The existance of God

[BCRE8TVE]

Hello all!

I started this thread at the suggestion of MorningStar, so that I as an atheist can present what I believe and do not believe. This will be an open thread as well, for all those who want to join I suppose, but I will be mostly focussing on MorningStar's posts.

As an atheist, I do not believe in God. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and I have not yet seen such extraordinary evidence. I am open to the idea that I may encounter such evidence here, and that it will change my mind. In the meantime, this is what I believe specifically about religion.


Man always wants to know, to understand. Our brains are made to seek patterns, as patterns can help us find out food or danger, help us survive. When man looked into the savage and careless nature, unpredictable weather, they had no way of understanding it all. So they came up with deities to explain it. These deities made them feel safe, protected.

Fast-forward to the time when towns are being built. Whereas before shamans went with the tribe, and offerings were made to the spirits or gods or whatever depending on the hunt, now they could have a permanent place of worship. They could make others believe that if they gave enough to their gods (through the temple of course) that rain would come, no disease would harm them, etc. That is the bad side, the controlling aspect of religion. The good side is it helped unite people, it helped make a society. Whereas cavemen would bash each others heads with rocks to take whatever they wanted, primitive religions now told them 'If you steal from your neighbour, big man in the sky will punish you'. That element of fear controlled us out of primitive behaviour and into a social behaviour. The places of worship also offered divine rewards for being good, such as afterlife, etc.
Of course, there have been abuses by churches against the people, but that was caused either by greedy people at the head of religious institutes, or of the kind of individuals being raised in that certain theological background produced.

As many different cultures and people started meeting, clashes were inevitable. Stronger religions enabled people to be more faithful, more stronger, have better morale, to believe in a greater cause. Religions that catered mostly to tell people to be good and did nothing to protect them, were wiped out by aggressive religions. Those aggressive religions may have been victim of their own aggressiveness, in that people in that religion started rebelling against the violence. Through this natural selection, religions came along that managed to perfectly balance violence and peace, to be able to convert as many people as possible, to prevent their converts from turning away, and to keep them happy. Religions learned to exploit the gullibility of man to propagate themselves.

All this culminated into a fantastically great social shaping tool that enabled men to create and live in a stable society. If you stop thinking of religions as real and see instead what goals religion seeks to accomplish and how they achieve it, it all makes sense. All the contradictions in the holy books don't matter one bit, because while it may be historically accurate, passed on as legend, the fantastic aspect is not true. All that is left is the cold hard facts.

Was the spread of religion good or bad? Who knows, maybe it was inevitable with the way the primate brain evolved.

Is this theory 100% accurate? I don't think so. But I do think I may not be too far off the mark either.

 

[MorningStar]

As an atheist, I do not believe in God. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and I have not yet seen such extraordinary evidence.

You mean extraordinary evidence like the galactically intricate fine tuning of the universe, quantum mechanics, and our human bodies? What more would you need to establish extraordinary evidence?

Religions learned to exploit the gullibility of man to propagate themselves.

So, apparently you view Christian faith as being a 'gullibility', correct? If so, do you not see any difference in these gullibilities and religious faith at all?

All the contradictions in the holy books don't matter one bit, because while it may be historically accurate, passed on as legend, the fantastic aspect is not true. All that is left is the cold hard facts.

While I agree that contradictions within holy books are largely overrated as being important in discerning a 'perfect and inerrant dogma', it does not mean the contradictions within the Christian bible reduce the doctrine to mere fairy tales that are worthless or completely untrue.

Was the spread of religion good or bad? Who knows, maybe it was inevitable with the way the primate brain evolved.

I would have to say the spread of the positive aspects of religion, the moral views, the teachings of tolerance and forgiveness, love, etc. are most certainly beneficial to mankind. I do think the division religion causes has been quite woeful and even embarrassing to Christians, but given the amount of charitable works religion caters too, its hardly a wholly bad thing.

So, just to understand your background, did you ever consider yourself religious/spiritual or a follower of any dogma at any time in your life?

 

[BCRE8TVE]

You mean extraordinary evidence like the galactically intricate fine tuning of the universe, quantum mechanics, and our human bodies? What more would you need to establish extraordinary evidence?

A fine-tuned universe and intricate human bodies are only evidence of their own existence, nothing more, until someone produces a mechanism to explain them and how this is evidence for a religion.

So, apparently you view Christian faith as being a 'gullibility', correct? If so, do you not see any difference in these gullibilities and religious faith at all?

I meant that religion spread thanks to the gullibility of man, not that religion itself is gullible. But I don't see any difference between all religious faiths as in to know if one or the other truly was divinely inspired. I do see the differences the consequences of different religions produce though.

While I agree that contradictions within holy books are largely overrated as being important in discerning a 'perfect and inerrant dogma', it does not mean the contradictions within the Christian bible reduce the doctrine to mere fairy tales that are worthless or completely untrue.

No, you are right, it takes much more than just the errors in the bible to see how it is not really the hand of a divinity at work within religion. And even if it is all fairy tales, doesn't mean it is worthless. If it were, then the Fables of LaFontaine would have absolutely no morals, the fairy tales and stories and legends we tell ourselves would have no meaning either. The moral is in the story itself, regardless of where the story comes from.

I would have to say the spread of the positive aspects of religion, the moral views, the teachings of tolerance and forgiveness, love, etc. are most certainly beneficial to mankind. I do think the division religion causes has been quite woeful and even embarrassing to Christians, but given the amount of charitable works religion caters too, its hardly a wholly bad thing.

This is what I meant that I didn't know if religion was good or bad. Religion tends to bring out the best and the worst in men, it seems. Also, you have to ask, did the morals we use come from the Bible and were given to us, or did we incorporate our morals into the Bible?

So, just to understand your background, did you ever consider yourself religious/spiritual or a follower of any dogma at any time in your life?

No. I was raised in a catholic family, went through the catholic school system (kindergarten to 12th grade) and never once believed. I was honestly surprised to learn that people actually did believe in this, as though it were all real.

 

[farout]

There is a saying "for those who want to know the truth there is more than enough truth to believe in. For those who are convienced there is not enough truth to believe, there is not enough truth to prove anything."

Perhaps you have predetermined you do not want to believe? Many have started to prove the Bible is a false book, and while in the process found not only was there a loving God, but the Bible was true. This might be a good challange for you.....if you really want to know.

 

[MorningStar]

A fine-tuned universe and intricate human bodies are only evidence of their own existence, nothing more, until someone produces a mechanism to explain them and how this is evidence for a religion.

Well, I guess that view still fits the idea that there can never been any proof of God outside our own minds as it would destroy the need for faith.

I have heard many atheists say that our religious faith is merely a delusion, and to wit, I cannot prove my God outside of my own reality. So, truly, it would seem a delusion to an outsider....yet perfectly true to me....a very discouraging process indeed, but it is what it is.

Have you ever experienced something you cannot fully explain?

I meant that religion spread thanks to the gullibility of man, not that religion itself is gullible. But I don't see any difference between all religious faiths as in to know if one or the other truly was divinely inspired. I do see the differences the consequences of different religions produce though.

As above, sense our belief is a inter-personal thing, it would seem as both a delusion and a form of gullibility to the outsider....and yet still perfectly true to the believer.

Of course the ultimate irony is that Christians often view other religions as cults, and understand the gullibility cult members express when devoting themselves to these less than moral ideologies. It always seems different on the other side of the fence until you are personally touched in your heart and spirit.

No, you are right, it takes much more than just the errors in the bible to see how it is not really the hand of a divinity at work within religion. And even if it is all fairy tales, doesn't mean it is worthless. If it were, then the Fables of LaFontaine would have absolutely no morals, the fairy tales and stories and legends we tell ourselves would have no meaning either. The moral is in the story itself, regardless of where the story comes from.

As a Christian, I once believed that atheists were Satan worshipers. After researching these things closer I realized atheists didn't even believe in Satan, the devil, or any deity. Yet, I see some truly horrific examples of atheism destroying mankind. Hitler and Kim Jong-Il for example were atheists and some of the worst examples of immoral behavior...how do you explain this influence on them?

This is what I meant that I didn't know if religion was good or bad. Religion tends to bring out the best and the worst in men, it seems. Also, you have to ask, did the morals we use come from the Bible and were given to us, or did we incorporate our morals into the Bible?

Good question. While most Christians feel moral came directly from the bible, I understand there MUST have been moral people long before Judaism and Christianity was created. However, personally speaking, I do think our innate moral character was instilled by God as even the youngest children show signs of moral character far before they are taught more complex moral behavior.

No. I was raised in a catholic family, went through the catholic school system (kindergarten to 12th grade) and never once believed. I was honestly surprised to learn that people actually did believe in this, as though it were all real.

I've spoken to many atheists who never had any belief growing up, as well as some who were raised believers then lost their faith. I see certain differences in these two types of atheists. For example, it seems those who never had faith as a child seem to be far more harsh in their tone towards others, mainly the religious. You seem to be less harsh so that is refreshing.

Do you see any differences in these two types of atheists?

 

[Julie1983]

You might be interested in researching the Fibonacci sequence. There is a mathematical design that is repeated everywhere in creation. It is on your ear, on sea shells, on sunflowers, your index finger, starfish, pineapples, on waves, on the milky way and much more. It is the same exact sequence over and over and points to an intelligent creator which we know as the Lord. The fingerprint of God. Search the title, The Fingerprint Of God on you tube to see this proven. The version uploaded by the user 'biziarek' is the original version.

 

[gdemoss]

God is not interested in converting atheists outside of the preaching of the Gospel. If you have heard the true Gospel and have declared it foolishness, there is little hope you will ever get it figured out. Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow you may die.

The Gospel can be found by clicking arrow above

May God have mercy upon you and grant you repentance to the acknowledging of the truth through his goodness which is what actually leads people to repentance.

Gary

 

[BCRE8TVE]

Farout
Actually I never started believing, and never saw a good reason to begin believing since. I would believe if I thought it were logical and the appropriate thing to do.

Well, I guess that view still fits the idea that there can never been any proof of God outside our own minds as it would destroy the need for faith.

I have heard many atheists say that our religious faith is merely a delusion, and to wit, I cannot prove my God outside of my own reality. So, truly, it would seem a delusion to an outsider....yet perfectly true to me....a very discouraging process indeed, but it is what it is.

Have you ever experienced something you cannot fully explain?

Unfortunately, no matter how true to you, doesn't mean God exists. I see the dilemma, and I understand it. I will not be so arrogant as to call it delusion though.
And no, not that I can recall off the top of my head.

As above, sense our belief is a inter-personal thing, it would seem as both a delusion and a form of gullibility to the outsider....and yet still perfectly true to the believer.

Of course the ultimate irony is that Christians often view other religions as cults, and understand the gullibility cult members express when devoting themselves to these less than moral ideologies. It always seems different on the other side of the fence until you are personally touched in your heart and spirit.

Well, that's my entire argument How do you know which faith is 'true', which really is the one true god, when everyone says they are right? What kind of standards can you use to test out each hypothesis?

As a Christian, I once believed that atheists were Satan worshipers. After researching these things closer I realized atheists didn't even believe in Satan, the devil, or any deity. Yet, I see some truly horrific examples of atheism destroying mankind. Hitler and Kim Jong-Il for example were atheists and some of the worst examples of immoral behavior...how do you explain this influence on them?

I thank you for the efforts you have done. Understanding between people can only lead to peace.
As for atheism destroying mankind, it is not sure whether Hitler was Christian or not, but that doesn't terribly matter. The very first treaty the Nazi Party signed was with the Holy See, establishing Nazism as an official Church recognized movement. He used christian messages to inspire (his duty before God) and hate (Jews killed Jesus) to masterful effect.
From what I know of Kim Jong-Il, it is my understanding he has created a state religion of which he is the 'God' if you will. In a sense yes he is an atheist, but I also think he's raving mad if not insane. Atheism is not among his most worrisome traits.
A great many immoral behaviours were committed by every religon, every organization. What do all these groups have in common? People. The source of immoralities is not in what people believe, but from people themselves.

Good question. While most Christians feel moral came directly from the bible, I understand there MUST have been moral people long before Judaism and Christianity was created. However, personally speaking, I do think our innate moral character was instilled by God as even the youngest children show signs of moral character far before they are taught more complex moral behavior.

Thank you for being so intellectually honest. I appreciate it.
Children learn by watching and copying their parents. Why do they babble so much? They hear us babbling and attempt the same. There are many surprising instances of children learning so much simply by looking, while we are completely unaware of it. When you point your finger at something, a very young child (I think it's below 6 or 9 months of age) will look at your finger. Above that age, they will look at what you are pointing. Did we have to explain this complicated behaviour? No.

I've spoken to many atheists who never had any belief growing up, as well as some who were raised believers then lost their faith. I see certain differences in these two types of atheists. For example, it seems those who never had faith as a child seem to be far more harsh in their tone towards others, mainly the religious. You seem to be less harsh so that is refreshing.

Do you see any differences in these two types of atheists?

I have not spoken to many atheists online, but I have seen some appalling messages from atheists lashing out in anger at theists, and of other atheists treating theists like they were less intelligent than the norm. I think it's because the former kind of atheists deconverted, and they resented the fact that they had been lied to all along. The second type may come from the fact they've been raised by atheists who had deconverted, and were taught of the stupid things theists believe.
Of course there are also atheists who lash out because they feel constant pressure from a very religious society all around them (mainly the south and the bible belt, I'm told), and it's harder to find which one is the case.

I was raised in a very liberal home, where there was zero pressure to believe. I have told my family that I didn't believe. They were surprised, but accepted it and moved on. In Canada, it's as though religion just isn't that important. Nobody up here acts like religion is a big deal, trying to save people's souls, or being openly atheist and pointing out the horrors in the bible. There is nothing like that here. I just grew up to be myself, to learn who I was, and I learned to respect others.


Julie

I know the Fibonacci sequence, and I know it is found in a lot of very surprising places. It just so happens that Fibonacci's sequence is the most organized way for sunflowers to store their seeds, etc. I do admit it is very surprising, but there is no connection between Fibonacci's sequence and God. You'd think He'd have told us in the bible or something, no?


gdemoss

I have not heard the gospels in great details, I have not read the bible, nor have I had the bible read to me. I will read the link you provided, thank you.
The most I have read was the Illustrated Bible for Children some 10 years ago or so. I am fluent with the most popular ancient testament 'tales' (I'm sorry, if there is a proper noun to describe these events, I do not know it, no offence intended) and I know of the good deeds of Jesus. I don't know the bible in great detail though.
I just find it unfortunate that God made such acts. One example would be the tower of Babel. We now know it is impossible to reach God's realm by going up into the sky, because we've gone to the moon, and he wasn't there. Therefore, why did God confuse the workers at Babel? They would not have succeeded anyways, and would have failed. Perhaps their failure would have been a good lesson for them, a lesson in humility, but God chose instead to separate the unified people into smaller fragments. It is for this and many other reasons I do not agree with the bible. I consider each story based on its virtues alone, granting no brownie points because it is a tale of my culture.

I do not understand how theists are skeptical of all the supernatural claims of others, and yet accept everything written in the Bible without so much as a doubt.

 

[Brother Mike]

Numbers and God.

I know the Fibonacci sequence, and I know it is found in a lot of very surprising places. It just so happens that Fibonacci's sequence is the most organized way for sunflowers to store their seeds, etc. I do admit it is very surprising, but there is no connection between Fibonacci's sequence and God. You'd think He'd have told us in the bible or something, no?

It's also the most successful trading tool used by those on Wall Street. One would have to assume that there is no God to not see the connection.

One just has to look around and see tree's, flowers, grass, the different animals and how they react in the Worlds Eco systems to grasp that none of it came from some cells walking out of the ocean. It's mathematically impossible for all these things to be here, in the order they are as explained by evolutionist. It does not matter how much time you add to it.

You can go to a junk yard with all the parts in perfect condition for a Mercedes, you can blow that junk up over and over for 4 billion years, and not one time when the dust clears will there be a fully assembled Mercedes. How much more the complexity of living things?

Jesus Is Lord.

 

[David777]

Hello BCRE8TVE.

You said,

A great many immoral behaviours were committed by every religon, every organization. What do all these groups have in common? People. The source of immoralities is not in what people believe, but from people themselves.

That was a startling insight you displayed BCRE8TVE.

The term immorality.

You are a clever monkey!

But, what do you mean by immorality?

 

[brakelite]

Hello BCRE8TIVE

Hi. You claim there is no connection between the Fibonacci sequence (also known as the golden ratio) and God. You suggested that if it was in the Bible, you may reconsider?
Here are two sites that I thought you might find interesting, because they both reveal a very definite Biblical connection to the sequence. A mathematical formula that according to evolutionists ought not to have been understood 4000 years ago because we have only recently "evolved' intelligently enough to understand such things.
Scariest book of all time.: Noah's Ark location
Golden ratio - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

That the existence today of the remains of Noah's ark ought to be sufficient to convince many that the Biblical account of the flood must be true, the fact that the ancient people who built the Great pyramid and those who buried Darius the Great knew of the arks location ought to be the clincher.

 

[BCRE8TVE]

It's also the most successful trading tool used by those on Wall Street. One would have to assume that there is no God to not see the connection.

It is? On Wall Street? I know nothing of economics, so I don't know how such a sequence would be found there. Do you mean interest rates?
As for the connection, you assume there is a connection. I don't assume there is. If you can provide me with a mechanism of how the Fibonacci sequence is directly related to God, I would be happy to believe you.

One just has to look around and see tree's, flowers, grass, the different animals and how they react in the Worlds Eco systems to grasp that none of it came from some cells walking out of the ocean. It's mathematically impossible for all these things to be here, in the order they are as explained by evolutionist. It does not matter how much time you add to it.

You can go to a junk yard with all the parts in perfect condition for a Mercedes, you can blow that junk up over and over for 4 billion years, and not one time when the dust clears will there be a fully assembled Mercedes. How much more the complexity of living things?

I do believe you misinterpret evolution, or do not know how it works. It did not come from cells walking out of the ocean, you are right. It is a lot more complicated than just that.
As for mathematical impossibility, there is always a small chance. The chance might be 1 times 10 to the negative hundred billion power, but there is always a chance. We cannot say it IS zero, but we can treat is as though it were.
However, evolution is a way to 'cheat' probabilities, if you wish. The probability to roll 50 6's in one shot with 50 dice is 1/6 X 1/6 X 1/6, formulated as (1/6)^50, which is about 1.23 X 10^-39th power, or 1.23 with 39 zeros in front of it. You'd have to reroll a huge amount of times to get 50 6's in one shot. However, what evolution does, is the moment a die falls on a 6, you do not re-roll that die. Therefore, when rolling 50 dice, 1/6 of them will fall on a 6. The next time, you reroll only 42 dice, then only 35 dice, then only 29, 24, 20, 17, 14, 12, 10, 8, 7, 6, 5, etc etc etc. You are significantly reducing the amount of time it would take for you to arrive at 50 dice all falling on a 6 by NOT rerolling the good dice. That is exactly what evolution does. Whichever organism survives, passes on its genes. Whichever organism dies, does not.
That is why I am wary of statistical impossibilities, because the difference between an accurate representation and a straw-man is so huge, it is very easy to arrive at impressive numbers.

Jesus Is Lord.

Evolution does not contradict that, mind you.




David

You said,

A great many immoral behaviours were committed by every religon, every organization. What do all these groups have in common? People. The source of immoralities is not in what people believe, but from people themselves.

That was a startling insight you displayed BCRE8TVE.

The term immorality.

You are a clever monkey!

But, what do you mean by immorality?

Actually, the correct term would be that we are smart apes, as monkeys are a different family, but whatever

The question of immorality. In many cases the definition is very clear-cut, but in many many cases, morality is very ambiguous.

We agree that stealing is bad, it is immoral. However, if your life, or if the life of someone you loved, was in danger? Yes you would.
Cannibalism is immoral. If you were in a plane crash, and in order to survive, you had to eat the bodies of those who had died, would you do it? Yes you would.

Life is not clear-cut, it is not black and white. Some may ignore that if they wish, but it doesn't change the fact that morals are relative to a degree. Morals are relative according to culture, to what you were raised with. However, good people can grow up in terrible environments, which shows that the environment is not the only factor. There is a part of us which has an innate morality. People with genetic problems can show a lack of morality, such as people with the 'superman' syndrome, where they have 1 Y chromosome and 2 X chromosomes. These people are naturally more aggressive. Other people have some kind of problem with their brain structure, some kind of chemical imbalance, and they are unable to feel emotions. These people are psychopaths. However, not all psychopaths are evil. They only do what is beneficial to them. However, they also avoid to be recognized as selfish, because it would be detrimental to them. It is logical for them not to seem psychopath. Where is the morality in that?
So to me, morals are relative. There is a core of morals we have, which was probably bred into us by evolution when we began living as tribes. There is a part of our morals which comes from our upbringing. And there is a part of our morals which comes from the chemicals in our brains, which comes from genes, which are affected by evolution. Some people may innately have 'more' morality than others, but their upbringing may increase or decrease that amount of morality.

In short, morals are relative.

If you wish to show me how you think morals are absolute, go right ahead! I will be very interested in reading your thoughts, and will not be disrespectful. I am very curious as to how exactly morals are linked to God, because I have never heard an explanation of that.

 

[David777]

Yo.

I knew an atheist who frequently used the term "clever monkey".
I was joking of course BCRE8TVE.

I asked what you implied by immorality.

This is part of your answer,

There is a core of morals we have, which was probably bred into us by evolution when we began living as tribes.

You have made an enormous statement of faith just in this one line.

You have confidence in the belief in the evolution of man!

You have confidence in the belief that morality is injected through evolution!

OK, so far BCRE8TVE?

 

[Julie1983]

If monkeys turned into humans then why are there still monkeys? Why havent any other species evolved and become intelligent? Evolution makes no sense at all. Atheism, the belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. You choose that over the Bible?

 

[gdemoss]

gdemoss

I have not heard the gospels in great details, I have not read the bible, nor have I had the bible read to me. I will read the link you provided, thank you.
The most I have read was the Illustrated Bible for Children some 10 years ago or so. I am fluent with the most popular ancient testament 'tales' (I'm sorry, if there is a proper noun to describe these events, I do not know it, no offence intended) and I know of the good deeds of Jesus. I don't know the bible in great detail though.
I just find it unfortunate that God made such acts. One example would be the tower of Babel. We now know it is impossible to reach God's realm by going up into the sky, because we've gone to the moon, and he wasn't there. Therefore, why did God confuse the workers at Babel? They would not have succeeded anyways, and would have failed. Perhaps their failure would have been a good lesson for them, a lesson in humility, but God chose instead to separate the unified people into smaller fragments. It is for this and many other reasons I do not agree with the bible. I consider each story based on its virtues alone, granting no brownie points because it is a tale of my culture.

I do not understand how theists are skeptical of all the supernatural claims of others, and yet accept everything written in the Bible without so much as a doubt.

The tower of Babel was about the self destruction of man based upon his desire to do things his own way. God twisted their language to cause them to be divided and scared of one another in order that they would turn to seek him for help. It was to their benefit that God did this. One has to remember that this has never been about us so much as it has been about God.

 

[brakelite]

As for mathematical impossibility, there is always a small chance. The chance might be 1 times 10 to the negative hundred billion power, but there is always a chance. We cannot say it IS zero, but we can treat is as though it were. However, evolution is a way to 'cheat' probabilities, if you wish. The probability to roll 50 6's in one shot with 50 dice is 1/6 X 1/6 X 1/6, formulated as (1/6)^50, which is about 1.23 X 10^-39th power, or 1.23 with 39 zeros in front of it. You'd have to reroll a huge amount of times to get 50 6's in one shot. However, what evolution does, is the moment a die falls on a 6, you do not re-roll that die. Therefore, when rolling 50 dice, 1/6 of them will fall on a 6. The next time, you reroll only 42 dice, then only 35 dice, then only 29, 24, 20, 17, 14, 12, 10, 8, 7, 6, 5, etc etc etc. You are significantly reducing the amount of time it would take for you to arrive at 50 dice all falling on a 6 by NOT rerolling the good dice. That is exactly what evolution does. Whichever organism survives, passes on its genes. Whichever organism dies, does not.

I have a problem with your dice analogy. Let us apply that to a living organism, for example the honey bee.
So the dice are rolled, and there appears upon said insect a ligament on the leg. How does the evolutionary process know that that ligament was necessary to the development of sacs for the transport of nectar? Many other dice need to be rolled also, all coming up trumps at precisely the same time, to form the various essential ingredients in the making of just one sac. The dice need to be rolled again to make the other sac (the bee has two), again many times for all the necessary bits and pieces to form said sac. Then it has to be placed in the correct spot. Just in the right place to be most convenient for the bee to work with. How many bees died because the evolutionary process took millions of years to get the sac in the right place?
So okay, an insect manages to survive the process thus far, the two sacs are there, correctly positioned and then the dice can be thrown to get the next step, right? But wait. Why should the evolutionary process accept the sacs in the first place? What possible good can they accomplish when the process knows nothing of nectar, of hive making, and all the myriad of other factors that must be incorporated into the life of the honey bee? Which came first? The instinct to gather nectar? The sacs? The legs to attach them to? The variety of skills and mathematical acumen to create the hive? The dance that relays the directions of the flowers to fellow bees?

The entire evolutionary process falls flat on its collective backside because each and every part of the whole is essential, yet on its own would have been rejected because it would make no sense until or unless the rest was established before it. In other words, for the process to make sense and to work, each part had to be established last.

Therefore your dice analogy needs some adjustment. Every dice of the fifty, ( an extremely conservative number by the way when considering all the variables and different things that need to be factored in to any living organism) must turn up on the six first time, simultaneously, and without fail. Otherwise the program will come up with the answer...defective....and rethrow again...all the dice.

Instant creation is the only logical and reasonable answer to the question of beginnings.

Psalm 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses.
8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him.
9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

 

[Julie1983]

BCRE8TVE the Bible says that you will be thrown into the lake of fire and that you will be tormented day and night forever if your name is not written in the Book of Life. Can you imagine how long a million years is? Eternity will barely have begun. In fact it just never ever ends. Burning, burning burning, forever. No way out, no light, no hope. You have a chance right now to escape that. If you confess with your mouth Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. Just please try and imagine what it will be like to burn forever, no escape? The thought of it horrifies me to my very core and I cling to Christ my Saviour.

 

[s.i.e.]

Regarding the OP of this thread: that's quite the chronological account of world religion's, and the hows/whys of it coming about. You say you rely on science, logic, and rational? For you to come to these conclusions based on your fanciful account of world history, you may be well served to do some more homework on that, my friend...being that you're drawing some wide-sweeping conclusions that shape your world-view, all based on your rather cynical account of the last several thousand years of human history.

Not to mention that you could drive a Mac-truck through the gaping holes you've left out in your story...but we're not here to talk about that. We're here to put the idea of God, on trail, right?

Such fun.

I can't begin to have the time to enter into such a complete discussion...but here are some initial thoughts on your OP that I do have:

Man always wants to know, to understand.

And why is this? Who, or "what", would have caused man to have developed in such a way as this?

This craving for knowledge and understanding? And why? Does your local feline share this trait? How 'bout your local primate? No? Ok...your local K-9, perhaps?

So then...is this faceless/nameless thing called evolution responsible for evolution'izing mankind into such a curious and interested creature?

And what does man seek, anyways? Or, how 'bout the why of it?

I don't suppose science can answer these types of questions, can it?

If so, do tell...as I remain....well....curious???

Our brains are made to seek patterns, as patterns can help us find out food or danger, help us survive.

Oh...so, perhaps, this may answer the what's the reason question, and your answer is: survival.

But then...why? Why would ma-nature have evolved us in such a way that would drive us towards...survival??

After all, what does ma-nature care of our survival in the first place? It's a wild, dynamic, unsafe-and-unfriendly environment, that ma-nature has created all around us, right? So...why should it care for something as trivial and temporal, as human-beings survival?

By the way...you said above that our brains are made....and I'll take that as far more than a simple Freudian-slip. You have a drive in you that is carrying you towards your answers, my friend...and it's driving you towards an undeniable belief in God. ;-)

Anyways...back to your survival proposition: I'm sure you have a scientific reason to explain why mother-nature and/or this evolution force would have caused man to develop in such a way as to survive?

Again, please provide this evidence...because such an extraordinary claim can surely be backed up by extraordinary evidence??

When man looked into the savage and careless nature, unpredictable weather, they had no way of understanding it all. So they came up with deities to explain it.

Hmm...I guess I just covered this, above...but here, you agree. So, at least that's a starting point: yes, nature is savage and careless, from a certain lens. That said, as hard as it may be to understand...can you deny it's absolute beauty?

Again...if you're going to stand on the scientific aspects to explain all things, I suppose I should also ask you to provide the scientific explanation for making all things so beautiful, even if they're also so wild??

I'm all ears on that one too...

Religions learned to exploit the gullibility of man to propagate themselves.

Hmm...yes, this is true, in many cases. Even some aspects of Christendom, I suppose.

But "religions" aside...how about Christ. How about what you see in the New Testament: what would that exploit in you? What exploitation does Christ accomplish, if you were to come to him today? What do you risk? What would you lose? What would you gain?

I submit to you, that in the case of Christ: nothing. There is zero exploitation, at all. The same cannot be said for mankind in general, including many religions...but this is not to be said of Christ.

If you stop thinking of religions as real and see instead what goals religion seeks to accomplish and how they achieve it, it all makes sense.

Again: what "agenda" does Christ seem to have, for you? What "goals" or "accomplishments" would be attained by "God's Kingdom" if you were to become a follower of Christ right now?

 

[David777]

Ideologies.

The World is awash with ideas.

Evolution in the end is only just an idea.

I am not even sure that anybody understands the proposition of Evolution.

Empiricism is used as the justification for the idea.

What is empiricism, an idea that knowledge arrives via the senses.

How do we know what we are sensing?

Is it in fact Evolution that we are witnessing or something else?

My brothers we believe, we believe it is.

And it was so, Evolution is a fact, a result of blind chance.

Return my children under the wings of Philosophy.

You have wasted your time, we still have not decided what knowledge represents. There still arguing that one.

Thankyou Jesus that I do not have to be enslaved by ideologies.
You have set me free, liberated from slavery to sin and death.
Revelation is all mankind has in the end. There is no alternative.

 

[Brother Mike]

Time to wrap it up.

Talk Jesus is a forum where we can fellowship and discuss scriptures. It is also a place people can come looking for answers.

The hope is that someone that does not know the Lord Jesus will get truth and light, and plenty of truth has been given to the original poster in hopes that someday it will make sense to them.

Talk Jesus welcomes everyone, but can not be a soapbox for the unsaved, or those that just refuse what is true. There are other forums on the net where they can find "Like Minded" people to voice their thoughts and concerns.

The site Admin Chad has a thread here in which you may continue any discussion on this matter.

http://www.talkjesus.com/evidence-bible-prophecy/22662-atheist-test.html

If you feel you have more that will actually contribute and glorify Jesus, please leave Chad a P.M. to open the thread.

Mike.