Was this character Hawkins around at Creation? What the hell does he really know about anything? I read his book "A Brief History of Time" and there were no facts in. Just ramblings and myths and theories. Nothing of any substance.

Originally Posted by flash

there were no facts in. Just ramblings and myths and theories. Nothing of any substance.

You sure that's not the Bible you are describing?
I thought you were going to give is a 101 on physics, thermodynamics and entropy to show us how these great physicists have got it all wrong?

Originally Posted by DaveUK

You sure that's not the Bible you are describing?
I thought you were going to give is a 101 on physics, thermodynamics and entropy to show us how these great physicists have got it all wrong?

Instead of making irrelevant comments tell me something of substance in his book. It is nothing but postulations based upon very little evidence.

I'll school you in basic physics when I have the proper time to do it. I suspect with your demonstrated level of ignorance on the subject it will take considerable time. I can't do it today because I am just back from the rifle range and I have to clean my weapons. Something else you know nothing about.

Have you even ever heard of the Law of Entropy? I need that information because I need to know if have to start from scratch explaining to you that you can’t make something out of nothing or if I can assume you know that but just don’t want to believe it when it comes to the theory of the Big Bang, which that character Hawkins embraces.

Originally Posted by flash

Instead of making irrelevant comments tell me something of substance in his book. It is nothing but postulations based upon very little evidence.

I'll school you in basic physics when I have the proper time to do it. I suspect with your demonstrated level of ignorance on the subject it will take considerable time. I can't do it today because I am just back from the rifle range and I have to clean my weapons. Something else you know nothing about.

Have you even ever heard of the Law of Entropy? I need that information because I need to know if have to start from scratch explaining to you that you can’t make something out of nothing or if I can assume you know that but just don’t want to believe it when it comes to the theory of the Big Bang, which that character Hawkins embraces.

I don't need any schooling from you at all, on any subject thank you. Yes I have heard of the law entropy thanks, and it doesn't exclude the possibility of something from nothing, so maybe you need the schooling.
If I choose to take schooling on the subject of Physics, I'd rather study the work of people like Hawkings thanks. He's not considered one of the greatest physicists ever for nothing...........where as you are renowned in the world of science for what exactly? You don't even have the interlectual and moral courage to drop the pretense of your reigion. You dismiss most of the Bible as alagorical and myth, while dogedly clinging to the most unlikely verse in the whole book, which is GEN 1:1.

BTW, I've been to riffle ranges before, a long time ago. And cleaned fire arms, also a long time ago. I did it as a child in the ATC. I grew out of it though. Most people do in this country, grow out of the excitement of firing a gun. It's an overated expereince.

Dr. Hawkings has a great mind and is a great physicist, but he really is no more qualified to make such a judgement on the existence of God than the Man in the Moon. He neither has special insight nor special equipment and his observations on the universe are as limited by our science and technology as the rest of us. He is entitled to his opinion, but his opinion on God is no more valid than a 6 year old's.

It's really a fairly ignorant statement by Hawking because conceptually, science simply cannot answer the question of God.

This is primarily for two related reasons.

(1) Science begins with the assumption that the universe can be explained purely by the interaction of mechanical forces (matter, gravity, etc.) without reference to any supernatural forces (i.e. God). Science is generally a deductive process, and as a deductive process you cannot prove your assumptions, it is a logical fallacy.

a. Assume no supernatural forces.
b. observe mechanical forces.
c. conclude that mechanical forces explain everything and that supernatural forces don't exist.

It simply doesn't work. Now your could argue that science often works in practice more by induction than deduction, but that tends to fail as well because of point two, below.

(2) Science is inherently limited to observing how things already in existence interact with one another. In order for the scientific process to work, you have to begin with something you can observe in some way, even if that observation is purely mathematical theory. Therefore, conceptually science can never fully explain the universe because it can never answer the "something coming from nothing" question. For instance, assume Hawking is right and that matter can be created from nothing purely from the laws of physics. But there he isn't starting from nothing, he's starting from the laws of physics, which begs the question of where the laws of physics come from. So suppose another bright physicist is able to explain how the laws of physics come from the interaction of cosmic strings. Again, the next question would be where do the cosmic strings come from, and so on. It is an entirely irreducible problem for science because science must observe something in order to work. And it is in this space of something coming from nothing where most thinking people conceptualize God - the creative force of the universe in total, rather than some puppet master pulling the strings of the daily weather.

In fact, I think that the above should be plain to someone as intelligent as Hawking, which is why I suspect one of two things going on. One possibility is that he simply fits the old adage that a specialist outside his area of specialty is no smarter than anyone else. The conception of "God' that Hawking has now "negated" is in fact a very primitive conception of a "God of the gaps," i.e. a supposition that God must exist because there are things about the physical world (like magnets) that cannot otherwise be explained. Most thinking people who believe in God don't pin their belief on this. That view hasn't really been popular since Darwin. So either Hawking is a complete noob at philosophy, or the other possibility is that his earlier belief in the possibility of God was disingenuous. That is, he never really thought of God as a possibility, but wanted to appear open-minded. So now that his theory on matter generation is more developed, he concludes that there is no God and people take note of his earlier open-mindedness and conclude that Hawking must be right about the whole God thing. Either way, Hawking isn't adding anything new to the philosophical debate on the existence of God.

Flash, you're so good at trying to rubbish everyone else's opinions, even those of some of the leading scientists of our time, yet not once in all the dozens of posts you've written on religion and the creation of the universe have you even attempted to answer the question which has been put to you time after time. That is if you're so adamant that the views of eminent scientists like those of Stephen Hawking are wrong, let's hear your version, how did your precious god create everything, what from and how - and don't forget to let us know who created that god in the first place.

But of course like every other time you've been asked this, you'll either come out with the vague generalisation of "god did it", or you'll ignore it or refuse to answer...... You've directly challenged Stephen Hawking's views; since this is a debating and discussion forum, give an equally detailed rebuttal or shut up.

Originally Posted by flash

It's really a fairly ignorant statement by Hawking because conceptually, science simply cannot answer the question of God.

This is primarily for two related reasons.

(1) Science begins with the assumption that the universe can be explained purely by the interaction of mechanical forces (matter, gravity, etc.) without reference to any supernatural forces (i.e. God). Science is generally a deductive process, and as a deductive process you cannot prove your assumptions, it is a logical fallacy.

a. Assume no supernatural forces.
b. observe mechanical forces.
c. conclude that mechanical forces explain everything and that supernatural forces don't exist.

It simply doesn't work. Now your could argue that science often works in practice more by induction than deduction, but that tends to fail as well because of point two, below.

(2) Science is inherently limited to observing how things already in existence interact with one another. In order for the scientific process to work, you have to begin with something you can observe in some way, even if that observation is purely mathematical theory. Therefore, conceptually science can never fully explain the universe because it can never answer the "something coming from nothing" question. For instance, assume Hawking is right and that matter can be created from nothing purely from the laws of physics. But there he isn't starting from nothing, he's starting from the laws of physics, which begs the question of where the laws of physics come from. So suppose another bright physicist is able to explain how the laws of physics come from the interaction of cosmic strings. Again, the next question would be where do the cosmic strings come from, and so on. It is an entirely irreducible problem for science because science must observe something in order to work. And it is in this space of something coming from nothing where most thinking people conceptualize God - the creative force of the universe in total, rather than some puppet master pulling the strings of the daily weather.

In fact, I think that the above should be plain to someone as intelligent as Hawking, which is why I suspect one of two things going on. One possibility is that he simply fits the old adage that a specialist outside his area of specialty is no smarter than anyone else. The conception of "God' that Hawking has now "negated" is in fact a very primitive conception of a "God of the gaps," i.e. a supposition that God must exist because there are things about the physical world (like magnets) that cannot otherwise be explained. Most thinking people who believe in God don't pin their belief on this. That view hasn't really been popular since Darwin. So either Hawking is a complete noob at philosophy, or the other possibility is that his earlier belief in the possibility of God was disingenuous. That is, he never really thought of God as a possibility, but wanted to appear open-minded. So now that his theory on matter generation is more developed, he concludes that there is no God and people take note of his earlier open-mindedness and conclude that Hawking must be right about the whole God thing. Either way, Hawking isn't adding anything new to the philosophical debate on the existence of God.

Is this coppied and pasted from a creationist web site? All sounds very farmiliar, and has been debunked time and again by real scientists.

He is entitled to his opinion, but his opinion on God is no more valid than a 6 year old's.

Read more: http://www.politic.co.uk/religion-fa...#ixzz0ySajHBS7

A silly statement at best, but lets grant this assumption for the sake of argument. Niether is yours or any other religious person, seeing as the evidence for God is still zero.

Originally Posted by Midas

Flash, you're so good at trying to rubbish everyone else's opinions, even those of some of the leading scientists of our time, yet not once in all the dozens of posts you've written on religion and the creation of the universe have you even attempted to answer the question which has been put to you time after time. That is if you're so adamant that the views of eminent scientists like those of Stephen Hawking are wrong, let's hear your version, how did your precious god create everything, what from and how - and don't forget to let us know who created that god in the first place.

...and you haven't answered the question I have dozens of times. If clowns like Hawkins are right with their silly myth like theories then show me the proof. There are some very basic questions that Hawkins can’t answer. Like what was the initiating event of the creation of the universe or what was around before his postulation of a Big Bang. He can’t even come close to answering where the material from the Big Bang came from but unlike you he even admits it.

You think you have the right to demand proof from me while not having to provide any of your own.

As I have said many times and you have ignored many times the proof of God is in the complexity of the universe and the lack of proof of an alternative. If there is an alternative to God that can explain how this universe came into being all you have to do is show it me. I have asked you many times for it but all I get is silence. It is unreasonable to believe that something as complex as this universe just sprang into existence one day out of nothing. Intelligent design is the only logical explanation. Nothing else makes sense given the level of real knowledge we have at this time. Maybe sometime in the future somebody will come up with the real proof but they haven’t yet. In the meantime if you believe in a secular creation you are believing in myth like theories based upon very few facts. What is even worst is that these myth like theories go against our understanding of the Laws of Physics. In you arrogant atheistic mind you can’t accept that because to do would bust your bubble and you would have to get your butt out of bed Sunday morning and go to church and you ain’t about to do that, are you?

This idiot Hawkins have made the grand proclamation that God doesn’t exist then he must have some facts to back it up right? Show me his facts. If the facts don’t exist to back up his claim then he is talking out his ass, ain’t he? That is what I really asked in my previous post, isn't it?

Originally Posted by flash

...and you haven't answered the question I have dozens of times. If clowns like Hawkins are right with their silly myth like theories then show me the proof. There are some very basic questions that Hawkins can’t answer. Like what was the initiating event of the creation of the universe or what was around before his postulation of a Big Bang. He can’t even come close to answering where the material from the Big Bang came from but unlike you he even admits it.

You think you have the right to demand proof from me while not having to provide any of your own.

As I have said many times and you have ignored many times the proof of God is in the complexity of the universe and the lack of proof of an alternative. If there is an alternative to God that can explain how this universe came into being all you have to do is show it me. I have asked you many times for it but all I get is silence. It is unreasonable to believe that something as complex as this universe just sprang into existence one day out of nothing. Intelligent design is the only logical explanation. Nothing else makes sense given the level of real knowledge we have at this time. Maybe sometime in the future somebody will come up with the real proof but they haven’t yet. In the meantime if you believe in a secular creation you are believing in myth like theories based upon very few facts. What is even worst is that these myth like theories go against our understanding of the Laws of Physics. In you arrogant atheistic mind you can’t accept that because to do would bust your bubble and you would have to get your butt out of bed Sunday morning and go to church and you ain’t about to do that, are you?

This idiot Hawkins have made the grand proclamation that God doesn’t exist then he must have some facts to back it up right? Show me his facts. If the facts don’t exist to back up his claim then he is talking out his ass, ain’t he? That is what I really asked in my previous post, isn't it?

Here we go again, evading the questions put to you and implying that your own have not been answered, which they have, many times - it's simply you don't want to hear the answers. That's of course totally irrelevant to what you've been asked and have consistently refused to discuss though...... You say Stephen Hawking (try getting his name right) should show facts - why don't you try asking him - but how about you doing the same here, you imply you know it all?

Originally Posted by Midas

Here we go again, evading the questions put to you and implying that your own have not been answered, which they have, many times - it's simply you don't want to hear the answers. That's of course totally irrelevant to what you've been asked and have consistently refused to discuss though...... You say Stephen Hawking (try getting his name right) should show facts - why don't you try asking him - but how about you doing the same here, you imply you know it all?

I have asked him in the sense I have read his books. I have watched him recently try to explain his little myths on his series with the Science Channel. Because I have an interest in things like this and am well read on the subject I probably know more about him than you do.

He has shown me nothing to back up his claim that there is no God. He just pulls stuff out of his ass, people like you applaud him but in reality he has no more credibility than on this particular subject than The Man in The Moon. Wasn’t this jackass trying to tell us last month that we should get the hell off earth? What is he going to tell us next month that he has been sexually abused by aliens and that is the reason he is in a wheelchair?

If he wants to know about God I would suggest that instead of making stupid comments that has no validity (like you do sometimes) he should actually make an effort to learn about God by opening up his heart.

It always amazes me that the people that don’t believe in God are the ones that are always making statements about God.

You will never know about God until you put aside your atheistic arrogance and open up your heart. If you would do that then you would understand why Hawking is an idiot.

Originally Posted by flash

I have asked him in the sense I have read his books. I have watched him recently try to explain his little myths on his series with the Science Channel. Because I have an interest in things like this and am well read on the subject I probably know more about him than you do.

He has shown me nothing to back up his claim that there is no God. He just pulls stuff out of his ass, people like you applaud him but in reality he has no more credibility than on this particular subject than The Man in The Moon. Wasn’t this jackass trying to tell us last month that we should get the hell off earth? What is he going to tell us next month that he has been sexually abused by aliens and that is the reason he is in a wheelchair?

If he wants to know about God I would suggest that instead of making stupid comments that has no validity (like you do sometimes) he should actually make an effort to learn about God by opening up his heart.

It always amazes me that the people that don’t believe in God are the ones that are always making statements about God.

You will never know about God until you put aside your atheistic arrogance and open up your heart. If you would do that then you would understand why Hawking is an idiot.

I have never in my life come accross anyone, either in the flesh or on the net, that can come close to the stupidity and arrogance of you sir.
The "proof" (an oxymoron seeing as there isn't even a shred of evidence, let alone proof) of God is NOT in the complexity of the universe. That stupid childish notion was debunked and shown to be a falacy decades ago.
The complexity aparent in the universe, in life forms etc, can be eligantly and simply explained without the need of a designer, or a prime mover. And even if one were irrational enough to take the position that the universe must be designed by a super natural deity, people like you still have all your work ahead of you to get to a God that designed everything with us in mind, that knows our thoughts and answers prayers, that periodically interviened in human affairs. That punishes and rewards depending how he's feeling. That demands animal and human sacrifice for sin.

It's you sir that has the closed mind, and arrogance in your dogmatic bronze age beliefs. Hawking's latest book and series of programs explain very eloquently how the universe came into being, you simply reject it because it slaughters your backward thinking and religion.

You've still not stepped up to the plate and accepted any invitation to debate your religion on purely Biblical precepts, you who claims to be so courageous, who calls people you don't even know cowards.
You won't because you have next to no understanding of your religion, of the holy book it derives from. You know even less about science, physics, cosmology etc.

Originally Posted by flash

I have asked him in the sense I have read his books. I have watched him recently try to explain his little myths on his series with the Science Channel. Because I have an interest in things like this and am well read on the subject I probably know more about him than you do.

He has shown me nothing to back up his claim that there is no God. He just pulls stuff out of his ass, people like you applaud him but in reality he has no more credibility than on this particular subject than The Man in The Moon. Wasn’t this jackass trying to tell us last month that we should get the hell off earth? What is he going to tell us next month that he has been sexually abused by aliens and that is the reason he is in a wheelchair?

If he wants to know about God I would suggest that instead of making stupid comments that has no validity (like you do sometimes) he should actually make an effort to learn about God by opening up his heart.

It always amazes me that the people that don’t believe in God are the ones that are always making statements about God.

You will never know about God until you put aside your atheistic arrogance and open up your heart. If you would do that then you would understand why Hawking is an idiot.

That'll be another no-answer to the question then......

Of course we all know why you consistently refuse to even make the attempt to answer, but the very fact that you won't admit that religion has no more of an answer than science is quite telling about your arrogance. In fact religion has even less of an answer than science, because it least the latter has got all our combined knowledge to base hypotheses about the creation of the universe on, whereas religion also has to find additional evidence to support its claim there is such a thing as a god, and then to answer the additional question of where that god came from and how he/she/it just happened to be there before the universe was created. And we all know that despite several thousand years of trying, it's totally failed to do either.

Despite your repeated sneering assertions that science knows less than nothing and your implications that you know it all, we're still waiting for you to get started with your own explanation...... Shall we do so now Flash, or will there be yet another prevarication?

Originally Posted by Midas

That'll be another no-answer to the question then......

Of course we all know why you consistently refuse to even make the attempt to answer, but the very fact that you won't admit that religion has no more of an answer than science is quite telling about your arrogance. In fact religion has even less of an answer than science, because it least the latter has got all our combined knowledge to base hypotheses about the creation of the universe on, whereas religion also has to find additional evidence to support its claim there is such a thing as a god, and then to answer the additional question of where that god came from and how he/she/it just happened to be there before the universe was created. And we all know that despite several thousand years of trying, it's totally failed to do either.

Despite your repeated sneering assertions that science knows less than nothing and your implications that you know it all, we're still waiting for you to get started with your own explanation...... Shall we do so now Flash, or will there be yet another prevarication?

…and you have yet to tell me how this complex universe came into being without intelligent design even though I have asked you numerous times. You are really good about not answering the most important question. If you don’t believe in God then you must have a rational explanation of how you and the rest of the universe got here. The best I can get out of you is “I don’t know but maybe I will know one of these days and in the meantime I just know there is no God”.

The analogy of Hawkings is one of the ant bed I have in my back yard. Florida is notorious for fire ants and I have one in my yard I have to take care of later today. I am going and stretch out this analogy for you. It may be a little on the silly side and doesn’t take into consideration the personal relationship people have with God or the fact that God made humans in His image but the basic point I make is valid.

In July I went out to the Hanford nuclear weapons complex to do an environmental and safety audit. One of my jobs this weekend is to finalize the report. It is a very detailed and complex report.

Those ants out in the back yard probably don’t even know I exist. They won’t know anything until I kill them and then they probably won’t know anything about me. They sure as hell cannot comprehend the complexity of the report I am writing. There may a Steven Hawkings of the ant world that is trying to figure out where he came from and may have even made some postulations about it but he doesn’t have a clue what I am all about or really about the universe he lives in. He sure as hell could not comprehend the report I am writing. Given the limited sensory of the ants and the brain capacity of the ants they will never know much of anything. Our little Hawkings ant probably could not even prove I exist to another ant. He may be the smartest ant in the colony but he really doesn’t know anything.

I will soon bring their little ant world to an end and they will have no clue of what or why.

When it comes to knowing about this universe humans don’t know anything. Jerkoffs like Hawkings may be one of the smartest ants in our little human ant hill but that doesn’t mean he really knows anything.

If I am wrong and humans really do know how this universe came into existence then all you have to do is take this time to explain it to me like I have asked you to do many time but yet you continue to avoid my question.

Originally Posted by flash

…and you have yet to tell me how this complex universe came into being without intelligent design even though I have asked you numerous times. You are really good about not answering the most important question. If you don’t believe in God then you must have a rational explanation of how you and the rest of the universe got here. The best I can get out of you is “I don’t know but maybe I will know one of these days and in the meantime I just know there is no God”.

[ ... ]

If I am wrong and humans really do know how this universe came into existence then all you have to do is take this time to explain it to me like I have asked you to do many time but yet you continue to avoid my question.

As I said, that'll be another no-answer to the question then, just another in your long line of obfuscations......

Virtually everyone who's taken part in this and similar discussions with you has given you answers to the questions you keep asking, but in common with most religious nuts I've met over the years, you either ignore or rubbish them simply because you don't like what you hear; you know full well that religion has even less of an answer than science. That's why, as I keep pointing out to you, you'll never confront the issue head on; it seems that you don't have the courage of your conviction otherwise you'd at least make some attempt to rationalise your thoughts and offer up some kind of answer even though it might be wrong. At a guess from the way you keep repeating what you've no doubt been taught to say by your church and ignoring everything else, fact or not, I'd say you know very little of the real history behind religion. For instance, this god you believe in - have you any idea when he/she/it first came into popular culture, and how, where and why that happened? I'll be interested to hear your answer, because it leads on to something very important.

Originally Posted by Midas

As I said, that'll be another no-answer to the question then, just another in your long line of obfuscations......

Virtually everyone who's taken part in this and similar discussions with you has given you answers to the questions you keep asking, but in common with most religious nuts I've met over the years, you either ignore or rubbish them simply because you don't like what you hear; you know full well that religion has even less of an answer than science. That's why, as I keep pointing out to you, you'll never confront the issue head on; it seems that you don't have the courage of your conviction otherwise you'd at least make some attempt to rationalise your thoughts and offer up some kind of answer even though it might be wrong. At a guess from the way you keep repeating what you've no doubt been taught to say by your church and ignoring everything else, fact or not, I'd say you know very little of the real history behind religion. For instance, this god you believe in - have you any idea when he/she/it first came into popular culture, and how, where and why that happened? I'll be interested to hear your answer, because it leads on to something very important.

What is the answer?


You keep claiming that you have “given the answer” but I haven’t seen it lately. All I have seen out of you is a denial of the Lord and some gobbly gook.


Where did this universe come from? It is a simple question. Give the answer without beating around the bush. Show me your proof.


You did say you don’t believe in God and on a couple of occasions you have said you don’t know how the universe got here but that is not an answer. Actually you have been jumping all over the place because one time you try to reiterate the gobbly gook of Hawking and other times you claim you don’t know how the universe got here when pressed on the details. I don’t think you really have any convictions one way or another except for your conviction that you don’t believe in God. That is the only thing you really believe, isn’t it? Sorry but your psychological hangups with denying the Lord doesn’t explain how the universe got here. Your denial of God doesn’t explain it and neither does Hawking’s denial of God explain how the universe was created. Hawking’s basis for claiming that God doesn’t exist is on the same credibility level as yours. Zilch.


You or Hawking or anybody else doesn’t know anymore about how this universe got here than an ant in the ant bed out in my back yard knows about the technical report pertaining to a nuclear weapons facility that I am working on this weekend.


All you have to do is admit it instead of trying to BS everybody.


You won’t admit it because to do so will shed doubt on your silly little secular myth like theory that the universe was created out of nothing. You know how silly it is and that is the reason you can’t defend it. You have closed your mind to intelligent design but yet you have no plausible alternative to it. If you do I have asked you dozens of times to produce the proof and you have shown me nothing.

Here's a theory without God;

The universe is essentially in an infinite loop, one universe eventually leading to the next. We know that the universe is expanding, and part of this expansion is driven by Dark matter, which is constantly expanding everywhere at once. At some point in the future, dark matter will have essentially expanded too much, whereupon the energy links between pieces of matter are now too far apart from each other to function as matter, and so the universe essentially pops like a balloon you've blown up too much (although there would not be an explosion). What you have left over is an infinite space made up of dark matter, and tiny remnants of matter and energy. Such pieces of matter and energy now exert gravity (essentially in the same way they do now), and they rush together (as there are no longer any intervening effects like other gravity fields and the like, the process is much faster and more powerful). Because gravity is the only force exerted on them, the particles for an infinitely dense ball of matter, being crushed together more and more. This forms a singularity, which then BAM, begins expanding, pushing out the dark matter (or possibly using it to create energy and hence, matter) to create a new universe.

Originally Posted by DC

Here's a theory without God;

The universe is essentially in an infinite loop, one universe eventually leading to the next.

...and exactly how do you know this?

Unless you show me some real proof then your "theory" it is nothing more than another silly little myth.

Originally Posted by flash

...and exactly how do you know this?

Unless you show me some real proof then your "theory" it is nothing more than another silly little myth.

I have faith.

Originally Posted by DC

I have faith.

So having faith is a legitimate reason? You had better be prepared to show proof because a few of the clowns on this thread won't accept it.

Unless you are being facetious then you are telling me that you have faith in that theory because it makes the most sense to you, correct?

To me I have faith in intelligent design because given the complexity of the universe and the fact that I don’t believe in making something out of nothing then that is idea that makes most sense to me.

I am glad some people are now seeing the light:

YouTube - Johnny Cash - I saw the Light (1974, Columbo: Swan song)

Originally Posted by flash

So having faith is a legitimate reason? You had better be prepared to show proof because a few of the clowns on this thread won't accept it.

Unless you are being facetious then you are telling me that you have faith in that theory because it makes the most sense to you, correct?

To me I have faith in intelligent design because given the complexity of the universe and the fact that I don’t believe in making something out of nothing then that is idea that makes most sense to me.

Wait so because have faith in my 'theory', it isn't a 'silly little myth'? Actually it's grounded in what we KNOW about the universe. The universe did begin with a singularity, it is expanding and one of the propelling forces is dark matter. The 'issues' with my theory are simply that we don't fully understand the properties of either singularities or dark matter. My 'theory' is purely a hypothesis that is based on what we currently know about the universe and the forces within it. What's more, mine can be proven, either true or false, by empirical science. Your belief is a factless one based on the rantings of a schizophrenic 2000 years ago.

Originally Posted by DC

Wait so because have faith in my 'theory', it isn't a 'silly little myth'? Actually it's grounded in what we KNOW about the universe. The universe did begin with a singularity, it is expanding and one of the propelling forces is dark matter. The 'issues' with my theory are simply that we don't fully understand the properties of either singularities or dark matter. My 'theory' is purely a hypothesis that is based on what we currently know about the universe and the forces within it. What's more, mine can be proven, either true or false, by empirical science. Your belief is a factless one based on the rantings of a schizophrenic 2000 years ago.

What do you know?

Tell me how the universe got here without intelligent design.

Originally Posted by flash

What do you know?

Tell me how the universe got here without intelligent design.

I just did, my theory perfectly explains the existence of the universe and the forces within it based upon what we know, completely without intelligent design.

Originally Posted by flash

What do you know?

Tell me how the universe got here without intelligent design.

The same question in reverse has been directed at you, and every religious crack pot that has ever postulated this "ID" garbage (which is just creation dressed up as science). So, do tell, how did the universe get here WITH intelligent disign? I want proof, not just theories or myths.

Originally Posted by DC

I just did, my theory perfectly explains the existence of the universe and the forces within it based upon what we know, completely without intelligent design.

I am sorry but I want some details. You haven't told me anything. You spouted some theory but you haven't proved anything or even said anything of substance.

There are billions and billions of galaxies out there. More galaxies than there are grains of sand on earth and each galaxy has hundreds of millions if not billions of stars.

How did that all get here?

If you try to tell me again that it just sprang into existence one day out of nothing I am going to puke. If you are going to talk about gobbly gook things like “parallel universes” or “singularities” or big bangs other scientific myths like that without showing me proof I am going to puke.

There are only two data points for the big bang theory. First is that the universe has been observe as to be expanding in the all directions so there (drum roll) it must have stared from a single point. Of course the red shift data compiled by Hubble was flawed and even as recently as a couple of months ago the scientists admitted they don’t know enough about dark matter to come to that conclusion nowadays but hey that isn’t going to stop a perfectly good anti God theory, is it?

The second data point is there seems to be a cosmic background noise that the scientists speculate must have been caused by a big bang. Quite a jump from hearing some static on a radio in a New jersey backyard to postulating that there is no God and we all sprang into existence (against the Laws of Physics) out of nothing, isn’t it?

Outside of those two data points there is nothing. Nada. Contrary to the arrogant proclamations of jackoffs like Hawking the denial of God has no scientific basis at all.

If we weren’t here because of intelligent design then tell me how we got here? No more beating around the bush. Put up or shut up. I want to see some real proof. If you really believe the universe got here without God then show me the proof. It should be easy since you are so convinced. For you to have convictions on it then you must have the proof. Just hating the idea of religion and God by itself doesn’t hack it. That is not science but hateful bigotry.

Originally Posted by flash

I am sorry but I want some details. You haven't told me anything. You spouted some theory but you haven't proved anything or even said anything of substance.

There are billions and billions of galaxies out there. More galaxies than there are grains of sand on earth and each galaxy has hundreds of millions if not billions of stars.

How did that all get here?

If you try to tell me again that it just sprang into existence one day out of nothing I am going to puke. If you are going to talk about gobbly gook things like “parallel universes” or “singularities” or big bangs other scientific myths like that without showing me proof I am going to puke.

There are only two data points for the big bang theory. First is that the universe has been observe as to be expanding in the all directions so there (drum roll) it must have stared from a single point. Of course the red shift data compiled by Hubble was flawed and even as recently as a couple of months ago the scientists admitted they don’t know enough about dark matter to come to that conclusion nowadays but hey that isn’t going to stop a perfectly good anti God theory, is it?

The second data point is there seems to be a cosmic background noise that the scientists speculate must have been caused by a big bang. Quite a jump from hearing some static on a radio in a New jersey backyard to postulating that there is no God and we all sprang into existence (against the Laws of Physics) out of nothing, isn’t it?

Outside of those two data points there is nothing. Nada. Contrary to the arrogant proclamations of jackoffs like Hawking the denial of God has no scientific basis at all.

If we weren’t here because of intelligent design then tell me how we got here? No more beating around the bush. Put up or shut up. I want to see some real proof. If you really believe the universe got here without God then show me the proof. It should be easy since you are so convinced. For you to have convictions on it then you must have the proof. Just hating the idea of religion and God by itself doesn’t hack it. That is not science but hateful bigotry.

Another idiotic rant, avoiding overwelming mountains of evidence. Midas has speculated that your denial is based on fear, fear of confronting your silly religion and testing it against evidence. I'm more convinced that you are just a bit stupid, and don't have the interlectual capacity to understand or comprihend the amazing elegant discoveries that REAL science has made that explain how our universe came to be. Beleiving in God gives you comfort, it rests your lazy disfunctional mind, it means you no longer have to think about anything. When a profound or fundamental question arises about our existence, "God did it, thats the answer because I don't understand all this gobly gook about science...........and I'm a rootin tootin, riffle ownin, gun totin, bible thumpin 'merican, so I'ma goin straight to heaven, while you stinkin atheists are on an express train straight to hell, halleluya, praise the lord.........can I get an amen"........

Originally Posted by flash

So having faith is a legitimate reason? You had better be prepared to show proof because a few of the clowns on this thread won't accept it.

Unless you are being facetious then you are telling me that you have faith in that theory because it makes the most sense to you, correct?

To me I have faith in intelligent design because given the complexity of the universe and the fact that I don’t believe in making something out of nothing then that is idea that makes most sense to me.

Talk about double-standards!! So it's fine for you to instantly demand proof if someone says they have faith in something, but when it comes to you being asked the very same question time after time, you consistently and repeatedly ignore it! Sheesh......

Originally Posted by Midas

Talk about double-standards!! So it's fine for you to instantly demand proof if someone says they have faith in something, but when it comes to you being asked the very same question time after time, you consistently and repeatedly ignore it! Sheesh......

You didn't understand the point I was making. I was challenging DC on using faith as in whatever while rejecting my faith in God.

You can't have "faith" in science. Science is either proveable facts or it is not. I want to see the facts on the evolution of a secular universe. I have asked to see these facts many times but I continue to get nothing.

Originally Posted by flash

You didn't understand the point I was making. I was challenging DC on using faith as in whatever while rejecting my faith in God.

You can't have "faith" in science. Science is either proveable facts or it is not. I want to see the facts on the evolution of a secular universe. I have asked to see these facts many times but I continue to get nothing.

And you didn't understand DC either, he was being ironic or as we working class Brits say "taking the piss".
And you wouldn't get the facts that clearly display the evolution of the universe, you don't have the capacity. Your mind is completely closed to anything other than bronze age myths.

Not sure if this is a private debate () but throwing my two pence worth in anyhow. I can kind of understand what both sides are saying but at the end of the day for me it comes down to this: scientific theory - of course the universe wasn't just created out of nowhere, I thought it was a result of mass of some kind creating a reaction. Religious view - those who want to believe God created everything at the start must accept then that he continues to do so.

Originally Posted by flash

I am sorry but I want some details. You haven't told me anything. You spouted some theory but you haven't proved anything or even said anything of substance.

Neither have you.

There are billions and billions of galaxies out there. More galaxies than there are grains of sand on earth and each galaxy has hundreds of millions if not billions of stars.

How did that all get here?

If you try to tell me again that it just sprang into existence one day out of nothing I am going to puke. If you are going to talk about gobbly gook things like “parallel universes” or “singularities” or big bangs other scientific myths like that without showing me proof I am going to puke.

Err, none of those things are myths, singularities are accepted fact. As for where it all came from that's quite simple, singularities produce enormous amounts of energy, from which matter can form. I also postulated that singularities may either use up dark matter to create real matter, or, as they are themselves of infinite density, simply produce immense amounts of matter and energy as they expand and contract. there's where all your stuff came from.

If we weren’t here because of intelligent design then tell me how we got here? No more beating around the bush. Put up or shut up. I want to see some real proof. If you really believe the universe got here without God then show me the proof. It should be easy since you are so convinced. For you to have convictions on it then you must have the proof. Just hating the idea of religion and God by itself doesn’t hack it. That is not science but hateful bigotry.

The reason we are skeptical of the idea of God is simple, either the universe was created through forces which are not fully understood, but otherwise behave in a clear and measurable manner, or it was created by a guy with a big bushy beard and hard on for plagues. Which is the most rational, logical and sensible to you?

Originally Posted by Lots2say

Not sure if this is a private debate () but throwing my two pence worth in anyhow. I can kind of understand what both sides are saying but at the end of the day for me it comes down to this: scientific theory - of course the universe wasn't just created out of nowhere, I thought it was a result of mass of some kind creating a reaction. Religious view - those who want to believe God created everything at the start must accept then that he continues to do so.

The secularists are saying the "reaction" came out of nowhere. To have a reaction you have to have something to start with and you have to have something to initiate the reaction and you have to the reaction mechanism in place. Where did all that stuff come from and what was here before the reaction? Very legitimate questions that can’t be answered.

The secularists demand proof that there is a God but can’t answer the very basis questions of if this universe was not put here by intelligent design then how in the hell did it get here? Since they are absolutely convinced there is no God then they must have proof that it was created elsewhere.

Since they really don’t have that proof and therefore really know nothing they say things like “oh, we really don’t have to prove anything”, which is really just a cop out to cover up the fact their beliefs are based upon a psychological hatred of God and not upon any scientific reason.

Atheists don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground about how the universe was created but they do know they don’t love the Lord. I have speculated that a distrust of God probably has some psychosis associated it. Maybe abuse as a child or a bad life where the person doesn’t take personal responsibility and blames it on God or whatever. It could be anything but I do know it isn’t based upon science because science can’t explain the origin of the universe. If I am wrong then all someone has to do is post the proof, which I have asked for many times but get nothing.

Originally Posted by Lots2say

Not sure if this is a private debate () but throwing my two pence worth in anyhow. I can kind of understand what both sides are saying but at the end of the day for me it comes down to this: scientific theory - of course the universe wasn't just created out of nowhere, I thought it was a result of mass of some kind creating a reaction. Religious view - those who want to believe God created everything at the start must accept then that he continues to do so.

A quick word Lots2say, but if you haven't already noticed, trying to discuss religion with Flash is akin to trying to wrestle with a ball of cotton wool! He's a great one for lecturing on his unsupported views, running through the spectrum of fallacies, and demanding answers from others (even though he's been given them in various forms many times over - if he doesn't like what he hears it's as if it's never been said), but ask him a direct question about anything to do with the reason for his belief or the foundations of religion and it'll be completely ignored.

Originally Posted by Midas

A quick word Lots2say, but if you haven't already noticed, trying to discuss religion with Flash is akin to trying to wrestle with a ball of cotton wool! He's a great one for lecturing on his unsupported views, running through the spectrum of fallacies, and demanding answers from others (even though he's been given them in various forms many times over - if he doesn't like what he hears it's as if it's never been said), but ask him a direct question about anything to do with the reason for his belief or the foundations of religion and it'll be completely ignored.

Trying to have a discussion with the God haters (excuse me, I mean the non believers) is a waste of time because they never answer any questions with substance and they have no intention of explaining how this universe got here if it wasn’t by intelligent design. You can ask that question until you a blue in the face and you will never get an answer.


In their arrogance they demand proof but supply none of their own. You would think that if someone was going to remove intelligent design from the list of possibilities they would have something to replace it with but when you ask them for it you get absolutely nothing.


At the end of the day it isn’t really about proof. It is about the fact that the atheists absolutely hate God for some unknown psychological reason. They try to deny it by making claims like “oh I don’t hate something I don’t believe in” but their demeaning of believers speaks volumes of their real agenda.


I really feel sorry for atheists. If they would just tell me what happen in their lives to create a rejection of God then maybe I could help them. If not me then there are plenty of other people who would be willing to help cure the psychosis.

If god created man then why isn't man biologically better? We have far too many faults to have been created by a perfect designer.

Originally Posted by Lots2say

Not sure if this is a private debate () but throwing my two pence worth in anyhow. I can kind of understand what both sides are saying but at the end of the day for me it comes down to this: scientific theory - of course the universe wasn't just created out of nowhere, I thought it was a result of mass of some kind creating a reaction. Religious view - those who want to believe God created everything at the start must accept then that he continues to do so.

I have challenged flash numerous times to a Biblical debate, nothing to do with science or anything like that, purely a Biblical theological debate. I opened a thread to get the ball rolling. So far he has rejected all offers to debate his religion based purely on Biblical Christianity. He babbles on about "intelligent design" as if it's a scientific argument. He won't accept or aknowledge that even in his own predominantly Christian country, a US court threw this nonsense out, denounced it as a psudeo science, ruled that it should not be taught in school, and even trashed the so called name of it, and told them that ID was just creation dressed up as science.
The answers to his questions have been given time and time again, links to peer reviewed works have been given. He continues to call some of the greatest scientists of all time "jackoffs" etc, claiming they know nothing, and he has all the answers. We've yet to see one of his answers though that can even cast a vague suspicion that God might exist, let alone any concret evidence or proof.
You'll never get a straight answer on anything to do with his religion. Whenever he's asked a straght forward question about his faith, he hides behind verbal abuse, irrational ranting and raving, name calling etc. On the odd occassion that he does let something slip about his faith, he shows his lamentable lack of any understanding aout Christianity, virtually zero knowledge of the ancient scriptures it is derived from. In fact, I've yet to see him display a single Christian value at all. He's arrogant, abusive, self centered, boastful, has violent tendancies, displays irrational bouts of racism, his political beliefs border on extreme fascism...................just about everything that the Appostle Paul said that a desciple of Jesus SHOULD NOT BE!
He seems to have a very unhealthy obsession with child abuse, and often makes cheap remarks about it, something he's been warned about. He's done it again in this thread, so I guess he just can't help himself.
I have a theory about his true identity. I think he is actually Kent Hovind using the prison library computers. Watch any of Hovinds laughable, crazy, mind nummingly stupid talks about creation, then read what flash has to say. It's all very similar rhetoric.

I'm sure he'll argue that this is not the case, but just have a read through some of the threads and make your own judgment. If you think my assessment has been unfair or inaccurate, please don't hesitate to point it out.

Originally Posted by DaveUK

I have challenged flash numerous times to a Biblical debate, nothing to do with science or anything like that, purely a Biblical theological debate. I opened a thread to get the ball rolling. So far he has rejected all offers to debate his religion based purely on Biblical Christianity. He babbles on about "intelligent design" as if it's a scientific argument. He won't accept or aknowledge that even in his own predominantly Christian country, a US court threw this nonsense out, denounced it as a psudeo science, ruled that it should not be taught in school, and even trashed the so called name of it, and told them that ID was just creation dressed up as science.
The answers to his questions have been given time and time again, links to peer reviewed works have been given. He continues to call some of the greatest scientists of all time "jackoffs" etc, claiming they know nothing, and he has all the answers. We've yet to see one of his answers though that can even cast a vague suspicion that God might exist, let alone any concret evidence or proof.
You'll never get a straight answer on anything to do with his religion. Whenever he's asked a straght forward question about his faith, he hides behind verbal abuse, irrational ranting and raving, name calling etc. On the odd occassion that he does let something slip about his faith, he shows his lamentable lack of any understanding aout Christianity, virtually zero knowledge of the ancient scriptures it is derived from. In fact, I've yet to see him display a single Christian value at all. He's arrogant, abusive, self centered, boastful, has violent tendancies, displays irrational bouts of racism, his political beliefs border on extreme fascism...................just about everything that the Appostle Paul said that a desciple of Jesus SHOULD NOT BE!
He seems to have a very unhealthy obsession with child abuse, and often makes cheap remarks about it, something he's been warned about. He's done it again in this thread, so I guess he just can't help himself.
I have a theory about his true identity. I think he is actually Kent Hovind using the prison library computers. Watch any of Hovinds laughable, crazy, mind nummingly stupid talks about creation, then read what flash has to say. It's all very similar rhetoric.

I'm sure he'll argue that this is not the case, but just have a read through some of the threads and make your own judgment. If you think my assessment has been unfair or inaccurate, please don't hesitate to point it out.

Come on Dave, stop beating around the bush; tell us what you really think

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

If god created man then why isn't man biologically better? We have far too many faults to have been created by a perfect designer.

Why don't you start going to church and open up your heart to God and then just maybe questions like this will be answered to your satisfaction? There is actually an explanation of that in the Old Testament if you would bother to read it and understand the message.

If you don't believe in God then your question on why that God made imperfect human beings is silly. You are asking a question where your basic premise is flawed if you never believe God made humans in the first place.

If you don’t believe in God then your question should be; why did the fictional writers of the Bible not explain to my satisfaction why humans are not perfect? The answer to that question is simple; because they didn’t. Next question.

I never feel the need to explain the details of God’s world to non believers. If they don’t believe in God for whatever screwed up psychological reason then there is nothing I can say that will satisfy them. I might as well be trying to explain the concept of physics to the Man in the Moon.

There are lots of secular questions I would like answered. Like why is this universe here if it wasn’t put here by intelligent design? How can you create something out of nothing?

Do you think you can answer some of those questions for me? It would be nice because nobody else can. Maybe you can be the person that enlightens me. Unlike an atheists that has some kind of psychological disorder preventing them from accepting God all you have to do with me is prove that God doesn’t exist and I will stop believing in Him. Be aware, however, that I can separate real proof from BS so your explanation better be rock solid.

Originally Posted by flash

Why don't you start going to church and open up your heart to God and then just maybe questions like this will be answered to your satisfaction? There is actually an explanation of that in the Old Testament if you would bother to read it and understand the message.

If you don't believe in God then your question on why that God made imperfect human beings is silly. You are asking a question where your basic premise is flawed if you never believe God made humans in the first place.

If you don’t believe in God then your question should be; why did the fictional writers of the Bible not explain to my satisfaction why humans are not perfect? The answer to that question is simple; because they didn’t. Next question.

I never feel the need to explain the details of God’s world to non believers. If they don’t believe in God for whatever screwed up psychological reason then there is nothing I can say that will satisfy them. I might as well be trying to explain the concept of physics to the Man in the Moon.

There are lots of secular questions I would like answered. Like why is this universe here if it wasn’t put here by intelligent design? How can you create something out of nothing?

Do you think you can answer some of those questions for me? It would be nice because nobody else can. Maybe you can be the person that enlightens me. Unlike an atheists that has some kind of psychological disorder preventing them from accepting God all you have to do with me is prove that God doesn’t exist and I will stop believing in Him. Be aware, however, that I can separate real proof from BS so your explanation better be rock solid.

Ok flash, I'll go into the arguments against intelligent design some other time if you so wish. However, even if we accept intelligent design, what evidence is there that it was the god of christianity who was the designer, and not the god of any other hundreds of established religions the world over?

There is actually an explanation of that in the Old Testament if you would bother to read it and understand the message.

No there isn't. As the story goes in Genesis, God seemed to have been taken aback by the talking snake and the easily led eve, and got extremely angry, so much so that he cursed eve and her female descendants with birth and menstrural pains forever, cursed the snake with having to crawl around in the dust forever, and cursed adam with having to work for a living.
Haven't you stated before that you believe in Darwinian evolution? I'm sure you have. Therefore this stupid story is irrelavent anyway isn't it?

If you don't believe in God then your question on why that God made imperfect human beings is silly. You are asking a question where your basic premise is flawed if you never believe God made humans in the first place.

Surely the same could be said for someone who believes that humans evolved..........as you must do if you believe in darwinian evolution?

If you don’t believe in God then your question should be; why did the fictional writers of the Bible not explain to my satisfaction why humans are not perfect? The answer to that question is simple; because they didn’t. Next question.

Actually, if one doesn't believe in God, and instead accepts that we are an evolving species that "bares the stamp of our lowly origins" (Charles Darwin), then the mystery as to why are not perfect instantly clears up. We no longer need to wonder why a God made us imperfect, susceptable to desease, deformaty, wickedness etc, and commands us to make ourselves well by accepting the torturing to death of a mad rabi known as Jesus.

I never feel the need to explain the details of God’s world to non believers.

Well you should, your religion demands it of you. You are suposed to preach the gospel to none believers, be always ready to give an answer for the hope that lies in you WITH MEAKNESS AND FEAR (not arrogance and verbal abuse).

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

Ok flash, I'll go into the arguments against intelligent design some other time if you so wish. However, even if we accept intelligent design, what evidence is there that it was the god of christianity who was the designer, and not the god of any other hundreds of established religions the world over?

There are two levels of belief.

The first one is accepting the concept of a Supreme Being.

The second level is disagreement/discussion among believers of the details of how the Supreme Being interacts with humans.

There is even a third level among different sects. For instance, my Lutheran sect differs from the Catholics.

If you are not a believer then there is no need to go to the second level, is there?

Why waste time?

Atheists don’t believe in God so why waste time explaining anything to them? If they open up their heart to God then their questions will be answered. If their mind is closed to God then what difference does it make?

If you have a hunger for understanding the Lord then don’t waste your time asking dumb questions on a two bit discussion forum. Open up your heart and then go to church and start learning about God’s world. There are many people out there that will help you.

My mind is always open to the secular world. Just show me how this universe came into existence without intelligent design and I will stop believing in God.

You can start by showing me the proof right now, which I have asked for many times, but nobody produces.

Originally Posted by flash

Atheists don’t believe in God so why waste time explaining anything to them? If they open up their heart to God then their questions will be answered. If their mind is closed to God then what difference does it make?

That sums up your whole narrow-minded attitude doesn't it? Quite why you're in a debating forum I don't know, discussing options and alternatives is the last thing you want to do. Perhaps you'd be far more at home in a Christian 'pat each other on the back' forum where you can all agree that your narrow little world of no evidence at all is right and everyone else is wrong.

My mind is always open to the secular world. Just show me how this universe came into existence without intelligent design and I will stop believing in God.

You can start by showing me the proof right now, which I have asked for many times, but nobody produces.

Is that supposed to be a joke? I've lost track of the number of times you've asked that question, just as I've lost track of the number of times you've been given answers to it... and just as I've lot track of the number of times you've refused to give the same proof of how this god of yours created everything.

Originally Posted by flash

There are two levels of belief.

The first one is accepting the concept of a Supreme Being.

The second level is disagreement/discussion among believers of the details of how the Supreme Being interacts with humans.

There is even a third level among different sects. For instance, my Lutheran sect differs from the Catholics.

If you are not a believer then there is no need to go to the second level, is there?

Why waste time?

Atheists don’t believe in God so why waste time explaining anything to them? If they open up their heart to God then their questions will be answered. If their mind is closed to God then what difference does it make?

If you have a hunger for understanding the Lord then don’t waste your time asking dumb questions on a two bit discussion forum. Open up your heart and then go to church and start learning about God’s world. There are many people out there that will help you.

My mind is always open to the secular world. Just show me how this universe came into existence without intelligent design and I will stop believing in God.

You can start by showing me the proof right now, which I have asked for many times, but nobody produces.

Some of the most convoluted clap trap cop out nonsense I have ever read from someone calling themselves a Christian.
As a christian how can there be two levels of belief, unless you're not sure what you are or what you believe?
What you have actually demonstrated is the unbelievable leap one has to make, with no linking corresponding evidence from the deist position, to the theist position, and then from the theist position, to the mindless piffle of denominational religion.
There's zero evidence to support the deist position. But even if one rejected logical scientific explanations for the complexity of time and space and life, and adopts the deist position.........there's nothing anything like convincing, logical or believable that can get you to the position of a creator that did it with us in mind, that interviens in human affairs, that rewards and punishes, demands human and animal sacrifice, performs mirricles, writes on slabs of stone, floods and drowns his creation, that plans to destroy everything anyway and start all over again after the "tribulation".
And then there's the hundreds of denominations and interpretations of the bronze age texts that this rubbish is derived from. And you expect to be taken seriously? If there was this much wild variation in the interpretation of scientific method and data, the human species would still be in the dark ages.
In your arrogance, you missed out another level to this nonsense. Which theistic belief system should the curious none believer adopt? Judeism, Christianity, or Islam? Whichever one you recomend, you surely have to explain why the other two are wrong. And you also have the problem of which stripe of any one of those three beliefs one should choose.
Going to a church is far from a guarantee that one will learn anything about Gods world, or word. It's far more likely you'll spend most of your church time enacting unbiblical pagan rituals, being told how wretched you are by someone with the moral fibre of a sewer rat, singing mindless psudeo pop songs, and emptying your pockets in tythes and donations.

You still haven't adressed the anomolies and inconsistancies in your belief in the Bible and evolution. The two are completely incompatible, mutually exclusive. You may not say that God created man, and then adopts Darwinian evolution. We were either created in Gods image, or we are evolved primates that bare the lowly stamp of our origins. Which is it? Avoiding or ignoring the question won't get you off the hook.

Originally Posted by DaveUK

Some of the most convoluted clap trap cop out nonsense I have ever read from someone calling themselves a Christian.

[ ... ]

I'd like to expand slightly on your comment "In your arrogance, you missed out another level to this nonsense. Which theistic belief system should the curious none believer adopt? Judaism, Christianity, or Islam? Whichever one you recommend, you surely have to explain why the other two are wrong. And you also have the problem of which stripe of any one of those three beliefs one should choose.", both generally and in specific relation to a question about 'the history of god' I asked Flash a few days ago, which as usual he's ignored.

Of course you're right, during recorded history there have been literally thousands of different gods around the world. Many of the very early ones we have only sketchy details of as they were worshipped in the days before the written word, and we're only aware of them by either interpretational references from artifacts or from drawings and other pictorial evidence. Perhaps the earliest gods we can give specific and identifiable names to were Enki from Sumeria, Tiamut from Babylon and Bat from early dynastic Egypt, all three dating back to around 2,500 BCE, not long after the first written words in any form other than pictographic are known. What we do know from several sources, as well as from our knowledge of human psychology, is that a god is an ontological manifestation of a gap in our knowledge, a stopgap to fill something about which we have no information or concept. It's of little wonder that the earliest gods were those relating to the sun and the moon, water, birth and life itself, everyday subjects about which our early ancestors had everyday experience of, but no knowledge of at all. It's ludicrous to expect that those early ancestors could have somehow worked out that there was just one god (God), the same god so many people worship today, who ruled everything in the universe, as some people would try to have us believe.

Gods evolved over time, and shrunk in power, as cultures increased their knowledge of the natural world, and the perception of gods was further changed once the early rulers cottoned on to the fact that such superstitious beliefs could be used as a powerful means to control of their populations. This is perhaps best illustrated by the way in which the early Egyptian Pharaohs decreed themselves to be the human manifestation of gods, and introduced a hierarchy of priests in order to both formulate and enforce laws and extract increasing taxes and tithes from their populations. All this inevitably leads us to just one conclusion; gods were created in the mind of man and have been used ever since by man to control other men.

But jumping ahead a little bit to the 'birth' of the god which is worshipped by the three Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. During the time of the biblical account of the exodus and the formation of the state of Israel, the people of the region, Canaanites and Israelites in particular, were still polytheistic, despite one solitary attempt at introducing monotheism by Pharaoh Akhenaten in the mid 1300's BCE. There's plenty of archaeological evidence for this polytheism in the remains of settlements found in modern day Israel and Palestine. It was only some while after the formation of the biblical Israel (by the slow aggregation of people moving out of the disintegrating Canaanite city states and into the interior highlands, not by any exodus from Egypt or elsewhere as the bible would have us believe - that's a falsely created racial memory) that monotheism first started to appear, it's believed primarily as, surprise surprise, a means of uniting disparate groups and villages in the early Israel under one leadership.

What archaeological evidence there is shows that small groups of people both living in and travelling through a region to the south east of Israel, and referred to in the bible as Midian, worshipped a god called YHW. These early travellers to Israel brought stories of this god with them, and for reasons we're still unclear about, YHW, later known as YHWH or Yahweh, became adopted as the 'head god' of Israel, later to become the one and only god of Judaism when monotheism ousted polytheism.

Given this information, about which there is little doubt as it's been put together from decades of significant and intensive archaeological and document research, and especially when coupled with what we know about ontology and the way that pre-Bronze Age gods developed, it's difficult to see how today's Christian 'God' can be viewed as anything other than an invention of man. Far from being immortal and creating everything in the universe, this god is only about 3,500 years old and was 'born' in the minds of the Bronze Age dwellers of Midian.

Just thought you might be interested......