Originally posted by Unsane
In terms of answers pointing away from the bible God:

The universe is roughly 14 billion years old, discovered quite recently using astrophysiscs.

The earth is about 4 billion years old, we can see stars being created, we can see stars dying. (This shows that they do not need a helping hand)

We can observe evolutionary traits in multiple species, even observe adaption in bacteria and review archaeological data from the strata of the earth. Which all fits in with the theory.

We have proven that stories quoted as fact from the Bible are false (Noah's Ark for example). We have never recorded a provable miracle or something God-like in nature.

Im trying to convey that even though there is no absolute proof of no Biblical God, there has been nothing to support the God theory in the first place.

This brings on several really good points. First off, since most "Christians" attempt to sell the Bible writings as literal, most Atheists use this same literal translation to debunk it as well. Which is fair enough for arguement, but not accurate. Without quoting, I must mention some of these "literal" texts point to the fact the Bible is loosely written, and should be left open to learning & interpretation, a tool to use in life if you will. I personally believe this true; when I read at face value, I get nothing; but when I look deeper for a meaning, I become enlightened through the same text.
The most obvious example is of time. His time and man's time is of no comparison, if you use Genesis as a reference.

There is no agruing the age of the Earth, and it is NOT 6000yrs. old. Can't be. So its easy to attempt to debunk the Bible with this information.
BUT, as mentioned by several non-believers, was the Bible not written by man? So does it not stand to reason that man would have attempted to write in a way by which he could understand? Or rather, would this God explain something so complex, in way way a simpler creature could relate?
I do this everyday with my own children.....

When I apply the evidence from the strata of the Earth, or from observation in multiple species, to a non-literal translation, I find a compelling arguement for a Creator. Even the scientists who proposed the Big Bang Theory years ago, now today agree with that as well. After years of expanding the theory due to more advanced means of observation, they have found the precision reguired for such an event is so substantial, that something, or someone, had a play in how it happened, or it could not have happened at all. These very scientists had initially set out to disprove there being any such Creator, and now by thier own admission, believe its almost impossible for there not to be.

At one point being Agnostic myself, I was faced with how to percieve all the information and mis-information. Once I accepted there being a Creator, I set out to find him. And I found in him in Christianity. That revelation was quite personal, and I am not here to minister to you. But I will say that ANYTHING that has managed to survive for over 2000 yrs, must have some truth in it, albeit somewhat corrupted by man at times.

Sorry I rambled. Just my thoughts.

Originally posted by Mozzy

The fact that it's been preserved despite the 2000 years of manipulation and leading people against it speaks volumes.

so has rape, war, murder, and gambling and guess what. you believe in those too.

Yes, I do believe that stuff still happens doesn't it. It's a book which contains both good and evil.

The funny thing is people like to quote the old testament. What you fail to realize is that the old testament is a testament of the wrong way, and the ways without understanding. Thus the reason Jesus of the bible came to fulfill and bring understanding to the correct way.

So meh, you don't look for the truth, you look for ways to disprove and pretend you are being honest and intellectual. In reality, you just plain out don't understand the whole story, and base your impression on it based on those who do things in it's name.

It'd be about like dismissing the Star wars movie as retarded because of the fans without ever having seen or understood the story line.

managed to double post sorry real post below cant delete.

[edit on 16-12-2008 by gYvMessanger]

Originally posted by DoYouSeeIt

Originally posted by Unsane

There is no agruing the age of the Earth, and it is NOT 6000yrs. old. Can't be. So its easy to attempt to debunk the Bible with this information.
BUT, as mentioned by several non-believers, was the Bible not written by man? So does it not stand to reason that man would have attempted to write in a way by which he could understand? Or rather, would this God explain something so complex, in way way a simpler creature could relate?
I do this everyday with my own children.....

When I apply the evidence from the strata of the Earth, or from observation in multiple species, to a non-literal translation, I find a compelling arguement for a Creator. Even the scientists who proposed the Big Bang Theory years ago, now today agree with that as well. After years of expanding the theory due to more advanced means of observation, they have found the precision reguired for such an event is so substantial, that something, or someone, had a play in how it happened, or it could not have happened at all. These very scientists had initially set out to disprove there being any such Creator, and now by thier own admission, believe its almost impossible for there not to be.

At one point being Agnostic myself, I was faced with how to percieve all the information and mis-information. Once I accepted there being a Creator, I set out to find him.

And this I think brings us to the point I was trying to get across, and why I asked Bible texts not be used as part of the argument because as DoYouSeeIt has so eloquently put it, in that the scriptures have been massively misrepresented by not only the religions that wield them, but also those who wish to take a stand against them, at least to the masses. There is undoubtedly useful information within these texts and the ancient teachings surrounding them especially in correlation with what many people would recognize as real science today. That however is a separate topic for another time.

I am going to repost something I said in another thread and I apologize to those who may have already read it but im quite tired and still want to make some kind of input.

In my opinion people who ascertain the idea their is no god as a fact because their is no proof, don't want to see the proof there is.

As a very simple example if I make something, a building say, with lights and plumbing and heat controlled rooms, a thousand years from now it is discovered by a team of non-human explorers who do not know our history, do they assume some other form of life they haven't yet encountered created the structure, or do they think this building randomly came into existence because the local building blocks of the universe randomly happened to form into a complex structure. I'm not living in the building, I never did, I didn't leave a mark or signature on the building saying GYV WOZ ERE 2008, my bones aren't there, there is in fact no proof at all that I ever existed, at least not in that vicinity, only the building stands to prove that I ever existed, and yet apparently that's no proof at all.

However what I mean by god/creator is not what the majority of christian's view god as i'm sure. I think many people still have this idea of some beared man sitting on a golden throne atop a cloud or some variation thereof depending on the religion in question, personally I feel that's a damaging view to take, and would agree with people that yes that type of god does not exist, however at the same time a godforce at the very least is evident everywhere you look, and I wonder why is that other people would rather believe it was not so, when even if all you did was keep an open mind there could be so much to discover.

I should add that I am not a member of any faith, though I have explored the ideas of many.
[edit on 16-12-2008 by gYvMessanger]

[edit on 16-12-2008 by gYvMessanger]

double post

[edit on 16-12-2008 by gYvMessanger]

You would be surprised at what I would know, I offered to engage you in discourse on your subject on a separate thread if you wish to pursue it, the point of this thread is not the one you bought up, nor is the conversation intended to engage your mindset, I hope you understand, though if you would wish to share your experiences with us in relation to the divine outside of scripture that would be grand.

Originally posted by gYvMessanger
As a very simple example if I make something, a building say, with lights and plumbing and heat controlled rooms, a thousand years from now it is discovered by a team of non-human explorers who do not know our history, do they assume some other form of life they haven't yet encountered created the structure, or do they think this building randomly came into existence because the local building blocks of the universe randomly happened to form into a complex structure.

what interesting is that scientists have been able to determine human creation on less.

i know some ancient structures are only left with the outline of the walls with nothing really left of the structure itself. and still they are able to recognize that it was designed and constructed.

it hurts my head when people say complex structures like DNA are accidental

Originally posted by Unsane
I am sorry I haven't replied sooner.

its ok, im in bed at the moment, im not going anywhere

To clarify my point about the story of Noah's Ark, it has beem proven that genetically, it is impossible for us to have decended from 6 individuals within only a few thousand years. I think most would agree that there was a flood, however it was localised and not as 'world encompassing' as written in the Bible. I would also like to point out that there are no Polar Bears on or around the area of Mount Ararat, nor Orang Utangs. Why?

the thing about noah's ark is that you cant take god out of the picture. without god's guidance and direction, noah would not have been able to complete his task. i know that sounds like a copout but think about it for a moment.

did noah really comb the earth looking for each kind of animal? how did could noah have been 100% sure the ark would not spring a leak? how did the ark happen to arrive at the peak of a mountain when its probable that noah didnt design it to navigate?

its likely that if god did cause a flood, and gave noah enough time to build the ark (which is something that even local flood theories dont address), then it is likely that god would help with the survival right?

one point you bring up about the animals.... micro-evolution is observable. most if not all the "evidence" for evolution is micro. white moth turns brown because the browns are the only ones that survive, beaks of a bird get longer because because only the longer ones can reach the food in the nooks of rocks. these are all gradual changes. we simply do see the giant fantastic changes that evolutionist present. even the fossil record is not gradual.

the account of noah says that noah got them "according to their kind" not that he got every kind. its possible that he got one or two types of bear, and that after the flood the bears changed as they migrated (much like they do today). thats just a theory, i could be completely wrong. but its not unfeasible.

I have already stated that there is possibly of a God, something which is completely abstracted from our 'Human' perspective. I could believe in a God which was mathematical, an equation of all things. I find it hard to swallow that there is a God who actually 'cares' about us and 'loves' us (shows human emotions).

I will agree that the Bible is a fantastic resource for historical events. But that is a far as my logic will take me.

well thats where we disagree. the bible is what convinced me that god does have emotions. i wouldnt call them "human" emotions. the bible says we were created in his image, not the other way around.

but there are certain things that the bible is amazingly right on.

i posted in another thread about the accuracy of the genesis account of creation. moses couldnt have just guessed it correctly. its impossible.

the isrealites couldnt have just guessed how do deal with infectious disease correctly thousands of years before the medical world discovered germs.

isaiah couldnt have just guessed that cyrus would destroy babylon and that it would remain desolated forever on.

jesus couldnt have just guess what living in out time would be like.

im just putting out a few examples for you, i could right a book on the subject. but to me at least, the bible is evidence of god's interaction with humans.

Well I would agree with you, but evolutionists who know what they are talking about would never say that. Evolution is not accidental, it is a process of slow improvement over long periods of time, through survival of the fittest. It is no accident that Giraffes have long necks - the environment has guided the generations to provide better chance of survival to those with long necks. The mutations themselves might be random, but the process is not.

actually thats abit outdated. even evolutionists acknowledge that the fossil record does not show a gradual change. it why theories like mutation and super mutation were formulated, and the theories almost completely rely on accident.

In terms of DNA, this is something which also evolved to become it's current form. It started as RNA, which is a much more simplified version.

even just the protiens, the "simple" building blocks are a complexity of their own. scientist cant figure out how these proteins even managed to form since water breaks down complex mixtures, and if they formed in the air then stellar radiation would have killed them. then even if they form, how did only "left handed" proteins know to get together to form RNA or DNA.

fact is, there is nothing to show us that RNA is a basic form of DNA. even our bodies have both.

and there is no evidence of a more rudimentary form of either. all of its components are put together with a specific task that is lost if the combination is not there.

its like a saying someone invented a paintbrush before inventing the paint.

But I go back to my original statement. The least complex is the most likely. God is the most complex, therefore the least likely.

i would say the opposite.

if you have a house and you are wondering how it got there, the simplest answer would be "someone build it or put it there".

trying to explain with theories and supposition how the house could form naturally is the complex option

Just to add, there is no need for evolution to negate the existence of a God, just the existence of our interpretations of a God.

it doesnt even do that. i hear the catholic church uses evolution now and that god uses it as a tool of creation.

i just dont see how that conclusion is reached

I go back in forth believing on God. Things will happen that are very spiritual and I'll think to myself, well if that is possible then there has to be some kind of higher being or "God." Then I see on the news that a young child was killed or something along those lines and I think to myself, what kind of a God would let that happen? I go back and forth which means my faith either way is not very strong. I don't know what the heck to believe. I guess one day I will find out though.

Hang on surely the Creator would be outside the Creation itself, even if we accept that our Creator had a Creator itself your right at a certain point the concept will collapse as you go backwards.

Again though I think people are talking about two different things, the idea of the man on the cloud.

What I personally propose is that at some point there was most likely nothing and the essence of the thing I would recognize as god, that essence in one way over time, and one way instantly because there was no time, evolved its own consciousness and through that evolution began the act of creating.

If the Creator is outside of creation, the place where we live, than what we experience may well only be a portion of the godforce, the big bang may well have been the awaking of that consciousness amongst the void for the first time.

For me its not that I can't accept spontaneous bio genesis, but on such a massive level, in such perfect balance with so many complex rules governing how such things work, what I don't accept is that its truly random.

We have laws we dont even begin to comprehend which governs he way our universe works, and scientists in the last century have seemingly come leaps and bounds in finding quite a few of them, but don't you have to ask yourself how these rules came into play in the first place ?

I used to believe in God, then I realized I never had a choice. I was born to a catholic family, then I realized had I been born to a Muslim family, I would subscribe to their beliefs.

This is a subject I've given much thought to. When I believed in God I would be appauled at someone who said something that opposed God in a way. I was so brainwashed that I didn't know a world without God actually existed. I didn't know what an atheist was. If someone did not believe in God, then I automatically thought they believed in the devil. I became no different than a racist in the way I viewed homosexuality, and homosexuals. I saw them as being "against God", and destined to an afterlife of eternal suffering in hell.

But the more I thought about it, the more my views began to change. The more my views changed, the more I resented religion and belief in God for what they have caused, can cause, and will cause.

Belief in God has caused war, murder, bigotry, hatred, ostracism, and the stunting of human advancement.

However, it isn't only that that has caused me to reject such beliefs, because the more I thought about the subject and learned, the more things didn't make sense.

1. God granted us freewill, yet he is omniscient. The two are not compatible.

2. What makes one certain God from today any different than the thousands of others that humans have believed in?

3. There is no evidence whatsover of any kind that any God exists.

There are many others, but I won't go on any further, I think I've made my point lol.