There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[ElishaElijah]

Sorry but you constantly misapply exegesis. You follow the very erroneous and user of circular logic Kevin Conner. You have no valid complaint.

Since I do understand that quite a bit of the Bible is myth, but the authors often believed those myths I can beat you in both of those areas.

Your statement just proved you don’t know the meaning of exegesis. Like I thought, it’s gonna be a while.

 

[KWED]

Lol, so you have to have chemicals to get chemicals, just like you need life to create life. You are just talking in circles.

Do you need a hand with those goalposts. They look heavy.
You claimed that chemicals can't create themselves. They can.

And as I just explained, it is entirely possible that you don't need life to create life.
What is more, you face the same problem as you are presenting. If god created life, then life isn't needed to create life, unless you claim that god is a living thing, in which case, which life created god?
If you merely claim that life can exist infinitely, then there is no need for life in order to create it.
QED.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You claimed that chemicals can't create themselves. They can.

Obviously not. Combining two chemicals to get a third isn't chemicals creating themselves.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You brought it up.

Actually I didn't. Two others guys did.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Never claimed it did. But you claimed that a living thing can't develop from non-living material - which was wrong.

No it's not. It didn't come into being by non living material. I said all along that we need food to nourish what already exists.

 

[ppp]

No it's not. It didn't come into being by non living material. I said all along that we need food to nourish what already exists.

Ye, it is. It did come into being from non living materials.

 

[Wildswanderer]

That makes two of us.

You have a split personality?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your statement just proved you don’t know the meaning of exegesis. Like I thought, it’s gonna be a while.

How so? You did use a fallacious source. Perhaps you have your own personal meaning of exegesis. You seem to hate the fact that parts of the Bible can be demonstrated to have never happened.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Ye, it is. It did come into being from non living materials.

Life begets life. We all came to be from other life. We need food for sustenance but food obviously didn't create us.
Here's some information for you so you can find out where babies come from.. I trust you not to read it if you are too young.
Conception: How It Works | Patient Education | UCSF Health

 

[Wildswanderer]

Sorry, typo. Fixed it.

It was perfect before why change it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Life begets life. We all came to be from other life. We need food for sustenance but food obviously didn't create us.
Here's some information for you so you can find out where babies come from.. I trust you not to read it if you are too young.
Conception: How It Works | Patient Education | UCSF Health

Except when life began. You assume that it was magic, we follow the evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It was perfect before why change it?

No, now it is correct. How do I know? You had no answer to it.

 

[Wildswanderer]

No, now it is correct. How do I know? You had no answer to it.

I did answer. You have a closed mind.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I did answer. You have a closed mind.

False on both accounts.

 

[ElishaElijah]

How so? You did use a fallacious source. Perhaps you have your own personal meaning of exegesis. You seem to hate the fact that parts of the Bible can be demonstrated to have never happened.

By mentioning Kevin Connor and circular reasoning I can tell you don’t know what exegesis means. What’s he got to do with exegesis?

 

[ElishaElijah]

And as I just explained, it is entirely possible that you don't need life to create life.

According to who and what’s your basis for that, what is your definition of life?

 

[ElishaElijah]

Except when life began. You assume that it was magic, we follow the evidence.

Which is … by faith in the theory.

 

[We Never Know]

The surface of the Earth does not have an edge.

The expansion of the universe was NOT from a single point going outward. That is a misunderstanding. The expansion happens *everywhere*.

Did I mention the earth? Or anything spherical?

"The Big Bang Theory is the leading explanation for how the universe began. Simply put, it says the universe as we know it started with an infinitely hot and dense single point that inflated and stretched — first at unimaginable speeds, and then at a more measurable rate — over the next 13.8 billion years to the still-expanding cosmos that we know today."

The expantion was outward from that dense point as well as inside(objects getting further apart) as it expanded.

The stone in the pond....expantion was outward from that point where the rock hit as well as inside the ripples(objects getting further apart) as it expanded.

Edit... Oh! Forgot my joke...
"A man was found dead inside a old rock silo. They think he ran himself to death looking for a corner to pee in"

 

[ElishaElijah]

We can't make lightning , yet we know how it occurs without God. Where do we need a God?

Some people live their lives like Mr. Magoo, not realizing what trouble they’re in while they go through life.

 

[Sheldon]

Which chemicals did not create themselves. Please be specific and be ready to support your claims with peer reviewed science.

Folks, how long should I set my timer for? Is an hour a reasonable amount of time for a well supported answer? Maybe a day? And who had never?

I wouldn't hold your breath. So to speak...