up, or Shut up. <<<

The Big Bang Theory is currently the most supported scientific theory for the beginning of the universe. Prior to that was the "steady state" view, that the universe was eternal (though this is no longer an accepted view of the scientific community). To be honest, they are the only two I know of currently, as I'm far less interested in the studying the universe than I am about life.

Enough! This thread started with the question about HOW an atheistic view makes sense and you have done nothing to answer that. To cite a theory that you admit science no longer supports in lieu of another that makes equally as little sense is ridiculous. Like I said, arguing with a two year old. If you were not interested in answering the initial question and providing rationale behind a view of atheistic thought, which you probably think that you did, but sadly no - then why begin a response at all.

Like I had said earlier, I wish you well on the day you face the God that you seem to be certain doesn't exist. Unless He draws you to Himself, you will never be convinced. I have given you plenty to make you accountable before God, you will never be able to say that no one told you.

Good luck.

>>>Enough! This thread started with the question about HOW an atheistic view makes sense and you have done nothing to answer that. <<<

Of course I have. Haven't you been paying attention? I think you're looking for someone to confirm your pre-conceived views about why atheists are the way they are. What do you want from us? An admission that we're afraid of the God we don't believe in? Do you want us to say we just don't want to believe because we'd have to change our ways? I told you why atheism makes sense. Atheists see no reason to believe in God because there is no evidence for his existence. We don't look at the world and think "Wow, God did this" because we see don't see signs of creation or God. We simply see what is.

>>> To cite a theory that you admit science no longer supports in lieu of another that makes equally as little sense is ridiculous. <<<

You asked for alternative theories, and you received what you requested. You never said they had to be current.

>>> Like I said, arguing with a two year old. If you were not interested in answering the initial question and providing rationale behind a view of atheistic thought, which you probably think that you did, but sadly no - then why begin a response at all. <<<

Typical - ad hominem attack when you have nothing else to contribute. I have already answered your question. It's your own fault for not liking the answer.

>>>Like I had said earlier, I wish you well on the day you face the God that you seem to be certain doesn't exist. Unless He draws you to Himself, you will never be convinced. I have given you plenty to make you accountable before God, you will never be able to say that no one told you. <<<

Okay, whatever. Have fun with your delusions.

LOL.. I really enjoyed this thread!!:)

i have always said- bible was but written by mere mortals...i dont understand why people dont realise this.

so i guess u are an agnostic? or do u have some other faith??