Humans did NOT evolve from the common ancestor of Apes

[Sonofason]

I think the argument could be made, fairly soundly, that he knows the god of the Bible much better than you do - while you know the god of Sonofason much better than he does.

That coming from a person who doesn't know what he's talking about is of no value to anyone. So much for your opinion.

 

[Sonofason]

Yet you smugly discredit others for doing quite a bit more than the basics that you have listed here?

Yes I do.

 

[Sonofason]

How do you know that Angellous and I don't "know God?" You seem to have an awful lot of iron-clad knowledge that appears to have no basis in fact. Bring the facts, man! Prove that we don't know God. Otherwise, your assertion is nothing but trolling blather.

Dude, it's obvious to me. Look at how you speak to me. Look at your utter disrespect. Clearly you do not know God.

 

[dust1n]

Cue Benny Hill.

 

[Sapiens]

Just for a moment pretend that in your world there is not god. See how much like blather opinions support the obviously nonexistant is? Now please present any evidence that there is a god, anything except, or course, your possibly deranged belief structure.

 

[sojourner]

Your Scriptural illiteracy is coming to the front.

You're projecting. It's not me who's scripturally illiterate. But your literacy is certainly in question here.

Tell us what Day Adam was made, and then what Day Eve was made.

In Genesis one, Adam and Eve are not present. Only humankind -- "male and female." Humankind was created on day 6, according to Genesis 1. In the Genesis 2 account, creation isn't broken up into "days, and, in fact, Adam and Eve are not named in Genesis 2. There are only "the man" and "the woman." In fact, Eve isn't named until chapter 3, and Adam isn't named until chapter 4. Therefore, it's either a trick question, or you don't know what you're talking about. I'm betting on option #2.

John 1:3 also tells us that without Jesus was not anything made which was made. Can you tell us of the role of Jesus in the Creation.

This has nothing to do with Genesis, of course, but to answer your question: "life." "What came into being in him was life..."

Scripture tells us that those who have NOT been born Spiritually should be tested. This is your test.

First of all, it's not up to you to test anyone -- least of all me. It is up to church authorities to test people. Therefore, the test is bogus and meaningless. IOW, the "test" is no test at all. Therefore, there is no "failing" when there is no test.

I predict you will either fail or refuse to answer.

I thought you just said that you "predicted nothing."

By all means keep pissing into the wind. It's entertaining.

 

[Sonofason]

Just for a moment pretend that in your world there is not god. See how much like blather opinions support the obviously nonexistant is? Now please present any evidence that there is a god, anything except, or course, your possibly deranged belief structure.

Existence is real. Things don't exist for no reason. There is a cause for existence. And that cause might be God. While I can admit that there may exist some other cause, but I believe that is highly unlikely.

It is obvious, or at least should be obvious to intelligent beings capable of even the slightest bit of reason that the universe did not cause itself. Nothing that we know of in this universe caused itself, and so it is highly unlikely that the universe caused itself.

We know that the universe is not eternal. It had a beginning. And we refer to that beginning as the Big Bang. When the Big Bang occurred, the first thing that began to exist was light. What I find most compelling is the fact that the Bible, which many people believe was inspired by God Himself declares that God had spoken, and the first thing that God said was "let there be light". And by God there was light.

Since the universe had a beginning, and since the universe could not have caused itself, the only reasonable answer to why the universe exists is that something, or someone created it.

While I cannot tell you with absolute certainty that some "thing" did not somehow cause the universe to exist. You cannot tell me with any certainty that it was not God that created the universe.

This is strong evidence for God. It is not proof. It is evidence, very strong evidence
Consider the argument, or don't, I don't care.

Everything that exists is either matter or mind.

1. Everything that exists is either matter or mind.
2. Something exists now, so something eternal must exist.
3. Therefore, either matter or mind is eternal.

1. Either matter or mind is eternal.
2. Matter is not eternal, per the evidence cited above.
3. Thus, it is mind that is eternal.

Apologetics Press - The Case for the Existence of God [Part I]

 

[sojourner]

No, you do not get to decide why I do anything. I dismiss his credentials because I believe that he is wrong. Therefore it is my opinion that his credentials have served him no good.

Translation: Credentials are only valid when they agree with my beliefs.

 

[Sonofason]

Translation: Credentials are only valid when they agree with my beliefs.

Credentials are only valid if they serve a valid purpose.

 

[sojourner]

Dude, it's obvious to me. Look at how you speak to me. Look at your utter disrespect. Clearly you do not know God.

Hmmm... look at how Jesus spoke to the self-serving religious authorities. Are you saying that clearly, Jesus didn't know God?
Look at your own utter disrespect. you don't respect scientific fact, you don't respect the dignity of homosexuals, you don't respect peoples' credentials, you don't respect others' opinions, and you're very vocal about that lack of respect. Are you saying that clearly, you don't know God? Because if those are the criteria with which knowledge of God is invalidated, you've succeeded in condemning both Jesus and yourself.

The fact is, you know nothing of the sort. you're simply trolling here.

 

[sojourner]

Credentials are only valid if they serve a valid purpose.

yeah, but you're not the authority on what's valid in the case of these credentials. the academic and ecclesial communities are authoritative in this case.

 

[Sonofason]

Hmmm... look at how Jesus spoke to the self-serving religious authorities. Are you saying that clearly, Jesus didn't know God?
Look at your own utter disrespect. you don't respect scientific fact, you don't respect the dignity of homosexuals, you don't respect peoples' credentials, you don't respect others' opinions, and you're very vocal about that lack of respect. Are you saying that clearly, you don't know God? Because if those are the criteria with which knowledge of God is invalidated, you've succeeded in condemning both Jesus and yourself.

The fact is, you know nothing of the sort. you're simply trolling here.

Since you have completely lost my respect, I will no longer be responding to your posts. Sorry about that. You could have learned a lot from me, but you are far too closed minded. Adios amigo.

 

[Sapiens]

Existence is real. Things don't exist for no reason.

Unsupported claim.

There is a cause for existence.

Unsupported claim

And that cause might be God.

Then again, probably not.

While I can admit that there may exist some other cause, but I believe that is highly unlikely.

Unsupported claim.

It is obvious, or at least should be obvious to intelligent beings capable of even the slightest bit of reason that the universe did not cause itself.

Multiple unsupported claims.

Nothing that we know of in this universe caused itself, and so it is highly unlikely that the universe caused itself.

Unsupported claim

We know that the universe is not eternal. It had a beginning. And we refer to that beginning as the Big Bang. When the Big Bang occurred, the first thing that began to exist was light.

False claim

What I find most compelling is the fact that the Bible, which many people believe was inspired by God Himself declares that God had spoken, and the first thing that God said was "let there be light". And by God there was light.

Too bad, for your case, that light was not first, mass was.

The new experiment measures light emitted when the universe first became transparent to light, about 378,000 years after the Big Bang, said Paul Steinhardt, a theoretical cosmologist at Princeton University in New Jersey. It is “roughly akin to observing a picture of yourself 10 minutes after conception,” said Steinhardt, who has worked on both inflation and competing theories about how the universe started.

Since the universe had a beginning,

Unsupported claim

and since the universe could not have caused itself,

Unsupported claim

the only reasonable answer to why the universe exists is that something, or someone created it.

False conclusion.

While I cannot tell you with absolute certainty that some "thing" did not somehow cause the universe to exist. You cannot tell me with any certainty that it was not God that created the universe.

The burden of proof is yours.

This is strong evidence for God. It is not proof. It is evidence, very strong evidence

Unsupported claim

Consider the argument, or don't, I don't care.

Unsupportable lie ... then don't post.

 

[sojourner]

Since you have completely lost my respect,

That implies that I once had your respect. Sorry. Not buyin' it.

I will no longer be responding to your posts.

Translation: You caught me out in a logical inconsistency, so I'm picking up my marbles and going home.

Sorry about that.

Your loss.

You could have learned a lot from me

Thus far, your posts haven't convinced me that there's enough factual or insightful substance for them to accomplish that. What they have revealed is an almost out-of-control bias, an overblown sense of self-centeredness and entitlement, rampant bigotry, dangerous fundamentalism, closed mindedness, and disregard for established fact.

but you are far too closed minded.

Pot, I'd like you to meet Kettle...

 

[NulliuSINverba]

It is obvious, or at least should be obvious to intelligent beings capable of even the slightest bit of reason that the universe did not cause itself.

And you know this ... how?

Nothing that we know of in this universe caused itself, and so it is highly unlikely that the universe caused itself.

1.) So you've already made allowances that there may be things that we don't currently know of in this universe that did cause themselves?


2.) You're willing to draw conclusions about the nature of the universe itself based on the properties of the contents of the universe?

"All of the books on the bookshelf have numbered pages ... therefore it is highly unlikely that that the bookshelf doesn't have numbered pages?"

Does that follow? Isn't your argument fallacious?


And isn't there a law of thermodynamics that states that matter cannot be created or destroyed?

We know that the universe is not eternal.

How?

It had a beginning. And we refer to that beginning as the Big Bang.

Do we know that the Big Bang was a beginning, or simply a change in the state of the universe's existence?

Is it coherent to say that the singularity from which the Big Bang resulted didn't exist?

When the Big Bang occurred, the first thing that began to exist was light.

Do we actually know that with any degree of certainty? And again: Did the singularity exist prior to the Big Bang … or did it not exist? If it did exist, then why claim that light was the first thing that existed? Or (if you insist on semantic tap-dancing) the first thing that "began" to exist.

What I find most compelling is the fact that the Bible, which many people believe was inspired by God Himself declares that God had spoken, and the first thing that God said was "let there be light". And by God there was light.

The Bible also declares that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds. We know that this is demonstrably wrong.

Since the universe had a beginning, and since the universe could not have caused itself, the only reasonable answer to why the universe exists is that something, or someone created it.

1.) You haven't demonstrated that the universe had a beginning. You've only asserted that it does.

2.) You haven't demonstrated that the universe didn't cause itself. You've only asserted that it didn't.

3.) You seem to be hedging your bets when you say “reasonable answer.” Are you leaving room for the possibility that there may be an unreasonable answer?

While I cannot tell you with absolute certainty that some "thing" did not somehow cause the universe to exist. You cannot tell me with any certainty that it was not God that created the universe.

Aren't you playing with two sets of rules here? In Case A ("thing") you've demanded absolute certainty and in Case B ("God") you've stipulated any certainty.


Why not allow the same level of certainty in each case?

This is strong evidence for God.

An argument is evidence?

It is not proof. It is evidence, very strong evidence

Typically, isn't evidence used to support arguments? Again: Where is your evidence?

Consider the argument. Or don't. I don't care.

You've made an argument, but neglected to provide any evidence. So ...

Considered. Dismissed.

 

[McBell]

No, you do not get to decide why I do anything. I dismiss his credentials because I believe that he is wrong. Therefore it is my opinion that his credentials have served him no good.

How is your wording it:

I dismiss his credentials because I believe that he is wrong.​

mean anything different than:

you dismiss his credentials because you disagree with him.​

 

[jonathan180iq]

Repent of your evil ways and turn to Jesus. He is the ONLY one who can save you. God Bless you.

NEVER!!!

 

[Aman725]

You're projecting. It's not me who's scripturally illiterate. But your literacy is certainly in question here.

In Genesis one, Adam and Eve are not present. Only humankind -- "male and female." Humankind was created on day 6, according to Genesis 1. In the Genesis 2 account, creation isn't broken up into "days, and, in fact, Adam and Eve are not named in Genesis 2. There are only "the man" and "the woman." In fact, Eve isn't named until chapter 3, and Adam isn't named until chapter 4. Therefore, it's either a trick question, or you don't know what you're talking about. I'm betting on option #2.

Dear sojourner, Adam was made the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4-7
Eve was made the 6th Day. Gen 2:22

BOTH Adam and Eve were "created" in God's Image or in Christ Spiritually on the 6th Day AFTER Cain killed Abel. Gen 5:1-2 What is obvious is that you don't know the difference in being "formed" by Jesus and being Created Spiritually by the TRINITY.

This has nothing to do with Genesis, of course, but to answer your question: "life." "What came into being in him was life..."

False, since Jesus IS the Light of the first Day. Gen 1:3 Without Him was not anything made which was made. John 1:3 That means that Jesus IS the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end as Rev 22:13 states.

First of all, it's not up to you to test anyone -- least of all me. It is up to church authorities to test people. Therefore, the test is bogus and meaningless. IOW, the "test" is no test at all. Therefore, there is no "failing" when there is no test.

Wrong, since the command is given to "Beloved", which is speaking of Christians. Rev 22:13 Have you ever actually read the Bible?

 

[jonathan180iq]

That coming from a person who doesn't know what he's talking about is of no value to anyone. So much for your opinion.

You're such a sweet little darling.

One person reads a handful of entry level books and is full of conviction. Another person has spent at least 8-10 years purely devoted to the study of scripture and biblical academia combined with their convictions. The second persona has a better knowledge of the character of God as presented in the Bible than the first person... Explain how that statement is false, apart from the fact that anyone you disagree with gets dismissed as "not knowing what they're talking about"

 

[McBell]

Credentials are only valid if they serve a valid purpose.

His credentials do serve a valid purpose.
They have indirectly revealed how far from reality you have strayed.