• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Four Big Bangs That Kill Atheism

Omega Man said:
And yet they were redacted from 2 independent sources of 2 different ideologies nonetheless. That makes them separate accounts.


OM
Click to expand...

Nope, the same man wrote both of them, inspired by Jehovah God...the 1st account describes the creation of the heavens and the earth and everything in them...Genesis 1:1–2:4...the 2nd account concentrates more on the creation of the human race and its fall into sin.​..Genesis 2:5–4:26...it is still the same creation account...only one...
 
Elvira said:
Nope, the same man wrote both of them, inspired by Jehovah God...the 1st account describes the creation of the heavens and the earth and everything in them...Genesis 1:1–2:4...the 2nd account concentrates more on the creation of the human race and its fall into sin.​..Genesis 2:5–4:26...it is still the same creation account...only one...
Click to expand...

Actually, no. The Elohist was one source, the Jahvist another source. And then let's not overlook the involvement of the Priestly source - the one who attributed them all to the legend of Moses.


OM
 
Elvira said:
True, because atheism offers no answers...only more questions...
Click to expand...

Making up answers is not providing answers. believing in something with no evidence offers no answers
 
Elvira said:
Hey, I get it...some people have a problem with comprehending what they read, it's ok...
Click to expand...

all you have posted is a bunch of dumb one liners, maybe you added a second line, that makes statements with nothing to back it up. There is nothing to comprehend because your posts are void of any actual argument. And all you have been doing is deflecting

RAMOSS said:
It appears you are reading into the scripture rather than taking from it. Otherwise, you could use the words of scripture to expand upon and explain your claim. The fact you are unable to do that is strong evidence that your claims are null and void
Click to expand...

Yup, spot on
 
Omega Man said:
Actually, no. The Elohist was one source, the Jahvist another source. And then let's not overlook the involvement of the Priestly source - the one who attributed them all to the legend of Moses.


OM
Click to expand...

lol...
 
<alt>doxygen said:
Here is some info, if you are interested.

The Legends of Genesis: V. Jahvist, Elohist, Jehovist, the Later Collections

When I was a kid I tried to understand why the same story was being told twice and why they didn't exactly match, given I was being told that one person wrote it all based on "God's Word".
Click to expand...

Thanks but I don't consider the Genesis account a legend at all but the truth, so I prefer this logical explanation...

The first account is constructed chronologically, divided into six consecutive “days.” The second is written in order of topical importance. After a short prologue, it logically goes straight to the creation of Adam, since he and his family are the subject of what follows. (Genesis 2:7) Other information is then introduced as needed. We learn that after his creation Adam was to live in a garden in Eden. So the planting of the garden of Eden is now mentioned. (Genesis 2:8, 9, 15) Jehovah tells Adam to name “every wild beast of the field and every flying creature of the heavens.” Now, then, is the time to mention that “Jehovah God was forming from the ground” all these creatures, although their creation began long before Adam appeared on the scene.​—Genesis 2:19; 1:20, 24, 26.
Click to expand...

Does the Bible Contradict Itself? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

In regard to Adam’s creation it is good to read carefully what the Bible says. Moses in compiling the book of Genesis referred to written records or “histories” that predated the Flood. The first of these begins with Genesis 1:1 and ends at Genesis 2:4 with the words, “This is the history of the heavens and the earth . . . ” The second historical document begins with Genesis 2:5 and ends with Ge verse two of chapter five. Hence we have two separate accounts of creation from slightly different points of view. In the second of these accounts, in Genesis 2:19, the original Hebrew verb translated “was forming” is in the progressive imperfect form. This does not mean that the animals and birds were created after Adam was created. Genesis 1:20-28 shows it does not mean that. So, in order to avoid contradiction between Ge chapter one and chapter two, Genesis 2:19, 20 must be only a parenthetical remark thrown in to explain the need for creating a “helper” for man. So the progressive Hebrew verb form could also be rendered as “had been forming.”

These two creation accounts in the book of Genesis, though differing slightly in the treatment of the material, are in perfect agreement with each other on all points, including the fact that Eve was created after Adam. So not until after this event did the sixth creative day come to an end. Exactly how soon after Adam’s creation is not disclosed. “After that [Adam and Eve’s creation] God saw everything he had made and, look! it was very good. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a sixth day.” (Gen. 1:31) After the sixth creative day ends, the seventh one begins.
Click to expand...
 
Logicman said:
Evolutionists are from monkeys. Oo oo oo

We have God as our Father.
Click to expand...

Correction. Monkeys and the other great apes share a common ancestor.
 
Sampson Simpson said:
None of that kills anything, it just shows your lack of understanding of science and the typical dishonest idiocy when religious people who have nothing but "faith" and magical stories can't actually refute anything, so they make stupid posts like this.

They seem to think if science can't explain it just invoke magic and fairy tales. Just make it up. That is exactly what religion is, made up answer void of any evidence, fact and reality.

Religious people have a logical part of the brain somewhere, which must be very troublesome for them when they want to believe so bad and one side has all the facts and logic and they have not a shred of any evidence that their beliefs are true.

Even religion knows that, which is why it is big on the "faith" part. The convenient way to excuse believing in something with zero evidence and trying to justify it
Click to expand...

Barf.

There is a reason you're a liberal, and that is that you're ANOTHER ONE who hasn't done his homework on the historical Jesus Christ and the Bible. It's quite obvious. You liberals come in to these theology threads acting like know-it-alls when you don't have the first clue what's going on. Liberals are liberals because they're Biblically and spiritually challenged.

Were you even aware of all the historical personalities in the Old and New Testaments who have been confirmed by outside sources?

List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources - Wikipedia

As for evidence for Christianity, you might want to do your homework for a change and do some reading. You can start with these:

"The Historical Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas;
"New Evidence that Demands a Verdict," by former skeptic Josh McDowell;
"Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics," by Dr. Norman Geisler;
"The Case for Christ," by Lee Strobel," and
"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr, Gary Habermas.

Beware of Liberal Fundamentalism

Liberal Fundamentalism << The Righter Report
 
I note that no one is addressing the "Four Big Bangs" of the OP, but instead the usual suspects resort to attacking Biblical literalism, which has nothing at all to do with the OP.
 
RAMOSS said:
Correction. Monkeys and the other great apes share a common ancestor.
Click to expand...

My but aren't YOU sophisticated and all scientific and such.
How would YOU classify this "common ancestor," hmmm? It clearly was not human. Obviously it was very apelike, and ignorant. How did it differ from apes?
Please tell everyone, specifically. Then explain this:
"Bigger brains were necessary and evolved," we have been told for decades.
1. Research concludes that brain size has no correlation to IQ.
2. Nobody who "evolved" millions of years ago wrote symphonies or programmed computers, so why did they need the "superior intellect"?
3. One of the smartest animals on earth is the African gray parrot. How large is its brain, hmmm?
4. The animal with the largest brain on earth is the sperm whale. We can't communicate with them. How do they evidence their supreme intelligence? Tell everyone here.
5. There is no discernable difference between the intelligence of a chihuahua and a great dane. Explain.
6. Cows are incredibly stupid but have big brains. Explain this.
7. Spiders and butterflies exhibit incredible intelligence and creativity. Spiders use highly intelligent methods to capture prey in hundreds of different ways. Butterflies migrate thousands of miles to locations they have never before visited. Humans get lost in town and use maps and GPS. Explain.

Then there is the fraud of Haeckel's Drawings, which was first exposed around 1860 and yet his drawings continued to be published as "evidence" of evolution and "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny." All bogus. All fraud. Science should not fall for such fraud but it does, all the time.
And pretenders of scientific acumen simply preach their own superiority, without any evidence.
 
MrWonderful said:
My but aren't YOU sophisticated and all scientific and such.
How would YOU classify this "common ancestor," hmmm? It clearly was not human. Obviously it was very apelike, and ignorant. How did it differ from apes?
Please tell everyone, specifically. Then explain this:
"Bigger brains were necessary and evolved," we have been told for decades.
1. Research concludes that brain size has no correlation to IQ.
2. Nobody who "evolved" millions of years ago wrote symphonies or programmed computers, so why did they need the "superior intellect"?
3. One of the smartest animals on earth is the African gray parrot. How large is its brain, hmmm?
4. The animal with the largest brain on earth is the sperm whale. We can't communicate with them. How do they evidence their supreme intelligence? Tell everyone here.
5. There is no discernable difference between the intelligence of a chihuahua and a great dane. Explain.
6. Cows are incredibly stupid but have big brains. Explain this.
7. Spiders and butterflies exhibit incredible intelligence and creativity. Spiders use highly intelligent methods to capture prey in hundreds of different ways. Butterflies migrate thousands of miles to locations they have never before visited. Humans get lost in town and use maps and GPS. Explain.

Then there is the fraud of Haeckel's Drawings, which was first exposed around 1860 and yet his drawings continued to be published as "evidence" of evolution and "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny." All bogus. All fraud. Science should not fall for such fraud but it does, all the time.
And pretenders of scientific acumen simply preach their own superiority, without any evidence.
Click to expand...

It takes books to explain your questions. Do some research. I will only say that grey parrots have yet to invent computers or fly to the moon.
 
MrWonderful said:
My but aren't YOU sophisticated and all scientific and such.
How would YOU classify this "common ancestor," hmmm? It clearly was not human. Obviously it was very apelike, and ignorant. How did it differ from apes?
Please tell everyone, specifically. Then explain this:
"Bigger brains were necessary and evolved," we have been told for decades.
1. Research concludes that brain size has no correlation to IQ.
2. Nobody who "evolved" millions of years ago wrote symphonies or programmed computers, so why did they need the "superior intellect"?
3. One of the smartest animals on earth is the African gray parrot. How large is its brain, hmmm?
4. The animal with the largest brain on earth is the sperm whale. We can't communicate with them. How do they evidence their supreme intelligence? Tell everyone here.
5. There is no discernable difference between the intelligence of a chihuahua and a great dane. Explain.
6. Cows are incredibly stupid but have big brains. Explain this.
7. Spiders and butterflies exhibit incredible intelligence and creativity. Spiders use highly intelligent methods to capture prey in hundreds of different ways. Butterflies migrate thousands of miles to locations they have never before visited. Humans get lost in town and use maps and GPS. Explain.

Then there is the fraud of Haeckel's Drawings, which was first exposed around 1860 and yet his drawings continued to be published as "evidence" of evolution and "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny." All bogus. All fraud. Science should not fall for such fraud but it does, all the time.
And pretenders of scientific acumen simply preach their own superiority, without any evidence.
Click to expand...

Cut out the snark. Discuss like an adult.
 
zyzygy said:
It takes books to explain your questions. Do some research. I will only say that grey parrots have yet to invent computers or fly to the moon.
Click to expand...

That's because the ancient alien's introduced the god gene in to the apes and not the parrots. LOL!

I'm thinking the apes were chosen because they had thumbs. :lamo
 
MrWonderful said:
My but aren't YOU sophisticated and all scientific and such.
How would YOU classify this "common ancestor," hmmm? It clearly was not human. Obviously it was very apelike, and ignorant. How did it differ from apes?
Please tell everyone, specifically. Then explain this:
"Bigger brains were necessary and evolved," we have been told for decades.
1. Research concludes that brain size has no correlation to IQ.
2. Nobody who "evolved" millions of years ago wrote symphonies or programmed computers, so why did they need the "superior intellect"?
3. One of the smartest animals on earth is the African gray parrot. How large is its brain, hmmm?
4. The animal with the largest brain on earth is the sperm whale. We can't communicate with them. How do they evidence their supreme intelligence? Tell everyone here.
5. There is no discernable difference between the intelligence of a chihuahua and a great dane. Explain.
6. Cows are incredibly stupid but have big brains. Explain this.
7. Spiders and butterflies exhibit incredible intelligence and creativity. Spiders use highly intelligent methods to capture prey in hundreds of different ways. Butterflies migrate thousands of miles to locations they have never before visited. Humans get lost in town and use maps and GPS. Explain.

Then there is the fraud of Haeckel's Drawings, which was first exposed around 1860 and yet his drawings continued to be published as "evidence" of evolution and "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny." All bogus. All fraud. Science should not fall for such fraud but it does, all the time.
And pretenders of scientific acumen simply preach their own superiority, without any evidence.
Click to expand...

I would classify it as a primate that is pre-monkey and per-hominid. While we don't have the common ancestor fossil of them yet, we do have fossils near the split from about 25 million years old.

It's not sophisticated. It's known as 'knowing the facts', and being educated.
 
There has never been any evidence of gods existing except from ancient comics, no one has ever seen this supposed god, lets face it there are trillions of planets out there with life on them, why would he stick with a tiny insignificant place like our minute earth?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom