[1/3]
@sarahsalviander:âŁ
âŁ
đđŹđąđș, đ°đŻ đ”đ° đ”đ©đŠ đđđ. đđ©đŠđŽđŠ đąđłđŠ đ”đ©đŠ đČđ¶đŠđŽđ”đȘđ°đŻđŽ đąđŻđ„ đ°đŁđ«đŠđ€đ”đȘđ°đŻđŽ đâđ·đŠ đŁđŠđŠđŻ đ±đłđŠđŽđŠđŻđ”đŠđ„ đ”đ©đŠ đźđ°đŽđ” đ°đ§đ”đŠđŻ đŁđș đąđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđ”đŽ đ°đ·đŠđł đ”đ©đŠ đźđąđŻđș đșđŠđąđłđŽ đâđ·đŠ đŁđŠđŠđŻ đžđłđȘđ”đȘđŻđš đ°đŻ đ”đ©đŠ đđŻđ”đŠđłđŻđŠđ”.âŁ
âŁ
1. đ đ°đ¶âđłđŠ đą đŽđ€đȘđŠđŻđ”đȘđŽđ” đąđŻđ„ đșđ°đ¶ đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ·đŠ đȘđŻ đđ°đ„ đąđŻđ„ đđŠđŽđ¶đŽ đđ©đłđȘđŽđ”?âŁ
âŁ
đ đŠđŽ.âŁ
âŁ
Do you? Many atheists describe atheism as âthe disbelief in any gods,â and some say atheism âit addresses and rejects the claim that a god exists,â although atheism đąđŹ đđĄđ đźđ§đ©đ«đšđŻđđđ„đ đđ„đđąđŠ đđĄđđ đ§đš đ đšđđŹ đđ±đąđŹđ. I get the impression that you believe that God is Jesus Christ, who is not God, but the Son of God. I have interpreted your "yes" to mean that you no longer adhere to the claim that no gods exist.âŁ
âŁ
2. đđŠđłđŠ đșđ°đ¶ đłđŠđąđđđș đąđŻ đąđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđ”?âŁ
âŁ
đ đŠđŽ.âŁ
âŁ
Ok.âŁ
âŁ
3. đđłđŠ đșđ°đ¶ đą đșđ°đ¶đŻđš đŠđąđłđ”đ© đ€đłđŠđąđ”đȘđ°đŻđȘđŽđ”?âŁ
âŁ
đđ°.âŁ
âŁ
Ok.âŁ
âŁ
4. đđ©đąđ” đȘđŽ đșđ°đ¶đł đłđŠđ±đŠđąđ”đąđŁđđŠ, đŽđ€đȘđŠđŻđ”đȘđ§đȘđ€ đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ đ§đ°đł đđ°đ„?âŁ
âŁ
I noticed that you objected to this question as being illegitimate, rather than answering it.âŁ
âŁ
The existence of an orderly universe containing life points to a Creator. That Creator is God, for just as âevery house is built by someone, ⊠the builder of all things is God.â (Heb. 3:4) Simple, but powerful logic. But there is no hypothesis, no theory, postulate that can be presented as scientific evidence for God.âŁ
âŁ
If I had a video camera in my backyard that records the bunch of leaves I have raked together into a large pile being redistributed across the lawn during the two minutes I had stepped away to warn my neighbor, who has just parked her car at the curb in front of my house, that she needs to close her windows to ensure that her car's interior is unaffected by the water that will momentarily be coming from my water sprinklers, I can no more use that video to provide scientific evidence of the wind than I can provide scientific evidence of an invisible and immortal God. We could look around us and conclude that everything we see with our eyes constitutes evidence that that God exists.âŁ
âŁ
5. đđčđ”đłđąđ°đłđ„đȘđŻđąđłđș đ€đđąđȘđźđŽ đłđŠđČđ¶đȘđłđŠ đŠđčđ”đłđąđ°đłđ„đȘđŻđąđłđș đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ.âŁ
âŁ
Sagan's "ECREE" opinion aside, to claim belief in God would be ordinary to those believing in God, but would be extraordinary were an atheist to claim he or she believes in God. I like your red car/flying red car analogy, but DeLorean time machines and warp speed are extraordinary and are things that are right up there with flying red cars. đâŁ
âŁ
6. đđ°, đžđ©đș đ„đ° đșđ°đ¶ đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ·đŠ đȘđŻ đđ°đ„?âŁ
âŁ
The teleological argument and the KalÄm Cosmological argument are philosophical arguments that I imagine have persuaded many to believe in God (even in Spinoza's God), but it is also logical to conclude that the scientific peinciples associated with a fine-tuned universe, the zygote stage to neonate stage to adult progression, blood clotting and consciousness, as well as the things one learns from a study of the Bible have convinced many others to believe in God.âŁ
âŁ
7. đđ©đŠđłđŠâđŽ đŻđ° đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ đ§đ°đł đđ°đ„.âŁ
âŁ
How are "near-death experiences" compelling evidence for God?âŁ
âŁ
8. đđ©đș đ”đ©đŠ đđ°đ„ đ°đ§ đ”đ©đŠ đđȘđŁđđŠ đąđŻđ„ đŻđ°đ” đŽđ°đźđŠ đ°đ”đ©đŠđł đšđ°đ„?âŁ
âŁ
đđŠđŠ #6 đąđŻđ„ #7.âŁ
âŁ
Including Christianity, the 12 major religions in the world are Baha'i, Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism, IslÄm, Jainism, Judaism, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism and Zoroastrianism and there are an estimated 10,000 religions, but one's religion matters.âŁ
âŁ
[contâd]
[2/3]
9. đđ°, đȘđ§ đșđ°đ¶ đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ·đŠ đ”đ©đŠ đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ đąđŻđ„ đđąđłđ”đ© đąđłđŠ đŁđȘđđđȘđ°đŻđŽ đ°đ§ đșđŠđąđłđŽ đ°đđ„, đ„đ° đșđ°đ¶ đ”đ©đȘđŻđŹ đđŠđŻđŠđŽđȘđŽ đȘđŽ đ§đȘđšđ¶đłđąđ”đȘđ·đŠ?âŁ
âŁ
The question isn't whether Genesis is literal and figurative in any context; just whether it is figurative and it isn't. The word "day" is a homonym used in Genesis chapters 1 through 3, and this word may not always refer to a 24-hour day. The word "day" is used at Gen. 1:5, 2:4, 2:17 and 3:8, but none of them are used to refer to a 24-hour day.âŁ
âŁ
Similar to "day" is the word "light": "The morning light" (noun); "he used a match to light a fire" (verb); "the room was light and airy" (adjective); "the suitcase wasn't heavy at all, it was light" (adjective); "the lotion glistened because of her light skin" (adjective).âŁ
âŁ
Each of the âdaysâ in Genesis are epochs as proven by the fact that the Andromeda Galaxy, for example, is 15 quintillion (15 trillion million) miles away, so on the first creative âdayâ when God said âlet there be light,â light from the Andromeda Galaxy to which Gen. 1:3â5 refers would have taken 2.537 mly to reach the earth. The second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth creative âdaysâ were epochs, but not 24 hours in length.âŁ
âŁ
Moses wrote the book of Genesis under the inspiration of God. What Moses wrote is based on fact and isnât some guess based on Mosesâ belief considering the fact that the odds of his being able to write down the correct order of events as he does in Genesis is 1 in 3,628 800!âŁ
âŁ
Genesis lists the following major stages during the creation process and in this general order: (1) a beginning; (2) a primitive earth in darkness, enshrouded in heavy gases and water; (3) light; (4) an atmosphere; (5) large areas of dry land; (6) land plants; (7) sun, moon and stars discernible in the expanse, and the beginning of seasons; (8) sea monsters, flying creatures; (9) wild and tame beasts, mammals; and (10) man.âŁ
âŁ
Science agrees with this general order, so the science of mathematical probability says for anyone to just pick the numbers 1 to 10 randomly from a box and draw them in consecutive order (1:3,628,800) means that Moses didn't just happen to guess the right order correctly; this would be an unrealistic conclusion. Logically, Moses would had needed help from someone that was there at the time to write what he did, and I believe that "someone" is God.âŁ
âŁ
10. đđ§ đđ°đ„ đ€đłđŠđąđ”đŠđ„ đ”đ©đŠ đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ, đžđ©đ° đ°đł đžđ©đąđ” đ€đłđŠđąđ”đŠđ„ đđ°đ„?âŁ
âŁ
God is eternal and uncreated. It is not special pleading to state a scriptural fact. (1 Tim. 1:17) You wrote that "people believed the universe was eternal ⊠until the 20th century, when ⊠evidence began piling up showing the universe had a beginning" and how by "the 1960s, when Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered the cosmic background radiation, the Big Bang theory had pretty much destroyed the idea of an eternal universe," but what does the Big Bang have to do with who created God? Only someone eternal could create the universe and the Bible indicates that God is uncreated. Clement of Alexandria, who died about 215 AD, referred to God as âthe uncreated and imperishable and only true God.â (See Prov. 30:4.)âŁ
âŁ
An infinitely small point called a "singularity" exploded into the present universe, which inflated or expanded at a rate faster than the speed of light. What is supposed to have caused the big bang itself? What came before? If space-time did not exist then, how could everything appear from nothing? No one associated with modern cosmology is able to explain this singularity, where and when it began.âŁ
âŁ
[contâd]
[3/3]
I should add here that in his book, âThe Intelligent Universe,â Prof. Fred Hoyle wrote about Ptolemyâs futile use of epicycles and said: âI have little hesitation in saying that as a result a sickly pall now hangs over the big bang theory. As I have mentioned earlier, when a pattern of facts becomes set against a theory, experience shows that it rarely recovers.ââŁ
âThe Intelligent Universe (1983), page 186.âŁ
âŁ
You wrote that it comes down to choosing to âbelieve in an infinite chain of causes ⊠or an eternal something with the power to create. Which one makes more sense to you?â No. There is no need to guess: God is an uncreated being and he it was that created the universe.âŁ
âŁ
11. đđ°đž đ„đ° đșđ°đ¶ đŽđČđ¶đąđłđŠ đą âđŽđ”đłđąđȘđšđ©đ”đ§đ°đłđžđąđłđ„â đđŠđŻđŠđŽđȘđŽ đžđȘđ”đ© đą đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ đ”đ©đąđ”âđŽ đŁđȘđđđȘđ°đŻđŽ đ°đ§ đșđŠđąđłđŽ đ°đđ„?âŁ
âŁ
We live in an orderly 13.7 byo universe with a 4.6 byo sun and moon, and a 4.5628 byo earth, which is not in conflict with Genesis.âŁ
âŁ
12. đđ° đșđ°đ¶ đžđłđȘđ”đŠ đŽđ€đȘđŠđŻđ”đȘđ§đȘđ€ đ±đąđ±đŠđłđŽ đąđŁđ°đ¶đ” đđ°đ„âđŽ đȘđŻđ·đ°đđ·đŠđźđŠđŻđ” đȘđŻ đ”đ©đŠ đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ?âŁ
âŁ
đđ°.âŁ
âŁ
I have written many Bible-related posts featuring God's dealings with mankind since Adam's creation 6,051 years ago in 4026 BC.âŁ
âŁ
13. đđ·đŠđłđșđ°đŻđŠ đȘđŽ đŁđ°đłđŻ đąđŻ đąđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđ” ⊠đŁđąđŁđȘđŠđŽ đąđłđŠ đąđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđ”đŽ đ¶đŻđ”đȘđ đ”đ©đŠđșâđłđŠ đȘđŻđ„đ°đ€đ”đłđȘđŻđąđ”đŠđ„.âŁ
âŁ
You wrote: "The law of parsimony (Occam's razor) applies here," but evolutionary biology is psuedoscience and is in conflict with the Bible, which does not teach phylogenetic trees or that mankind evolved, but they we are the offspring of Adam and Eve. We are all born with clean slates, so to speak, but no one is born an atheist.âŁ
âŁ
14. đđŠđđȘđšđȘđ°đŻ đȘđŽ đą đ±đłđ°đ„đ¶đ€đ” đ°đ§ đžđ©đŠđłđŠ đșđ°đ¶ đžđŠđłđŠ đŁđ°đłđŻ, đșđ°đ¶đł đ§đąđźđȘđđș, đŠđ”đ€.âŁ
âŁ
Not always. Some people learn their religion from missionaries that proselytize in their country.âŁ
âŁ
15. đđŠâđłđŠ đąđđ đąđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđ”đŽ, đ đ«đ¶đŽđ” đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ·đŠ đȘđŻ đ°đŻđŠ đđŠđŽđŽ đšđ°đ„ đ”đ©đąđŻ đșđ°đ¶.âŁ
âŁ
I disagree; not all of us are atheists.âŁ
âŁ
16. đđ©đȘđ€đ© đ°đ§ đ”đ©đŠ đ”đ©đ°đ¶đŽđąđŻđ„đŽ đ°đ§ đšđ°đ„đŽ đ„đ° đșđ°đ¶ đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ·đŠ đȘđŻ đąđŻđ„ đžđ©đș?âŁ
âŁ
I believe in and worship the God of the Bible, whose name is Jehovah. (Exo. 6:3; Jer. 10:10, ASV; John 17:3)âŁ
âŁ
17. đđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđź đȘđŽ đ«đ¶đŽđ” đą đđąđ€đŹ đ°đ§ đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ§.âŁ
âŁ
No; atheism đąđŹ đđĄđ đźđ§đ©đ«đšđŻđđđ„đ đđ„đđąđŠ đđĄđđ đ§đš đ đšđđŹ đđ±đąđŹđ.âŁ
âŁ
18. đđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđź đȘđŽđŻâđ” đą đ±đ°đŽđȘđ”đȘđ·đŠ đ±đ°đŽđȘđ”đȘđ°đŻ. đđ©đ°đŠđ·đŠđł đźđąđŹđŠđŽ đ”đ©đŠ đ€đđąđȘđź đ”đ©đąđ” đŽđ°đźđŠđ”đ©đȘđŻđš đŠđčđȘđŽđ”đŽ đ©đąđŽ đ”đ©đŠ đŁđ¶đłđ„đŠđŻ đ°đ§ đ±đłđ°đ°đ§.âŁ
âŁ
The burden of proof (BOP) is on the individual that makes a claim. I believe in God; this is an affirmative (positive) statement. I am not obliged to prove my beliefs to anyone, but I'm always willing to share them with others. When the atheist makes a claim, the BOP is on the atheist to prove his or her claim that no gods exist.âŁ
[1/8]
@wendelltalks:âŁ
đđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđźâđŽ đ§đąđ·đ°đłđȘđ”đŠ đźđ°đ·đŠ đȘđŽ đ”đ° đ„đŠđźđąđŻđ„ đąđŁđŽđ°đđ¶đ”đŠ đ€đŠđłđ”đąđȘđŻđ”đș đ§đłđ°đź đđ©đłđȘđŽđ”đȘđąđŻđŽâŠ đžđ©đȘđđŠ đđȘđ·đȘđŻđš đ°đŻ đą đźđ°đ¶đŻđ”đąđȘđŻ đ°đ§ đąđŽđŽđ¶đźđ±đ”đȘđ°đŻđŽ.âŁ
âŁ
âą đđ©đŠ đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ đ«đ¶đŽđ” âđȘđŽâ âą đđȘđ§đŠ đ«đ¶đŽđ” âđ©đąđ±đ±đŠđŻđŠđ„â âą đđ°đłđąđđȘđ”đș đȘđŽ đ«đ¶đŽđ” âđ¶đŽđŠđ§đ¶đâ âąđđ°đŻđŽđ€đȘđ°đ¶đŽđŻđŠđŽđŽ đȘđŽ đ«đ¶đŽđ” âđŠđźđŠđłđšđŠđŻđ”â âą đđłđ¶đ”đ© đȘđŽ đ«đ¶đŽđ” âđžđ©đąđ”đŠđ·đŠđł đžđ°đłđŹđŽââŁ
@TherionWare:âŁ
đâđź đąđŽđŹđȘđŻđš đ§đ°đł đŽđ¶đ§đ§đȘđ€đȘđŠđŻđ” đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ, đđŠđŻđ„đŠđđ. đđ©đŠđłđŠ đ„đȘđ„ đșđ°đ¶ đšđŠđ” "đąđŁđŽđ°đđ¶đ”đŠ đ€đŠđłđ”đąđȘđŻđ”đș"?âŁ
âŁ
You would be a rare atheist tđĄđđ đđšđđŹđ§âđ đ°đđ§đ đđđŹđšđ„đźđđ đđđ«đđđąđ§đđČ for the beliefs that some Christians hold. In the Bible, at Rom. 1:19-20, it states:âŁ
âŁ
âFor what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.ââŁ
âŁ
Now is this true? Absolutely! Certainly! đ God HAS made it plain to us the things that we need to know, the things that we can see and perceive indicate that God has eternal power, that He actually exists and that He is superior to all man-made things, and all other things on earth and in the material universe. Since there is an ample amount of evidence that could be presented, I wonât spend any time with this and will just move on.âŁ
âŁ
đ đđđđđđđđđâđ đđđđđđ
đ đđđđ đđ đđđđđ đđ đđđđđđđđâŁ
đđđđđ đđđ đđ
đ
đđđ⣠[ tinyurl.com/3bxkh6dt ]
đđđđđ đđđđđđđđ[ tinyurl.com/3bxkh6dt ]
đđđđđđđđđ đđđđđđđđđđđđđđ [tinyurl.com/2wzbxc5z ]
đđđ
đ đđđđ đđđ đđđđ đ
đđđ đđđ-đđđ
đ⣠⣠[ tinyurl.com/4ppydyj9 ]
đđđđđđđđđđ đđđ đđđđđđ⣠[ tinyurl.com/4ppydyj9 ]
đđđ đđđđđđđđ đđđđđ đđ đđđđđđđđ⣠[ tinyurl.com/4ppydyj9 ]
đđđđđ đđđđđđđđđ [ tinyurl.com/4ppydyj9 ]
âŁ
đ đđđđđđđđđâđ đđđđđđ
đ đđđđ đđ đđđđđ đđ đđđđđđđđâŁ
Now there are some that adhere to their belief in God simply because of the belief of their parents or because they now happen to live where it is socially popular to be a Christian that believes Jesus to be both the Son of God and God. (FYI the Gospel of John at John 20:31 doesnât say that the Lord Jesus Christ is God, but that he is âthe Son of God.â)âŁ
âŁ
However, the fact that oneâs parents professed belief in God will not convince any atheist to believe that God exists, will it? Indeed, one of the reasons why many persons, even the children of some so-called Christians, become doubters of Godâs existence is the inability of believers to convincingly explain their convictions, they having no idea what âfaithâ means. And, frankly, unless a person has been personally convinced to believe in God, that person is not likely to defend any of his or her religious beliefs when under pressure to do so. (See Rom. 12:2; Heb. 11:1)âŁ
âŁ
A legitimate belief in God must be founded on facts that we intelligently determine to be true. But as a first century AD Bible writer wrote: âNo man has seen God at any time.â (John 1:18) So to be convinced of Godâs existence our belief must be based on the things we discern we observe in the material universe as well as our accumulated personal experience. Only then can we can develop an unassailable belief in God using our powers of reason.âŁ
[contâd]
[7/8]
This establishes God's superiority, and clearly someone higher than man must supply these needs. Why does there exist a vast variety of food in the world? Not just vegetation, but the animals and the fish we eat? Whose idea was it to make the plants, the fish and the other animals we eat?âŁ
We can look at man's body. We can look at the marvelous systems. The doctors and scientists say, these systems are not unrelated. They say, each system in our bodies is related to the other systems: The circulatory system, the nervous system, the respiratory system, the cardiovascular system, the blood system, the digestive system. If one breaks down or falls down, the others will rally to its side to try to make that body work anyway. Who thought of that? Man? Not even his doctors understand this fully. Why does these systems in the human body so organized that they work this way? Whose idea was this? Who made man?âŁ
âŁ
A prime example that proves Godâs existence that comes to my mind is this: Water, which is our most essential fluid. Water has a remarkable property that shows the remarkable and the eternal power of God. Perhaps youâve noticed this:âŁ
âŁ
When water freezes, it expands, and gets lighter and floats. You know that because when you put an ice cube in your Pepsi, it doesn't sink to the bottom. It floats right there on the top. And you know, too, that it expands because when you fill your ice tray, you don't fill it up all the way to the top. You leave a little room, because you know that when you pull it out of the freezer, it's going to take up that extra space.âŁ
âŁ
So because water, when frozen, expands, and gets lighter and floats, it keeps all of us from living, right here on this earth, in a refrigerator. Did you know that? How so? Well, now, consider this, for a moment there, how it is saving the whole world of mankind. Let's say just the opposite were true. Let's say water, when frozen, was like most other substances; they contract and get smaller. That's like that chicken in your freezer: When you pull it out, it has shriveled up a little. It has gotten smaller. See, that's how most things do when they freeze; not water. Well, that's saving us.âŁ
âŁ
And I will add here that when we boil water; it becomes steam, but none of this was written to discuss the different properties of water, but to discuss the proof that God exists.âŁ
âŁ
Let's say water did like most substances and when frozen became more dense, and instead of floating would sink. Well, during a cold winter, what would happen? All the water on top would freeze; lakes, rivers, ponds, all around the world, and since it wouldn't float, it would become more dense and would sink right to the bottom and there ice would be all winter.âŁ
âŁ
Then when the summer came, the sun couldn't penetrate all the way through the water down to the bottom where the ice is and had not melted, so by the time winter came around again, you would still have much ice at the bottom of all the rivers and lakes and streams.âŁ
But then with winter that on top would freeze again and would sink toward the bottom, piling up on top of that other unmelted ice at the bottom that had been there from the previous winter. Can you see what would happen now? After a few winters, there wouldn't be a drop of water on this earth, all of it would be frozen and we would be in a refrigerator, except we wouldn't be here because, without our most essential fluid that God provides, then we just could not exist as humans on this planet.âŁ
âŁ
Well, now, who thought of that? Who thought of making water the exception to most substances? Not man, although we do appreciate it and its properties. We live as a result of it. But it establishes the eternal power of God, and therefore the evidence all around us, visible and invisible collectively, constitutes proof that God exists.âŁ
âŁ
[contâd]
[8/8]
For an absolute certainty, it becomes clear by using, not the sense of hearing, but our four other senses of sight, smell, taste, and touch, that God exists.âŁ
âŁ
đđđđđđđđđâŁ
@TherionWare:âŁ
đ đ°đ¶đł đđȘđŽđ” đŁđ¶đŻđ„đđŠđŽ đ”đ°đšđŠđ”đ©đŠđł đ€đ°đŽđźđ°đđ°đšđș, đ”đ©đŠ đ°đłđȘđšđȘđŻ đ°đ§ đđȘđ§đŠ, đŠđ”đ©đȘđ€đŽ, đ€đ°đŻđŽđ€đȘđ°đ¶đŽđŻđŠđŽđŽ đąđŻđ„ đą đ”đ©đŠđ°đłđș đ°đ§ đ”đłđ¶đ”đ©, đ”đ©đŠđŻ đ±đłđŠđ”đŠđŻđ„đŽ đąđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđź đłđŠđČđ¶đȘđłđŠđŽ đźđŠ đ”đ° đŠđŻđ„đ°đłđŽđŠ đșđ°đ¶đł đŽđ¶đźđźđąđłđȘđŠđŽ đ°đ§ đąđđ đ§đȘđ·đŠ. đđ” đ„đ°đŠđŽđŻâđ”.âŁ
âŁ
"đ đ„đ°đŻâđ” đŹđŻđ°đž" đȘđŽ đą đ±đŠđłđ§đŠđ€đ”đđș đłđŠđŽđ±đŠđ€đ”đąđŁđđŠ đąđŻđŽđžđŠđł. đđ” đšđȘđ·đŠđŽ đșđ°đ¶ đŻđ° đžđąđłđłđąđŻđ” đ”đ° đȘđŻđŽđŠđłđ” đą đ„đŠđȘđ”đș, đŽđ”đȘđđ đđŠđŽđŽ đ”đ° đȘđ„đŠđŻđ”đȘđ§đș đȘđ” đąđŽ đ”đ©đŠ đđ©đłđȘđŽđ”đȘđąđŻ đ°đŻđŠ.âŁ
âŁ
đ đ°đ¶âđ·đŠ đžđłđȘđ”đ”đŠđŻ đŁđ°đ”đ© đŽđȘđ„đŠđŽ đ°đ§ đ”đ©đŠ đ€đ°đŻđ·đŠđłđŽđąđ”đȘđ°đŻ đąđŻđ„ đŽđ”đȘđđ đ°đźđȘđ”đ”đŠđ„ đ”đ©đŠ đąđłđšđ¶đźđŠđŻđ” đ”đ©đąđ” đžđ°đ¶đđ„ đŠđŽđ”đąđŁđđȘđŽđ© đșđ°đ¶đł đ€đ°đŻđ€đđ¶đŽđȘđ°đŻ. đđŻ đŠđ€đ°đŻđ°đźđȘđ€đąđ đžđąđș đ°đ§ đžđȘđŻđŻđȘđŻđš, đąđ„đźđȘđ”đ”đŠđ„đđș.âŁ
âŁ
What âargumentâ is missing? Please be specific.âŁ
âŁ
@Crypt0_Facts:âŁ
đđ©đŠ đ„đȘđ§đ§đŠđłđŠđŻđ€đŠ đŁđŠđ”đžđŠđŠđŻ đșđ°đ¶đł đđ°đ„ đąđŻđ„ đ”đ©đŠ đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ đ°đł đđȘđ§đŠ đ°đł đ€đ°đŻđŽđ€đȘđ°đ¶đŽđŻđŠđŽđŽ đȘđŽ đŻđąđźđŠđđș đ”đ©đŠ đ§đąđ€đ” đ”đ©đąđ” đ”đ©đŠđș đ„đŠđźđ°đŻđŽđ”đłđąđŁđđș đŠđčđȘđŽđ”, đ”đ©đ°đŽđŠ đąđłđŠ đ”đ©đŠ đŁđąđŽđŠđđȘđŻđŠ đ”đ©đȘđŻđšđŽ đ”đ©đąđ” đșđ°đ¶ đąđŻđ„ đ đąđŻđ„ đŠđ·đŠđłđșđŁđ°đ„đș đŠđđŽđŠ, đłđŠđšđąđłđ„đđŠđŽđŽ đ°đ§ đłđŠđđȘđšđȘđ°đ¶đŽ đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ§, đąđđ đąđšđłđŠđŠ đ°đŻ. âŁ
âŁ
đđŠ đąđđ đąđšđłđŠđŠ đ”đ©đŠ đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ đŠđčđȘđŽđ”đŽ, đžđŠ đąđđ đąđšđłđŠđŠ đđȘđ§đŠ đŠđčđȘđŽđ”đŽ. âŁ
âŁ
đđ©đąđ”'đŽ đą đđȘđ”đ”đđŠ đŁđȘđ” đ„đȘđ§đ§đŠđłđŠđŻđ” đ”đ©đąđŻ đșđ°đ¶đł đ±đąđłđ”đȘđ€đ¶đđąđł đ„đŠđȘđ”đș đ§đłđ°đź đșđ°đ¶đł đ±đąđłđ”đȘđ€đ¶đđąđł đłđŠđđȘđšđȘđ°đŻ đŠđčđȘđŽđ”đȘđŻđšâŁ
âŁ
I believe there is only one God, but you, as an atheist, assert a priori that all life on earth is the result of a common ancestor, and assumes that all animal and human behavior can be explained from a naturalistic point of view.âŁ
âŁ
Dismissing the entire category of personal testimony a priori isnât neutral skepticism; it is a presupposition that rules out the data before examining the pattern. However, testing the historical, circumstantial and testimonial evidence in the Bible for their authenticity, one can logically perceive that Godâs existence is a fact.âŁ
âŁ
Babies are born with blank slates as it were. By their third birthday, they may have learned to speak and understand one or more languages, but they do not and they cannot make the claim that gods do not exist.âŁ
âŁ
However, as children get older, parents teach their children their ideology, their worldview, their religion, both the atheist and the non-atheist, to guide them in life, and by the time they become adults, they will have decided to embrace either their parentsâ worldview or some other religion.âŁ
đđđąđđ§đđąđŹđđŹ đđ«đąđđ đđš đđ«đđđđ đ„đąđđ đđ§đ đđđąđ„đđ
tinyurl.com/2s42andx
đđđąđđ§đđąđŹđđŹ đđ«đąđđ đđš đđ«đđđđ đ„đąđđ đđ§đ đđđąđ„đđ
[1/2]
@wendelltalks:
đđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđ”đŽ đđ°đ·đŠ đ”đ° đŽđąđș âđ đ«đ¶đŽđ” đ§đ°đđđ°đž đ”đ©đŠ đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ.â
đđŻđ”đȘđ đ”đ©đŠ đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ đ±đ°đȘđŻđ”đŽ đ”đ°: âą đ đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ đžđȘđ”đ© đą đŁđŠđšđȘđŻđŻđȘđŻđš âą đđȘđŻđŠ-đ”đ¶đŻđȘđŻđš đ”đ©đąđ” đđ°đ°đŹđŽ đ„đŠđŽđȘđšđŻđŠđ„ âą đđŁđ«đŠđ€đ”đȘđ·đŠ đźđ°đłđąđ đ°đŁđđȘđšđąđ”đȘđ°đŻđŽ đ”đ©đŠđș đ€đąđŻâđ” đŠđčđ±đđąđȘđŻ âą đđ°đŻđŽđ€đȘđ°đ¶đŽđŻđŠđŽđŽ đ”đ©đąđ” đźđąđ”đŠđłđȘđąđ đ±đłđ°đ€đŠđŽđŽđŠđŽ đ€đąđŻâđ” đ±đłđ°đ„đ¶đ€đŠ
@JonHammond1701:
đđ©đŠ đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ đ„đ°đŠđŽđŻ'đ” đ±đ°đȘđŻđ” đ”đ° đđđ đ°đ§ đ”đ©đ°đŽđŠ đ”đ©đȘđŻđšđŽ.
đđ” đ±đ°đȘđŻđ”đŽ đ”đ° đđ±đąđ€đŠđ”đȘđźđŠ đŁđŠđȘđŻđš đąđŻ đŠđźđŠđłđšđŠđŻđ”, đ±đłđ°đ±đŠđłđ”đș đ°đ§ đ”đ©đŠ đŠđčđ±đąđŻđ„đȘđŻđš đđŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ, "đ§đȘđŻđŠ-đ”đ¶đŻđȘđŻđš" đŁđŠđȘđŻđš đ§đąđđŽđŠ, đźđ°đłđąđđȘđ”đș đŁđŠđȘđŻđš đąđŻ đȘđŻđ”đŠđłđŽđ¶đŁđ«đŠđ€đ”đȘđ·đŠ đŽđ°đ€đȘđ°đŻđ°đłđźđąđ”đȘđ·đŠ đ€đ°đŻđŽđ”đłđ¶đ€đ”, đąđŻđ„ đ€đ°đŻđŽđ€đȘđ°đ¶đŽđŻđŠđŽđŽ đŁđŠđȘđŻđš đą đŽđ±đŠđ€đ”đłđ¶đź, đ”đ©đąđ” đđ đ±đłđ°đ„đ¶đ€đŠđ„ đŁđș đđȘđ§đŠ.
Fine-tuning is false? No; it isnât false.
Maybe you know (or maybe not) that there are four fundamental forces of nature, right? A Gravitational Force; a Electromagnetic Force; a Strong Nuclear Force; and a Weak Nuclear Force. Referring to just the Electromagnetic Force, a slight difference in this force would affect the sun and thus alter the light reaching the earth, making photosynthesis in plants difficult or impossible. It could also rob water of its unique properties, which are vital for life. So again, the precise tuning of the Electromagnetic Force determines whether we live or not.
Equally vital is the intensity of the Electromagnetic Force in relation to the other three forces. For example, some physicists figure this force to be (10âŽâ°) times that of gravity. It might seem a small change to that number to add one more zero (10âŽÂč). Yet that would mean that gravity is proportionally weaker, and a Professor of Mathematics and Physics at Oxford, Dr. Reinhard Breuer (âThe Anthropic Principle: Man as the Focal Point of Natureâ) made this interesting comment on the resulting situation:
âWith lower gravity the stars would be smaller, and the pressure of gravity in their interiors would not drive the temperature high enough for nuclear fusion reactions to get under way: the sun would be unable to shine.â Imagine this!
What if gravity were stronger proportionately, so that the number had one fewer zeros (10Âłâč)? âWith just this tiny adjustment,â continues Breuer, âa star like the sun would find its life expectancy sharply reduced.â And other scientists consider the fine-tuning to be even more precise.
Indeed, two remarkable qualities of our sun and other stars are long-term efficiency and stability. Consider a simple illustration. We know that to run efficiently, an automobile engine needs a critical ratio between fuel and air; engineers design complex mechanical and computer systems to optimize performance. If that is so with a mere engine, what of the efficiently âburningâ stars such as our sun? The key forces involved are precisely tuned, optimized for life. Did that precision just happen?
@TalonXavier1973:
đđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ đ„đŠđąđ„ đ±đŠđ°đ±đđŠ đ€đąđŻ đ„đȘđŠ đąđŻđ„ đŁđŠ đłđŠđŽđ¶đłđłđŠđ€đ”đŠđ„ đŁđș đą đđŠđ·đȘđ”đąđ”đȘđŻđš đąđđȘđŠđŻ đžđ©đ° đ±đłđąđ€đ”đȘđ€đŠđŽ đŻđŠđ€đłđ°đźđąđŻđ€đș?
No, a resurrection by this means cannot happen. E.T. does nit and has never existed, except on the movie or tv screen or in a book.
@ThatAntiTheist1:
đđđ đ°đ§ đ”đ©đąđ” đȘđŽ đžđłđ°đŻđš.
Iâm sorry. I understand you to be saying that all of what @wendelltalks said in his post is wrong, but specifically what exactly?
1. đđ©đŠ đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ đ±đ°đȘđŻđ”đŽ đ”đ° đąđŻ [đȘđŻđ”đŠđłđŻđąđ] đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ.
To what evidence do you refer? Iâm a scientist, so use as many words as you need to give me the cliff-notes.
[contâd]
[2/2]
2. đđ©đąđ” đ„đ°đŠđŽ đąđŻ đȘđđ-đ”đ¶đŻđŠđ„ đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ đđ°đ°đŹ đđȘđŹđŠ? đđŻđ”đȘđ đșđ°đ¶ đ€đąđŻ đ„đŠđźđ°đŻđŽđ”đłđąđ”đŠ đ”đ©đąđ”, đ€đđąđȘđźđȘđŻđš đ”đ©đŠ đ¶đŻđȘđ·đŠđłđŽđŠ đȘđŽ đ§đȘđŻđŠ đ”đ¶đŻđŠđ„ đȘđŽ đŻđ°đŻđŽđŠđŻđŽđŠ.
Someoneânot manâauthored the anthropic principle, which includes the permittivity constant in Coulombâs law and Planckâs constant, explains the fine tuning of our universe, and governs the natural cycles that gives to our planet the ability to support the abundance of life on it. Four questions:
Why does the permittivity constant in Coulombâs law have the exact value of 8.85 x 10â»ÂčÂČ Coulomb per Newton-meter? Why is the electron charge to mass ratio exactly 1.76 x 10â»ÂčÂč Coulomb per kilogram? Why is the speed of light 3 x 10âž meters per second? Why is Planckâs constant exactly 6.63 x 10â»ÂłâŽ Joules-seconds?âŁ
3. đđ°đłđąđđȘđ”đș đȘđŽ đŽđ¶đŁđ«đŠđ€đ”đȘđ·đŠ đŁđŠđ€đąđ¶đŽđŠ đžđŠ đŻđ° đđ°đŻđšđŠđł đ°đžđŻ đ©đ¶đźđąđŻđŽ đąđŽ đ§đąđłđźđȘđŻđš đŠđČđ¶đȘđ±đźđŠđŻđ”.
Subjective? Really? Why is it that people all over our planet share the same moral view on stealing? on murder? on lying? Tell me you intended to write âobjective.â
4. đđŠ đ€đąđŻ đąđ€đ”đ¶đąđđđș đŽđŠđŠ đ”đ©đ°đ¶đšđ©đ”đŽ đąđŽ đ”đ©đŠđș đ§đ°đłđź đȘđŻ đą đ±đŠđłđŽđ°đŻ'đŽ đŁđłđąđȘđŻ.
We ca actually see s personâs thoughts? Are you at least 21 years of age? I ask because I donât think an adult would say such a thing.
đđ° đŽđ°đźđŠ đ§đ¶đ€đŹđȘđŻđš đłđŠđŽđŠđąđłđ€đ© đŁđŠđ§đ°đłđŠ đșđ°đ¶ đźđąđŹđŠ đșđ°đ¶đłđŽđŠđđ§ đđ°đ°đŹ đđȘđŹđŠ đąđŻ đȘđ„đȘđ°đ”.
đđŻđđŠđŽđŽ đ”đ©đąđ” đ”đ©đŠ đđ°đ°đŹ đșđ°đ¶'đłđŠ đšđ°đȘđŻđš đ§đ°đł.
Iâm pretty sure that you arenât smarter than I am when discussing the anthropic principle. I donât believe there is anyone on this platform that is sporting a âlook.â I mean, we canât see it. One wonders why it was you decided to say this. Were you intending to be clever? If so, thatâs fine, but please let me know that youâre not serious in the things youâve said in your post.
[1/3]
@xonphused:
đ đđŠđžđȘđŽđ© đźđąđŻ đžđąđŽ đ€đłđ¶đ€đȘđ§đȘđŠđ„ đŻđŠđąđłđđș 2,000 đșđŠđąđłđŽ đąđšđ°, đąđŻđ„ đđ©đłđȘđŽđ”đȘđąđŻđȘđ”đș đ€đđąđȘđźđŽ đ©đȘđŽ đ„đŠđąđ”đ© đ±đąđȘđ„ đ§đ°đł đ©đ¶đźđąđŻđȘđ”đșâđŽ đŽđȘđŻđŽ đąđŻđ„ đ©đȘđŽ đłđŠđŽđ¶đłđłđŠđ€đ”đȘđ°đŻ đ„đŠđ§đŠđąđ”đŠđ„ đ„đŠđąđ”đ©.
đđ¶đ” đžđ©đąđ” đŠđčđąđ€đ”đđș đ€đ©đąđŻđšđŠđ„ đ§đ°đł đ©đ¶đźđąđŻđȘđ”đș?
đđŠ đŽđ”đȘđđ đ„đȘđŠ. đđ¶đźđąđŻđŽ đŽđ”đȘđđ đ€đ°đźđźđȘđ” đąđ”đłđ°đ€đȘđ”đȘđŠđŽ. đđŻđŻđ°đ€đŠđŻđ” đ±đŠđ°đ±đđŠ đŽđ”đȘđđ đŽđ¶đ§đ§đŠđł đ§đ°đł đ”đ©đŠ đąđ€đ”đȘđ°đŻđŽ đ°đ§ đ°đ”đ©đŠđłđŽ. đđ·đŠđŻ đđ©đłđȘđŽđ”đȘđąđŻđŽ đ€đ°đŻđ”đȘđŻđ¶đŠ đ”đ° đŽđȘđŻ.
Yes, humans have committed atrocities in the past and they continue to do so, and innocent people still suffer injustices meted out to them by others because sin is in the world, but God will soon reverse the effects of these injustices, and will resurrect those that have died as a result of such atrocities.
đ đ¶đŻđ„đŠđłđŽđ”đąđŻđ„ đ”đ©đąđ” đđ©đłđȘđŽđ”đȘđąđŻđŽ đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ·đŠ đŽđąđđ·đąđ”đȘđ°đŻ đȘđŽ đŽđ±đȘđłđȘđ”đ¶đąđ đąđŻđ„ đŠđ”đŠđłđŻđąđ, đŻđ°đ” đąđŻ đȘđźđźđŠđ„đȘđąđ”đŠ đŠđŻđ„ đ”đ° đ©đ¶đźđąđŻ đŽđ¶đ§đ§đŠđłđȘđŻđš. đđ¶đ” đ”đ©đąđ” đłđąđȘđŽđŠđŽ đąđŻ đŠđ·đŠđŻ đ„đŠđŠđ±đŠđł đČđ¶đŠđŽđ”đȘđ°đŻ:
đđ§ đąđŻ đąđđ-đ±đ°đžđŠđłđ§đ¶đ đđ°đ„ đ€đłđŠđąđ”đŠđ„ đ©đ¶đźđąđŻđȘđ”đș, đŠđŽđ”đąđŁđđȘđŽđ©đŠđ„ đ”đ©đŠ đłđ¶đđŠđŽ, đąđŻđ„ đ©đąđŽ đ”đ©đŠ đ±đ°đžđŠđł đ”đ° đ§đ°đłđšđȘđ·đŠ, đžđ©đș đžđąđŽ đ”đ©đŠ đ„đŠđąđ”đ© đ°đ§ đąđŻ đȘđŻđŻđ°đ€đŠđŻđ” đ±đŠđłđŽđ°đŻ đŻđŠđ€đŠđŽđŽđąđłđș đŁđŠđ§đ°đłđŠ đ©đ¶đźđąđŻđȘđ”đș đ€đ°đ¶đđ„ đŁđŠ đ§đ°đłđšđȘđ·đŠđŻ?
đđ©đș đ€đ°đ¶đđ„đŻâđ” đđ°đ„ đŽđȘđźđ±đđș đ§đ°đłđšđȘđ·đŠ?
đđŻđ„ đȘđ§ đđŠđŽđ¶đŽâ đłđŠđŽđ¶đłđłđŠđ€đ”đȘđ°đŻ đȘđŽ đ”đ©đŠ đ·đȘđ€đ”đ°đłđș đ°đ·đŠđł đ„đŠđąđ”đ©, đŁđ¶đ” đȘđ”đŽ đ¶đđ”đȘđźđąđ”đŠ đŁđŠđŻđŠđ§đȘđ” đ€đąđŻ đ°đŻđđș đŁđŠ đ€đ°đŻđ§đȘđłđźđŠđ„ đąđ§đ”đŠđł đ„đŠđąđ”đ©, đžđ©đąđ” đȘđŻđ„đŠđ±đŠđŻđ„đŠđŻđ”đđș đ·đŠđłđȘđ§đȘđąđŁđđŠ đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ đŠđŽđ”đąđŁđđȘđŽđ©đŠđŽ đ”đ©đąđ” đ”đ©đȘđŽ đ·đȘđ€đ”đ°đłđș đąđ€đ”đ¶đąđđđș đ°đ€đ€đ¶đłđłđŠđ„?
I do not agree with this idea of yours about âChristians believing that salvation is spiritual and eternal.â I have no idea what this idea even means, but no Christian believe such a thing. I will now go on here to answer these other questions.
Our original parents, Adam and Eve, were created perfect by God, but before any children were born to them they willfully did what God had commanded them not to do, and incurred a debt that constituted an unforgivable sin against God. True to his word, God sentenced them to eternal death as a consequence.
All of Adamâs offspring has inherited the consequences of Adamâs sin at birth, and just as Adam and Eve grew old and die, so we, too, suffer the wrath of God as well, which are the consequences of Godâs perfect justice, that is, the indignity and misery of having become sinners with imperfect bodies that are not just vulnerable to the common cold, but to heart disease, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, dementia, Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinsonâs Disease, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and psoriatic arthritis to name just a few of the diseases that plague and affect our quality of life as we get older, as well as the knowledge that we, like our original parents, could not escape death on our own without divine help.
Without a just basis, God cannot forgive Adamâs sin or forgive our sins. If God were to reverse the death process without the payment of a ransom in satisfaction of Adamâs debt, he would be untrue to his word that âthe wages of sin is death.â (Rom. 6:23) No imperfect man could satisfy this debt and deliver us from this penalty by âgiving to God a ransom for the life of any sinner that would grant to the individual the right to live forever.â (Psa. 49:7-9; Rom. 7:24)
[contâd]
[2/3]
Gratefully God provided the legal basis whereby he could justify and give to mankind forgiveness of their sins, which would free us from the penalty of eternal death. This God did by sending Jesus from heaven to be born as a perfect human, so that he could give his life as a ransom for all of Adamâs children. Jesusâ resurrection is not any victory over death for us. By his resurrection, Jesus himself was restored to life again, but by his death we have the ransom that provides atonement for the sins of those that exercise faith in its value to them by obeying Jesus.
How the ransom works can be likened to Adamâs having deprived all of his offspring of their rightful inheritance, their savingsâwhich he did!âwhich resulted in his being sentenced to life imprisonment, leaving us, the innocent victims of his corruption, impoverished and destitute with no money and no way to get out of our circumstances, that is, until a kind benefactor stepped in and relieved us of our debt and restored to us our rightful inheritance.
God has arranged for Jesus to redeem us and cancel the debt of sin that Adam owed to God by having Jesus provide the ransom that âtakes away the sin of the world.â (John 1:29) We have now been relieved of our debt, but we continue to be impoverished and destitute until the wrath of God comes, and our sins are purged and death is finally abolished.
Unlike Adam, Jesus âcommitted no sinâ (1Â Pet. 2:22), so that because he died with the potential for fathering a perfect human race, he could adopt Adamâs sinful descendants as his children, and make it possible for those drawn into a relationship with God on the basis of (1) faith in the value of Jesusâ ransom sacrifice, (2) getting baptized in Jesusâ name and (3) obeying him could escape Godâs wrath and receive eternal life. (John 3:36; Rom. 3:24)
By our willingness to make changes in our life as we await the coming of Godâs wrath, we strive to bring our lives into harmony with Godâs will through ârepentance and turning backâ from the pursuit of an ungodly course and we take appropriate action to do the things that are pleasing to God so that the sins we commit âmay [finally] be blotted out.â (Acts 3:19) In the meantime, those who are baptized are freed from a guilty conscience and obtain âa good conscienceâ toward God. (1 Pet. 3:21)
đâđź đŻđ°đ” đ€đđąđȘđźđȘđŻđš đ”đ©đŠđŽđŠ đČđ¶đŠđŽđ”đȘđ°đŻđŽ đąđ¶đ”đ°đźđąđ”đȘđ€đąđđđș đ„đȘđŽđ±đłđ°đ·đŠ đđ©đłđȘđŽđ”đȘđąđŻđȘđ”đș. đâđź đąđŽđŹđȘđŻđš đžđ©đș đą đ€đđąđȘđź đ”đ©đȘđŽ đŠđčđ”đłđąđ°đłđ„đȘđŻđąđłđș đŽđ©đ°đ¶đđ„ đŁđŠ đąđ€đ€đŠđ±đ”đŠđ„ đžđȘđ”đ©đ°đ¶đ” đŠđčđąđźđȘđŻđȘđŻđš đȘđ”đŽ đđ°đšđȘđ€, đȘđ”đŽ đźđ°đłđąđ đȘđźđ±đđȘđ€đąđ”đȘđ°đŻđŽ, đąđŻđ„ đ”đ©đŠ đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ đŽđ¶đ±đ±đ°đłđ”đȘđŻđš đȘđ”.
đđ©đąđ” đ„đȘđ„ đđŠđŽđ¶đŽâ đ„đŠđąđ”đ© đąđŻđ„ đłđŠđŽđ¶đłđłđŠđ€đ”đȘđ°đŻ đ„đŠđźđ°đŻđŽđ”đłđąđŁđđș đąđ€đ€đ°đźđ±đđȘđŽđ© đ§đ°đł đ©đ¶đźđąđŻđȘđ”đș đ”đ©đąđ” đ€đ°đ¶đđ„ đŻđ°đ” đ©đąđ·đŠ đŁđŠđŠđŻ đąđ€đ©đȘđŠđ·đŠđ„ đžđȘđ”đ©đ°đ¶đ” đ”đ©đŠđź?
Thereâs nothing wrong with your questions, even if were your goal here to disprove the legitimacy of Christianity, but no one is expected to accept Christianity and pursue a godly course apart from a fair reading and study of the Bible. (Eph. 4:20-32) With so many things that could distract us in the world, pursuing godliness isnât an easy thing to do. As the saying goes, you cannot know what you donât know.
But without Godâs providence in sending his son Jesus to earth so that by his death and the sacrifice of his life âas a propitiation by [Jesusâ] blood for our sake his righteousness could be impugned to those of us exercising faith in the ransom, God could not demonstrate his divine forbearance in passing over former sins, and we would not be justified and would continue to die for an affliction we inherited even though our sins are by no means âlike the transgression of Adam.â (Rom. 3:24-26; 5:14) Consequently, faith in Jesus and his ransom is the only means by which we can be saved.
[contâd]
[3/3]
@Carlton3ru:
đđ©đłđ°đ¶đšđ© đđ©đłđȘđŽđ”'đŽ đŽđąđ€đłđȘđ§đȘđ€đŠ đđ°đ„ đžđȘđđ đ§đ°đłđšđȘđ·đŠ đ°đ¶đł đ”đłđąđŻđŽđšđłđŠđŽđŽđȘđ°đŻđŽ.
đđ° đđ©đłđȘđŽđ”'đŽ đ„đȘđ„ đŻđ°đ” đ€đ°đźđŠ [đ”đ° đźđąđŹđŠ] đ¶đŽ đ±đŠđłđ§đŠđ€đ” đąđŻđ„ đŻđ°đ” đŽđȘđŻ, đŁđ¶đ” đ”đ° đ±đłđ°đ·đȘđ„đŠ đą đžđąđș đ”đ° [âŠ] đ§đ°đłđšđȘđ·đŠ đ§đ°đł đ°đ¶đł đŽđȘđŻđŽ.
đđ°đ„ [đŽđąđșđŽ] đ”đ©đŠ đžđąđšđŠđŽ [đ°đ§ đŽđȘđŻ] đȘđŽ đ„đŠđąđ”đ©, đ”đ©đȘđŽ đȘđŽ đ”đłđ¶đŠ đąđŻđ„ đȘđłđłđŠđ§đ¶đ”đąđŁđđŠ đŠđ·đŠđŻ đ§đ°đł đąđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđ”đŽ đ”đ° đ„đŠđŻđș, đžđ©đș?
1. đđŠđ€đąđ¶đŽđŠ đŠđ·đŠđłđșđ°đŻđŠ đŽđȘđŻđŽ, đŻđ° đ°đŻđŠ đȘđŽ đ±đŠđłđ§đŠđ€đ”.
2. đđŠđ€đąđ¶đŽđŠ đ”đ©đŠ đžđąđšđŠđŽ [đ°đ§ đŽđȘđŻ] đȘđŽ đ„đŠđąđ”đ©, đŠđ·đŠđłđșđ°đŻđŠ, [đžđ©đŠđ”đ©đŠđł] đșđ°đ¶ đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ·đŠ đ°đł đŻđ°đ” đžđȘđđ đđđ.
đđ°đ” đșđ°đ¶đł đŁđłđŠđąđŹđ”đ©đłđ°đ¶đšđ© đŽđ€đȘđŠđŻđ€đŠ đ°đł đŽđ¶đ±đŠđł [đźđŠđ„đȘđ€đȘđŻđŠđŽ] đ°đł đ€đ¶đ”đ”đȘđŻđš đŠđ„đšđŠ đ”đŠđ€đ©đŻđ°đđ°đšđș đ°đł đąđ”đ©đŠđȘđŽđ”đŽ [đŁđŠđđȘđŠđ§đŽ], đ°đł đșđ°đ¶đł đŁđŠđŽđ” đ±đ©đȘđđ°đŽđ°đ±đ©đȘđŠđŽ đ€đąđŻ đ€đ©đąđŻđšđŠ đ”đ©đąđ”.....đŽđ°đłđłđș.
@Slickid007:
đđłđŠđąđ” đČđ¶đŠđŽđ”đȘđ°đŻđŽ đąđŽđŹđŠđ„ , đŻđ°đž đžđąđ”đ€đ© đ©đ°đž đŻđ° đ°đŻđŠ đžđ©đ° đ€đđąđȘđźđŽ đ”đ° đŁđŠ đą đ€đ©đłđȘđŽđ”đȘđąđŻ đžđ°đŻâđ” đŁđŠ đąđŁđđŠ đ”đ° đąđŻđŽđžđŠđł đąđŻđș đ°đ§ đ”đ©đŠđŽđŠ đČđ¶đŠđŽđ”đȘđ°đŻđŽ đȘđŻ đ”đ©đŠ đ€đ°đźđźđŠđŻđ”đŽ; đąđđ đ”đ©đŠđș đ„đ° đȘđŽ đ§đ°đđđ°đž đđȘđŹđŠ đ”đ©đŠ đ§đ°đ°đđȘđŽđ© đŽđ©đŠđŠđ± đ”đ©đŠđș đąđłđŠ .
As someone that professes to be a Christian, I will typically any and all questions that pertain to the gospel of the kingdom of God. Your anti-Christian taunt is not just false, but makes IMO what you say in your post foolish. Iâm not asking, but Iâm sure there are some that are reading this thread that wonder why you would make such a bombastic statement knowing that what you stated wasnât representative of all Christians.
@Carlton3ru
đ đąđŻđŽđžđŠđłđŠđ„ đȘđ” đŽđźđąđłđ” đšđ¶đș.
No, actually, IMO you đđąđđ§âđ satisfactorily answer any of the OPâs questions; I suspect that you didnât know how. I did notice that you paraphrased Rom. 6:23, which was good. Take a moment though and read my response to @xonphusedâs post.
[1/2]
@SandersLam69990
đđ·đ°đđ¶đ”đȘđ°đŻ đȘđŽ đ”đ©đŠ đ§đ°đ¶đŻđ„đąđ”đȘđ°đŻ đ°đ§ đźđ°đ„đŠđłđŻ đŁđȘđ°đđ°đšđș.
What makes you say this? I speak as an scientist and an academic in pointing out to you that evolutionary biology is đ§đšđ the foundation of modern biology, not even a branch of science, but is a subfield of biology.
Contrary to what you have been persuaded to believe, evolution is pseudoscience at best since evolution is đ§đšđ an empirically verifiable scientific theory, and is đ§đšđ settled science.âŁ
đđŻ đŽđ€đȘđŠđŻđ€đŠ, đą "đ”đ©đŠđ°đłđș" đȘđŽ đŻđ°đ” đą đšđ¶đŠđŽđŽ; đȘđ” đȘđŽ đą đžđŠđđ-đ”đŠđŽđ”đŠđ„, đ€đ°đźđ±đłđŠđ©đŠđŻđŽđȘđ·đŠ đŠđčđ±đđąđŻđąđ”đȘđ°đŻ đŁđąđ€đŹđŠđ„ đŁđș đźđąđŽđŽđȘđ·đŠ đŠđ·đȘđ„đŠđŻđ€đŠ.
But evolution is not a scientific theory.
đđ·đŠđł 98% đ°đ§ đŽđ€đȘđŠđŻđ”đȘđŽđ”đŽ đąđ€đ€đŠđ±đ” đŠđ·đ°đđ¶đ”đȘđ°đŻ, đąđŻđ„ đȘđ” đŽđ¶đ€đ€đŠđŽđŽđ§đ¶đđđș đ±đłđŠđ„đȘđ€đ”đŽ đ±đąđ”đ”đŠđłđŻđŽ đȘđŻ đšđŠđŻđŠđ”đȘđ€đŽ, đ§đ°đŽđŽđȘđđŽ, đąđŻđ„ đŻđąđ”đ¶đłđŠ.
Over 98% of scientists believe in this fairy tale? Iâve heard you, but this is false. Iâll repeat here what I wrote in a previous post that you may still find it difficult to comprehend:
First, with respect to the ToE, it isnât possible to observe the past. Observation is an activity that utilizes the senses to collect data in the present. We cannot use the senses to collect empirical data about past events. While it is possible to examine past events in the present, a degree of interpretation and inference will always be required to establish how such past events occurred.âŁ
âŁ
Second, itâs not possible to design experiments to determine what happened in the past. Controlled observations/experiments may determine whether an event is possible in a specific situation, but the exact conditions that existed in a past moment in time can never be replicated. Conclusions about the past cannot be reached through inductive reasoning. Such conclusions or explanations are made through abductive reasoning.âŁ
âŁ
Third, as Iâve already stated, itâs not possible to predict the past. Science predicts FUTURE events arising from certain situations based on CURRENT observations of nature. It is not used to make predictions of what happened in the past based on general observations of nature. Nor can it be used to establish the past events that led to the current observationsâthis would be the remit of abduction.âŁ
âŁ
Using the scientific method, one observes what happens and then, based on those observations, postulate a theory as to what might be true, test this theory by making further observations and by conducting experiments; observe what results to see if predictions based on the theory are fulfilled.âŁ
The ToE is said to involve observed frequency changes in alleles, but these frequency changes are PRESUMED, for such changes have NOT been observed, and, as Sir Karl Popper has pointed out, that while natural selection is a testable hypothesis, the ToE isnât subject to the possibility of empirical falsification, which means that whatever one thinks evolution to be, WHAT IT ISNâT is a legitimate scientific theory. I call the ToE narrative pseudoscience. Geology is a branch of science. Physics is a branch of science. Chemistry, Astronomy, Mathematics, Botany, Zoology and Genetics are each branches of science. Evolutionary biology is a subfield of biology, but, again, it is NOT a branch of science.
You like to talk, but youâve never attended college and have no degree, which is what makes it difficult for you to appreciate how foolish your pushback sounds. You clearly do not understand the things Iâve been saying to you here, which I imagine a high school graduate should be able to understand. Be that as it may, below Iâve added the following remarks that were posted by @darwintojesus:
[contâd]
[2/2]
Evolution isnât that hard to understand, animals change gradually over time as random genetic mutations are selected for on account of their giving some kind of survival advantage. Those genetic advantages are then spread through the populations. Itâs not hard to understand, and most theists had to learn it in school and weâve been constantly inundated with evolutionary propaganda. Itâs not that we âdonât get it,â itâs that you* donât get the problems with it. Hereâs a few:
1. Most, if not all mutations are harmful. Imagine trying to write code for a video game using something that nearly always distorts whatâs already there rather than adding something good or meaningful, and then thinking youâd get a great game this way. That makes no sense.
2. Like it or not, you need abiogenesis for evolution to work as a naturalistic theory that explains life. You need some way to go from no life to life, before you can meaningfully posit evolution⊠and the more we learn about life the more insane that prospect looks.
3. Thereâs no evidence that tiny changes over time can create the kind of complexity we see in living organisms. The chasm between a birdâs beak changing length and something like an organ forming from a non-organ is enormous. Atheists conflate these things, but imagine saying the sand on the beach changes slightly every day so thatâs what makes the sand castle. Small changes are just that, small changes. You need something that can create insane feats of engineering (like the wing) from scratch. The cause posited by evolution is an insufficient explanation.
4. Naturalistic evolution is also absurd. If it was actually true youâd have to say a heart isnât for anything, it just happens to pump blood. A lung isnât for breathing, thatâs just what it happens to do. Feet arenât for walking, feet happen to be used for walking. Nothing is FOR anything. Thereâs no design, no intention, no telos. In other words, no proper function. If people really believed that you could kiss medicine goodbye.





