The Atheism Thread - Part 7

[Hotwire]

2) God answers those who seek him. We don't have to know everything, that's what you guys seem to want. We just need to know enough and surely, praise God, he has provided... which is why the world is full of believers. God is good.

If there is a God, he obviously doesn't give two s***s about anything that happens here. Just look at how many innocent children suffer from all manner of horrific atrocities. Then look at the parents of those kids who dedicate they're lives to God only to watch as noting happens. If God existed/cared, do you really believe He would allow guys like Joel Osteen to become insanely wealthy while those kids starve?

 

[Doctor Evo]

"scientists"

Cute.

 

[Alex_Spider]

If there is a God, he obviously doesn't give two s***s about anything that happens here. Just look at how many innocent children suffer from all manner of horrific atrocities. Then look at the parents of those kids who dedicate they're lives to God only to watch as noting happens. If God existed/cared, do you really believe He would allow guys like Joel Osteen to become insanely wealthy while those kids starve?

Oh, but he 'll reward them in the afterlife

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

We don't have to know everything, that's what you guys seem to want. We just need to know enough

I think this sums you up just fine.

What if people said that 100 years ago? Or 500? Or 1,000? Or 10, 000?

Trouble is, we don't know enough, you can never be too knowledgeable.

 

[regwec]

If you don't believe in God, then how can you say he doesn't have a just cause for what he does.

Oh, for ****'s sake, really?

Let me try to move this on: we have established that logic and evidence are of no consequence to rodhulk, old tinker, or their ilk. So what do they think about illogical belief systems in themselves?

1) How do you know that your particular collection of prophetic texts (and the particular version of it you use) is the correct one and in the correct form?

2) Why is the book of revelation the "cut off" point? Are all the Christians who read and believed in a bible that still included the apocrypha now in hell?

3) The Qu'ran was supposedly received by Muhammad as a "new testament" rather like the words of Jesus were interpreted by his followers. Why do you find the Christian new testament credible and the testament of Muhammad incredible?

4) What do you think happens to Muslims when they die?

5) What do you think happens to Christians of a slightly different creed to you when they die?

6) Do you believe in predestination or justification by faith alone? If not, why not?

7) If you heard the voice of "god" telling you to, for instance, rape a woman or murder a child, would you do it? If not, why not?

More later.

 

[SV Fan]

5) What do you think happens to Christians of a slightly different creed to you when they die?

This reminds me of a funny quote(no clue who said it) but basically there is something like 32,000 different christian denominations so the only difference between an atheist and a christian in any of these denominations is an atheist believes 1 more denomination is wrong

 

[The End]

After reading your post, I'm still waiting for you to show me the assertions you said I make.

For example, the stars shall not fail from Isaiah 40:26. You mentioned not one would be lacking. Lacking in what. That they die? That's what you say just to deny scripture. You're not fooling anybody here except your fellow anti-Bible believers. You mentioned that I'm using someone else's interpretation. This right here shows how you've been faulty at your approach from the get -go. If you actually read my response, I showed you in this passage that I actually used scripture to tell me what It is saying. I mentioned the NIV version. Funny that you don't mention that in your post. By my saying they won't fail to be in their proper place at the proper time, sure you will find this said somewhere by others, too. But it is scripture that confirms this for me, not just somebody's statement. That's why I very clearly used the NIV translation to support my position. Obviously you're just trying to make it look like my argument is faulty when in fact you have been ignoring almost everything I have said. Here, let me show you a whole host of translations so you can see what is being said in Isaiah 40:26.

New International Version
Lift up your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one and calls forth each of them by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing.

New Living Translation
Look up into the heavens. Who created all the stars? He brings them out like an army, one after another, calling each by its name. Because of his great power and incomparable strength, not a single one is missing.

English Standard Version
Lift up your eyes on high and see: who created these? He who brings out their host by number, calling them all by name, by the greatness of his might, and because he is strong in power not one is missing.

New American Standard Bible
Lift up your eyes on high And see who has created these stars, The One who leads forth their host by number, He calls them all by name; Because of the greatness of His might and the strength of His power, Not one of them is missing.

King James Bible
Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Look up and see: who created these? He brings out the starry host by number; He calls all of them by name. Because of His great power and strength, not one of them is missing.

International Standard Version
"Lift your eyes up to heaven and see who created all these— the one who leads out their vast array of stars by number, calling them all by name— because of his great might and his powerful strength — and not one is missing."

NET Bible
Look up at the sky! Who created all these heavenly lights? He is the one who leads out their ranks; he calls them all by name. Because of his absolute power and awesome strength, not one of them is missing.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
Look at the sky and see. Who created these things? Who brings out the stars one by one? He calls them all by name. Because of the greatness of his might and the strength of his power, not one of them is missing.

Jubilee Bible 2000
Lift up your eyes on high and behold who has created these things; he brings out his host by number; he calls them all by their names; none shall be lacking by the greatness of his might and by the strength of his power.

King James 2000 Bible
Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who has created these things, that brings out their host by number: he calls them all by names by the greatness of his might, for he is strong in power; not one is missing.

American King James Version
Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who has created these things, that brings out their host by number: he calls them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one fails.

American Standard Version
Lift up your eyes on high, and see who hath created these, that bringeth out their host by number; he calleth them all by name; by the greatness of his might, and for that he is strong in power, not one is lacking.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Lift up your eyes on high, and see who hath created these things: who bringeth out their host by number, and calleth them all by their names: by the greatness of his might, and strength, and power, not one of them was missing.

Darby Bible Translation
Lift up your eyes on high, and see! Who hath created these things, bringing out their host by number? He calleth them all by name; through the greatness of his might and strength of power, not one faileth.

English Revised Version
Lift up your eyes on high, and see who hath created these, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by name; by the greatness of his might, and for that he is strong in power, not one is lacking.

Webster's Bible Translation
Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names, by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth.

World English Bible
Lift up your eyes on high, and see who has created these, who brings out their army by number. He calls them all by name. by the greatness of his might, and because he is strong in power, Not one is lacking.

Young's Literal Translation
Lift up on high your eyes, And see -- who hath prepared these? He who is bringing out by number their host, To all of them by name He calleth, By abundance of strength (And he is strong in power) not one is lacking.

Notice all the "not one is missing."

We're looking at the light of dead stars. So yes, there are stars that are missing. You CHOOSE to interpret the passages whatever way that you want. This is the point that you're dishonest on.

No, you probably won't because you refuse to believe the word of God.

How do we even know it is the word of god? This is just something you assume to be true from the beginning.

How is this saying "not one shall die?"

Not one faileth is easily interpreted as not one shall die.

Or how about "not one is lacking" that is used in some of the translations. Lacking in what? Lacking to be in place at their proper time fits perfectly.

But none of them say that. There's not a single one of the versions of that passage that says anything about place or proper time. This is something you have ADDED to it yourself, or someone else's interpretation you've read online. You've went further than what's actually there in the text.

You can interpret these passages to mean WHATEVER YOU WANT THEM TO MEAN. You're simply being intellectually dishonest if you can't recognize that.

Especially when coupled with all the "not one is missing." I like to allow scripture to interpret scripture,

That's not what you're doing.

You're adding terms that aren't present in the text. You're ignoring other valid interpretations (more readily apparent interpretations at that, in my opinion).

But the thing is we're dealing with poetic metaphor, so of course there's going to be multiple interpretations, but YOU won't recognize that. You've fallen into a trap of looking for literal, factual truths about reality within poetic metaphors and there's nothing anyone can say to dissuade you from this no matter how obvious it is that you're interpreting it whatever way you WANT to interpret it to make it make sense.

We know the purpose of stars was to be set in place (Psalm 8:3)

8:3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;

and their place as per God was to rule by night (Psalm 136:9).

136:9 The moon and stars to rule by night: for his mercy endureth for ever.

So we can see that by saying one will not fail, or lacking, or missing, it all has to do with being in their place at their time.

Seriously?!

You're making it up. It's so obvious that you're just making it up. The sad thing is that you can't recognize this, and you've convinced yourself that you've found literal truths about reality in these passages, but you have to stretch, contort, and add things to the passages to reach the conclusions you're reaching.

What have you done to yourself? What have you done to your brain? It's astounding.

You mentioned you can't go on if I'm not acknowledging where I'm wrong... I'm still waiting for you to show me where I'm wrong.

1. You make up and interpret passages whatever way you want to, to make them say whatever you want, even though its pretty clear you have to make big leaps to do so.
2. A literal genesis account does not match with the evidence, does not match with reality.
3. You've yet to explain how you've determined that god is good.
4. You keep posting AIG, showing no indication you've read what I have against AIG.

You use this argument only because you can't defend yourself against the word of God that I answered with to many of your "supposed" biblical wrongs. The psalmist in Psalm 10:4 was correct about you. But you will continue to receive my prayers.

Yes, God is righteous. Show me how he's not

Don't flip it on me; YOU think he's righteous and I've asked you multiple times how it is you've come to this conclusion.

since you seem to be so keen on the idea that he isn't. If WW2 is a good thing and was for the better of mankind despite the high casualty rate of all ages, then why is God wrong for perhaps doing the same thing in his judgement?

Because we don't actually have any reason to think the judgement of the god character described in the bible is actually for our own good. There's no reason to believe that. It's something you put faith in, something you trust, but how was that actually determined?

How is it better for us that billions of people suffer in hell for eternity?

As for the "after their kind" and how this can work in evolution, the changes between each individual generation would be so small that it would always be "after their kind." But due to no mention by God and the Adam and Eve account about new kinds or a new family, these changes will only be variations inside of the "kind" or "family." But by and of itself, "after their kinds" does not go against evolution.

If genesis doesn't accept that animals share common descent with other animals and not merely only "inside a kind", genesis is wrong. Humans share common descent with chimps. The best evidence shows this.

I wish you wouldn't copy/paste yourself as you're merely only repeating yourself.

 

[The End]

For the seeker of truth:

Bill Nye VS Ken Ham: A Full Commentary

[YT]LITCCA212hg[/YT]

For anyone that wants a detailed analysis of the Bill Nye vs Ken Ham debate. The original debate without commentary in itself is powerful in how it illustrates how far apart Nye and Ham are in their world views, in and of itself its convincing to objective people that creationism is not viable. This commentary of the debate, is only more devastating in its detailed deconstruction of creationism. I've watched over an hour, and its quite good. I find it hard to see, frankly, how any objective person could come to this and still come away a creationist. Put it on in the background while you're doing other things.

Subjects raised:

The tearing apart of creation scientists that Ken Ham presents (how they don't publish their creation views in science journals, how vastly different actual peer reviewed articles are from what's put up on Answers in Genesis, Answers in Genesis supporting other pseudosciences like astrology, showing that creation scientists lie with comparisons between what one of them said about e. coli, and what the actual studies of e. cloi have said) (more specifically, a creation scientist said that e. coli's ability to take in citrate that wasn't present before, was always present and is just a switch, when actually the Lenski experiment SHOWS that these were mutations and NOT a switch that was always present)

The tearing apart of Ken Ham's distinction between observational science and historical science. Ken Ham's position is like saying you can't demonstrate with evidence the guilt of a murderer unless you witnessed the murder happen in real time. Also, video gives examples of how we can know things about reality indirectly, without direct observation in real time of the whole, such as the fact that we've known the Earth is a sphere since antiquity based on measurements of the shadows of pillars, getting it so precise you could even know the size of the Earth down to an incredibly slim margin of error - all without actually observing Earth from space, only basically with the tool of mathematics, and we can tell things about the past of the Earth indirectly too.

The ridiculousness of Noah's arc. How you have the problem of either: too many animals on the arc, or, if you reduce the number of animals on the arc you only increase the amount of speciation that would have to occur within a tiny amount of time to account for the biodiversity that exists today. It simply is not plausible.

There's more that I'm missing.

I dare Rodhulk and Old Timer to watch just an hour and ten minutes.

I'm continuing to watch:

1 hour 23 minutes: (related to Ken Ham's assertion that radiation decay rates used to measure the age of the Earth may not always have been the same)

Ken Ham's young earth creation model requires believing that the planet released 8.5 times times more radiation than Fukishima in total, every square mile, every second, for the past 6, 000 years. Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaang.

 

[The End]

2 hours into the video. Mesmerizing, brilliant, but I think I'll take a break.

 

[Breogan]

For the seeker of truth:

Bill Nye VS Ken Ham: A Full Commentary

[YT]LITCCA212hg[/YT]

The ridiculousness of Noah's arc. How you have the problem of either: too many animals on the arc, or, if you reduce the number of animals on the arc you only increase the amount of speciation that would have to occur within a tiny amount of time to account for the biodiversity that exists today. It simply is not plausible.

There was a thread specifically for the debate, don't know if it was mentioned there beyond speculation http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=472321&page=25, but the sad part of this debate it has actually given Ham the attention and money he needs to create his Ark "museum".

Creation Museum founder Ken Ham announced Thursday that a municipal bond offering has raised enough money to begin construction on the Ark Encounter project, estimated to cost about $73m. Groundbreaking is planned for May and the ark is expected to be finished by the summer of 2016.

Ham said a high-profile evolution debate he had with “Science Guy” Bill Nye on 4 February helped boost support for the project.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/28/creation-museum-kentucky-noahs-ark-museum-ken-ham

But Ken Ham may have the last laugh, as the creationist announced Thursday that the debate revived interest in a flagging creationist project, spurring enough fundraising to build a 510-foot replica of Noah's Ark called "Ark Encounter."

Estimated to cost about $73 million, the Ark Encounter exhibit is expected to be completed by the summer of 2016, reports the Associated Press. A municipal bond offering by the city of Williamstown, Ky., site of the planned ark, raised enough money to cover those costs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/28/ken-ham-noahs-ark_n_4873893.html

Creation Museum founder says fundraising after Bill Nye debate helps resurrect Noah's Ark project

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014...aising-after-bill-nye-debate-helps-resurrect/

During tonight’s live web stream hosted by the president/CEO of Answers in Genesis, Ken Ham, AiG announced that enough money had been raised for the Ark Encounter bond offering to allow the release of the funds to start construction of the Ark project in Williamstown, Kentucky.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ark/ark-bond-offering-succeeds

Ken Ham: The debate between Bill Nye “the Science Guy” and me in February, that went viral around the world, occurred in God’s providence right before the bond closing. ....

Behold the terrifying monstrosity where humans living with dinosaurs, the tower of Babel leading to different languages, and a world wide flood will be presented as "history" and "science".

 

[KevanG]

And when he gets told that the ark couldn't possibly hold the variety of animals needed he gives the answer 'Magic/god did it' which washes away all questions and makes him right every time.

 

[MrsKent26]

Seriously?!

You're making it up. It's so obvious that you're just making it up. The sad thing is that you can't recognize this, and you've convinced yourself that you've found literal truths about reality in these passages, but you have to stretch, contort, and add things to the passages to reach the conclusions you're reaching.

This is religion in a nutshell.

 

[rodhulk]

Cute.

Thanks.

 

[Doctor Evo]

This is ridiculous. Rodhulk, you and Old Timer are getting destroyed in this thread.

Eh, I don't like to look at it that way. I think Old Timer is getting something of an education - even if he insists upon maintaining his beliefs, at least he's being forced to comprehend the alternative by mere virtue of this discussion. There are clear misconceptions that are being challenged and corrected, and that's all I can really hope for.

With regard to rodhulk, he's completely shut himself off from this opportunity by virtue of some silly and childish objection to some perceived slight. I did happen to notice that he happened to raise that objection after I asked a rather difficult question, however. I'm inclined to believe that he found himself unprepared (and/or unable) to answer the question and invented a reason not to continue the discussion in order to save face, though I'm sure he'll deny this vehemently.

I've also noticed that he will respond to some of my points, but refuses to respond to others, all the while referring to the previously mentioned refusal to discuss this topic with me. I do wish he'd be more consistent.

 

[rodhulk]

We're looking at the light of dead stars. So yes, there are stars that are missing. You CHOOSE to interpret the passages whatever way that you want. This is the point that you're dishonest on.




How do we even know it is the word of god? This is just something you assume to be true from the beginning.




Not one faileth is easily interpreted as not one shall die.




But none of them say that. There's not a single one of the versions of that passage that says anything about place or proper time. This is something you have ADDED to it yourself, or someone else's interpretation you've read online. You've went further than what's actually there in the text.

You can interpret these passages to mean WHATEVER YOU WANT THEM TO MEAN. You're simply being intellectually dishonest if you can't recognize that.




That's not what you're doing.

You're adding terms that aren't present in the text. You're ignoring other valid interpretations (more readily apparent interpretations at that, in my opinion).

But the thing is we're dealing with poetic metaphor, so of course there's going to be multiple interpretations, but YOU won't recognize that. You've fallen into a trap of looking for literal, factual truths about reality within poetic metaphors and there's nothing anyone can say to dissuade you from this no matter how obvious it is that you're interpreting it whatever way you WANT to interpret it to make it make sense.



8:3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;






136:9 The moon and stars to rule by night: for his mercy endureth for ever.



Seriously?!

You're making it up. It's so obvious that you're just making it up. The sad thing is that you can't recognize this, and you've convinced yourself that you've found literal truths about reality in these passages, but you have to stretch, contort, and add things to the passages to reach the conclusions you're reaching.

What have you done to yourself? What have you done to your brain? It's astounding.



1. You make up and interpret passages whatever way you want to, to make them say whatever you want, even though its pretty clear you have to make big leaps to do so.
2. A literal genesis account does not match with the evidence, does not match with reality.
3. You've yet to explain how you've determined that god is good.
4. You keep posting AIG, showing no indication you've read what I have against AIG.



Don't flip it on me; YOU think he's righteous and I've asked you multiple times how it is you've come to this conclusion.



Because we don't actually have any reason to think the judgement of the god character described in the bible is actually for our own good. There's no reason to believe that. It's something you put faith in, something you trust, but how was that actually determined?

How is it better for us that billions of people suffer in hell for eternity?



If genesis doesn't accept that animals share common descent with other animals and not merely only "inside a kind", genesis is wrong. Humans share common descent with chimps. The best evidence shows this.

I wish you wouldn't copy/paste yourself as you're merely only repeating yourself.

What's funny yet odd at the same time is that you are actually interpreting the "stars" scripture to whatever you want yourself. I'm basing mine on all the scriptures that I've shown and the various translations. You're sticking to just one translation and refuse to acknowledge the others because they show you're wrong. When examined, I have a decent case for "the proper place at the proper time" conclusion, the "not one is missing" works just fine so as to be (the star) where it is supposed to be. You only have denial. Literally the Bible does not say if stars die or not. As I said before, that is you and only you.

How do I know it is the word of God? Because it shows tons of evidence, most of it which you "still" refuse to look at. Just re-read my previous post for it. You're only attempting to answer what you "think' you have answers to but thanks be to God, your true intentions shine like the sun in this thread..... just like the "God is righteous" statement I made. You bet I've given you my personal answer to it. God doesn't exactly tell us but it could be for the better of mankind. Noah's arc is a perfect example but it will fall on deaf ears for you. However, I say that not for you but for the casual onlooker who may have eyes to see. But it's not that I haven't given you an answer, it's that you don't accept God. You don't accept his ways. But Jesus died for you, too.

Humans have a common ancestor you say.... your best evidence only leads to that. Nothing more than that. I refuse to take that leap of faith (as what I've shown you in previous messages that I'm still waiting for a reply on, the Bible does give more credible evidence. If you don't think so, that's your opinion).

Funny how I showed you that the "after their kinds" in and of itself doesn't do away with evolution but you step past that (just like so many other things in my previous post) and just go into the general Genesis account and say it is all wrong because you know I just showed you that the "after their kinds" can actually work if you were being honest which you've clearly shown you aren't.

Since you've shown that you aren't willing to tackle most of my previous posts and just attempt a couple of answers to where you feel you can have a strong word, I'm going to move on from you and post in a more general way and/or to other posters. You're more than free to continue to read them and post replies but after a few attempts of mine to show you how amazing and accurate the word of God is - and I hope all the casual viewers here can understand this, those who have ears to hear - my points from previous posts all remain and the word of God, the Bible, has words that can lead to life.

 

[rodhulk]

With regard to rodhulk, he's completely shut himself off from this opportunity by virtue of some silly and childish objection to some perceived slight. I did happen to notice that he happened to raise that objection after I asked a rather difficult question, however. I'm inclined to believe that he found himself unprepared (and/or unable) to answer the question and invented a reason not to continue the discussion in order to save face, though I'm sure he'll deny this vehemently.

I've also noticed that he will respond to some of my points, but refuses to respond to others, all the while referring to the previously mentioned refusal to discuss this topic with me. I do wish he'd be more consistent.

Wow! But not surprised. You've made it clear you're full and that even you yourself didn't respond before to an answer of mine to your reply and took it elsewhere which immediately raised a red flag for me. But if you insist I'm the bad guy, well, Christians usually are in the eyes of the world.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Wow! But not surprised. You've made it clear you're full and that even you yourself didn't respond before to an answer of mine to your reply and took it elsewhere which immediately raised a red flag for me. But if you insist I'm the bad guy, well, Christians usually are in the eyes of the world.

I'm sorry, I thought you weren't discussing these topics with me?

 

[rodhulk]

1) The point is that you keep saying that he'll kill kids if he felt it was so needed if they were going to do evil crap in their future and yet he let Hitler and his inner circle gain power and do all of that for years and that led to millions of innocents being murdered in horrific ways. There seems to be no rhyme or reason for his persecution of people besides random chance which is exactly the same as if he didn't exist at all.

2) And what I'm saying is that no one should be relying on the magic sky being to give you answers. We always look for answers in science and what we know is never enough. That's the point of learning and growing beyond what we are. If we were fine with what we were then we'd be stuck back in hunter gatherer mode with very little agriculture and no society to speak of. We'd be getting wiped out by diseases and murdered by animals.

It's not a matter of wanting to know everything, it's a matter of growing up beyond what we were and being more than we are.

1) How do you know what God's intentions are when these bad things (or so-called bad things) happen? Noah's ark and the flood is a perfect example of how God wanted to get rid of the evil in the world and start over with righteous people. But you won't accept this because not only do you not believe in Noah's ark and the flood but you just don't believe in God. Period. God isn't here for you, though.

2) I've got no problems with learning and of course I am always studying the Bible (and other things) and learning new things often but until new light gets shed (which could be often), we always go by what we have at that moment in time. That was my point. I don't have a perfect answer to everything, just the best to my understanding which is exactly what you do with evolution and other things "science."

 

[rodhulk]

I'm sorry, I thought you weren't discussing these topics with me?

If you know this then why do you keep referring to me in your posts?

 

[KevanG]

1) How do you know what God's intentions are when these bad things (or so-called bad things) happen? Noah's ark and the flood is a perfect example of how God wanted to get rid of the evil in the world and start over with righteous people. But you won't accept this because not only do you not believe in Noah's ark and the flood but you just don't believe in God. Period. God isn't here for you, though.

I don't accept that we aren't in control of our own destinies and that some magic star god is forcing us to do what he wants because he can. It means that every single thing we've done is not because of ourselves but due to outside influence and direction which makes every single human achievement pointless.

He's willing to kill untold amounts of people to try and make a world that he wants it to be. If a person did that, you'd want him tried for war crimes but because it's 'god' he gets a free pass? He destroys cities, millions of people and 99% of the planet just because he doesn't like how we are acting. He's cruel and vindictive and willing to murder when he doesn't like what he sees because we can't hurt him back. That is not the mark of a kind and sane person, that is the mark of someone who is psychotic and mentally unstable.

 

[Feenix]

I don't think any other posters here have the patience for you, rodhulk. The End is your best bet.

I'm still not sure what you're trying to do with your posts in this thread. Whatever it is, I highly doubt it's working.

 

[MrsKent26]

1) How do you know what God's intentions are when these bad things (or so-called bad things) happen? Noah's ark and the flood is a perfect example of how God wanted to get rid of the evil in the world and start over with righteous people. But you won't accept this because not only do you not believe in Noah's ark and the flood but you just don't believe in God. Period. God isn't here for you, though.

Why would God have negative intentions toward anyone though? Can you not see how illogical this is? God wanted to get rid of the evil. What kind of God is that?

Are you familiar the ancient discussions around the "problem of evil"? From a theological perspective, the problem deals with whether the idea of an omnipotent (all powerful) and perfectly benevolent (all-good) God can even coexist with evil in the world. Different philosophers discussed this and it is rather logical:

If there is an a God that is benevolent, then that God does not want evil to happen.


If there is a God that is omnipotent, then that God can prevent evil from happening.


If God both wanted to prevent evil and could do so, then there would be no evil in the world.


There is evil in the world.


Therefore, God cannot be both benevolent and omnipotent, or there cannot exist an all powerful and perfectly good God.




So which is it? Is your god either 1) Not all powerful or 2) Not all good?


If you can't pick one of those, why?


If you can pick...why do you believe in a God that is not powerful enough to vanquish evil or not kind enough to want to?

 

[Feenix]

Oh oh I know this one! It's some BS about how god gave us free will and how we're evil because he allows us to be.

 

[rodhulk]

For those who have eyes to see and seek the truth:

If you have checked back over the last several pages, you can see how the word of God can stand up to the worst of it's critics. Though these critics give their opinion on how it's all wrong, how we (Christians) aren't being honest, and every attack you can probably think of, note that this is just their opinions and they could be just as wrong as they accuse the Christian of being wrong. You can see how they pick and choose only topics that they think they have an answer to leaving much behind. This "much behind" is evidence of the power of scripture. You can see how one who has faith in this book, the Bible, is hated here, not because of anything they have done but just because they choose to believe in something other than what seems right to others here. But know this, they only hate the Christian because they hated Christ first - John 15:8. They try to throw questions out to the Christian of things that they can't comprehend or just don't want to accept (including a Christians answer) and when this happens, they deny God but the Bible tells us to not lean on our own understanding - Proverbs 3:5. The Bible has given us enough to know what we need to know, hence the number of Christians throughout the world. Christians may not always have the answer or an answer with 100% assurance, some things aren't answered in the Bible or more thoroughly talked about, but God has given us enough to trust him throughout our days in which I hope much of this post can help you see that. The Bible says there is a way that seems right to man but in the end, it leads to death - Proverbs 14:12. The "way" the Bible speaks of that leads to life is Jesus, he is the way, the truth, and the life - John 14:6.

The word of God does indeed speak words of truth, and if you honestly seek the Lord, then you, too, can taste the goodness of God that is found in Jesus Christ, the Lord and savior.

The Bible is full of amazing evidence that it's words are true and I hope you can see the beauty of it. If you're searching for the truth, I believe the Bible teaches it. Amen.

For the seeker of truth:

Romans 1:20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."


As has been presented over the last couple of pages in this thread, one can see these scriptures "come to life" quite clearly by many in this thread. God has revealed things that show that his divine qualities are seen, but you need to look openly and look at the world and universe around you.

Israel is a skeptics worst nightmare. The fulfilled prophecies with that nation cannot be overlooked. If one overlooks Israel, then I would think that especially Romans 1:20 and Psalm 10:4 rings true for them. Israel is for real and she is of God.

http://www.watchmanbiblestudy.com/Ar...sFulfilled.htm

http://therefinersfire.org/recent_prophecy.htm


You can also see that events taking place in the world are as per scripture said they would be.

http://www.raptureforums.com/BiblePr...01lastdays.cfm


Many of these people here who I have debated with will deny the scriptures, that they are full of contradictions. But God is good and does answer many of these supposed contradictions.

2 Timothy 3:16: "All scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, correcting..."

http://thedevineevidence.com/skeptic...adictions.html

http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...cripture-index

(This one has to do with creation-evolution) http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-...tering-critics

In Psalm 104:6-9, the passage does indeed say that the mountains rose after these mountains (land) were under water. After these mountains rise, scripture only then indicates that the flood waters will not be able to flood the earth anymore - that boundaries have been set - would it be these newly formed mountains and valleys that are the boundaries? Regardless of that, the real point I am making here is that the Bible got it correct that mountains were under water at some point just as evolution says. The rising of these mountains is after a time they were under water according to the scripture and the sea fossils we find on mountain tops confirm evolution's explanation of why we find sea fossils on mountain tops, at least to the point of mountains rising after being under water. The Bible really did get it right even despite evolutionists denial of the flood account, the idea that evolutionists will say that the mountains were under water is exactly what this scripture says.... oh, and scripture says it perhaps thousands of years before evolutionists found this to be true.

Job 26:7 God hangs the earth on nothing.

Isaiah 40:22 Earth is circular.

Job 9:8 God stretches out the heavens. Think the big bang here.

 

[Breogan]

I'm still not sure what you're trying to do with your posts in this thread.

Looks like he's pimping for Ken Ham's Answers in Genesis approach to science.
[YT]7GB-0D5lCog[/YT]

Above is who you are debating with Doctor Evo.