Feed on Posts or Comments 01 October 2014

Christianity Thomas on 05 Jan 2010 12:24 am

Is this really how Christians think?

Here is a video titled, “ATHEISTS: How To Make Their Heads Explode”. The question is, is this really how Christians think?

The fact is that we do not yet know how the universe was created. Scientists have not figured it out yet. Which is not surprising – 50 years ago no one knew what the structure of DNA was or how it functioned. Today we do. In a decade or three scientists will understand how the universe was created.

Creating an imaginary man in the sky does not explain how the universe was created. Just like creating an imaginary man in the sky – sun gods – did not explain how the sun rises every morning, or – rain gods – what causes the rain.

Even sillier is to then attach imaginary attributes to this imaginary man in the sky like, “Homosexuals are evil and should be killed” or “Women must wear head to toe burquas.”

The universe shows zero evidence for the existence of any god. This video can help Christians understand this fact of life:

20 Responses to “Is this really how Christians think?”

  1. on 05 Jan 2010 at 8:09 pm 1.Severin said …

    On “Atheists, How To Make Their Heads Explode”:

    What a nice auto-goal!
    I enjoyed it!
    Do authors of this video take their publics as idiots?

    A 14 y. old boy with good knowledge of English (my brother’s son) posed the question “who/what created god?” immediately after he saw this video!
    Excellent!

    Let’s see the “logic” of authors:
    No explanation yet how matter started to exist, so let us put a god on the beginning, and declare him as the cause of existance of universe!.
    God is unquestionable, he (it?) is the beginning of everything.
    Do not dare to ask how god started to exist, and who/what created him! Thus, no such a dangerous question in the video, noooo!
    Idiotic one, but question which turns our attention from the real topic to direction authors prefere: “WHO caused the Big Bang” (instead WHAT caused it, we are stupid, and we are not expected to notice it) was, of course posed!

    But, as we are not idiots, so we DO dare to pose further questions. Moreover, we MUST pose them!

    If cause/effect theory has NO beginning, we have NO RIGHT to stop at ANY point of the cause/effect chain. Going back on the list of “what caused what” (or what was effected by what), the same logic is valid for EACH LINK the cause/efect chain: If we agree that god created matter, what/who, then, created god, and what/who created god’s creator, and what/who created the creator of god’s creator, etc.?
    These are not only logical, but INEVITABLE questions. It would be illogical NOT to pose them. Why would any link od the causal chain have higher value than another one?
    Nobody can just neglect them, and stop the chain of causality on an arbitrary point, by his choice, as gentlemen authors of this video tried to stop us at the point “god”.
    Give us any logical reason to stop there (by god), and not to go further back!

    If the chain of causality HAS beginning, and extends from its beginning further, in logical steps, why start with god?
    Why is matter not a good candidate to be on the beginning of the chain?
    And what, in this case (if matter is on the beginning of chain of causality), makes it divine or supernatural?

    Plus, if YOU claim something can not be created from nothing, how and from what was god created? From nothing? Or, if he was NOT created at all, but just WAS THERE FROM EVER, what makes matter unfit to category of “uncreated things” that just were ther from ever?
    (It was also one of the questions of the a.m. boy)

    Just a few years ago religions not only oposed, but SUPPRESSED scientific thought. Now, after 7-8000 years of fighting science, and proving nothing by themselves, they are “flirting” with science and calling science to help them to prove their bullshits.

    Gentlemen athors, such complex questions are not for you, except if you enjoy to make fools of yourself, as in this video.
    Let competent people to deal with such questions!

  2. on 05 Jan 2010 at 9:15 pm 2.Severin said …

    Yesterday we were filled with Biblical “truths” about how god created man of mud, and woman from his rib.
    Not a lon ago, people were burnt if they claimed oposite.

    Bible is not withdrawn or declared invalid, and we suddenly have a new god nowadays:
    We have a god who DID NOT create humans directly.
    Fresh news are that god created matter, by causing the Big Bang and natural laws to occur!
    Humans obviously appeared spontaniously MUCH later (much after god created matter and cause the Big Bang), by development of matter created by god long ago.

    Are we talking different gods here?
    Are monotheist believers expected to became polytheists?

    Which one of those gods is valid?
    Is the Bible still valid?

    If I was a believer, I would be extremely confused and shaked in my beliefs. And I would start to question what the hell is going on, and who is trying to make me a fool.

  3. on 05 Jan 2010 at 10:58 pm 3.Xenon said …

    “The fact is that we do not yet know how the universe was created. Scientists have not figured it out yet. Which is not surprising – 50 years ago no one knew what the structure of DNA was or how it functioned.”

    Um, well…other than the fact DNA is here before us and the universe was created once billions of years ago. LOL, quite the funny comparison, eh?

    God will never be disproved because God cannot be disproved. Even if we knew the mechanism for creation that would not disprove God no more than me finding the assembly line of the Shelby GT disproves his designer. Silly atheist.

  4. on 06 Jan 2010 at 6:40 am 4.LyokoFreaks said …

    @Xenon: Which isn’t a problem because his existence was never proven true in the first place. We’re not in the business of disproving unsubstantiated claims (even though much of our findings disprove the notion of popular gods anyway). Silly theist.

  5. on 06 Jan 2010 at 11:25 am 5.Severin said …

    Xenon 3
    So you DO recognize that the universe we know began to exist some 13-14 billion years ago by Big Bang, which, according to you, a supernatural being/god created?
    Or not?

    Then, 13 bill. years later, the supernatural being which created the B. B., chooses to visit earth, among trillions of other planets in his universe, and to create a man from mud, and a woman from his rib (!!!).

    Then the same creator of universe (god) chooses a small nation (Jews), whihc made some 1 or 2% of total population of earth at that time, to rule them.
    He neglects other millions of people living at the same time on the earth (Africa, Asia, Americas…), and let the rest of poor people to invent their own gods to worhip.

    The same creature who was involved, no more and no less, in creating of universe, and had enough power to cause the B.B., now orders to this small nation to worship him. He becomes selfish, angry, jelous, cruel, creates rules for this small nation (Bible), punishes them cruelly, …….
    Was it the same god?
    What is wrong in this story?

    ORGANIZED RELIGIONS are the wrong „link“ in this story!
    Organized religions did not recognize the same god that you recognize in your mind.
    They invented and imposed their own gods, with ugly atributes, to keep people in obedience by ignorance and fear.
    So why to obey them further?

    A century ago they would burn you if you called biblical texts „allegories“, „methaphores“, „symbols“…
    Biblical texts were unquestionabel untill „yesterday“.

    Today THEY are telling us those texts were only „allegories“, „methaphores“, „symbols“, only „style figures“!
    They are sneaking arround and flirting science to find other explanation for their stupid „teachings“ in which people do not believe any more.

    Not openly and honestly, but silently and villainously, they are DE FACTO changingt their teachings to be in accordance with the present level of human knowledge.
    Mud yesterday, B.B. today, but always as creations of THEIR gods!
    More villainously, they still keep Bible for uneducated people, they did not withdrw it, but are teching parallel the biblical “truths” and the”new religion”!

    They are making people fools!

    „Sorry, we were giving you wrong data for several 1000 of years. Now you have to leave the mud and to turn to B.B., but always to believe that OUR god created it!“

    Very big MONEY is in this game!

    Why would you listen, obey, and GIVE YOUR MONEY to such a bunch of corrupted and dishonest people?

    Why would you need THEM to tell you what to believe ot not to believe?
    Don’t you have your own mind?

  6. on 06 Jan 2010 at 4:19 pm 6.Xenon said …

    @ LyokoFreaks
    “We’re not in the business of disproving unsubstantiated claims (even though much of our findings disprove the notion of popular gods anyway).”

    Then why the websites? Actually, I think the new atheist is addicted to religion. Anyhow, so in your mind what would constitute proof of God in the lab? I hear this claim of “No proof” so define what that would look like?

  7. on 06 Jan 2010 at 7:24 pm 7.Severin said …

    It seems to me that I have to withdrw an “if” from one of my recent comments.

  8. on 15 Jan 2010 at 3:25 pm 8.charles allan said …

    NATURAL SELECTION CAN ONLY SELECT FROM THINGS ALREADY DESIGNED.
    How could natural selection add design information?
    This is nonsense. An accounting program cannot design itself. It has to be designed by outside intelligence. Then we can SELECT the best program
    but this is not evolution.

    SELECTION OF THE FITTEST IS NOT EVOLUTION.
    Even the evolutionists would admit this.
    DNA information say for wings must be designed it
    cannot be added by acident.

  9. on 15 Jan 2010 at 6:04 pm 9.Severin said …

    “NATURAL SELECTION CAN ONLY SELECT FROM THINGS ALREADY DESIGNED.”

    I would be happy tohear from you who has designed “things”.

  10. on 15 Jan 2010 at 8:13 pm 10.Bishop said …

    Absolutely correct Charles. Mutations are actually the loss of information, not the gaining of new information. You don’t design a wing with natural selection

  11. on 15 Jan 2010 at 11:22 pm 11.Severin said …

    Charles, Bishop,
    „How could natural selection add design information?“

    It does not!
    Mutations neither add nor take information, they CHANGE information (radiation, chemicals, …).

    Write a sensible word on the table by letter cubes, then shake the table – THAT is a rough illustration of what mutations are.
    Mutated genes are transfered further to next generations.
    If mutated („shaken“) information, transfered to next generation, are benefitional for survival, species will survive. If not, it will dissapear.
    As simple as that!
    Some 1,500,000 species living today on earth represent only very small percentage of species that have ever lived on this globe.
    It was estimated that up to 100,000,000 of species ever lived on earth!
    Species which had no luck to have the right information in their genes to meet conditions in their environment, simply dissapeared, other survived.
    Yes, it is VERY unlikely that mutations will turn to be beneficial for the survival of species, and it happens extremely rarely. THAT the main reasons so many species did not survive.
    But if you have enough time (4,000,000,000 years), it may happen, and it does happen.
    „Shaken“ word on the table will rarely have any sense, but if you shake the table 100 years…?

  12. on 15 Jan 2010 at 11:59 pm 12.Severin said …

    “Absolutely correct Charles. Mutations are actually the loss of information, not the gaining of new information. You don’t design a wing with natural selection”

    Here is a 1996 quote from Pope John Paul II:
    Today, almost half a century after the publication of [Pius XII's] Encyclical, fresh knowledge has led to the recognition that evolution is more than a hypothesis……
    (http://www.lightandmatter.com/evolution/)

    So even the Pope recognizes evolution, and you “experts” don’t!
    Please read more! There are popular scientific books explaining things on understandable level, no need to be scientist to understand them.

    And why not trust them?
    When scientist “invent” the mobile phone, the GPS navigation, modern medicine…., you DO trust them, don’t you? You USE their inventions.
    When the very same scientists talk evolution and Big Bang, then you become bigger experts. You know better.
    Don’t make people laugh!

  13. on 16 Jan 2010 at 2:07 pm 13.Charles Allan said …

    Severin found his priest! Accept without question Severin? Well done soldier!

    Who claimed I don’t accept evolution? Get some book learning friend.

  14. on 16 Jan 2010 at 3:39 pm 14.Severin said …

    Charles Allan 13
    “Severin found his priest! Accept without question Severin?”
    Sorry, but I do not quite understand. Who might be my priest?

    Now, if you accept evolution in a creationist way, we have prolems here.
    Many of them!

    First, catholic church accepted evolution, under condition that god was first to create universe (big bang), but other churches did not.

    But catholic church is hypocritical and can not quite swimm in new waters:
    They „sold“ bullshits for some 2000 years about how god created earth, universe and humans, using the Bible as the ONLY reference for their claims, and sold them (biblical bullshits) VERY expensive!
    If you dared to say ANYTHING in the Bible was wrong, they would kill you (burn, slaughter, torture….).
    Today, when they lost their power to kill, unable to influence people by raw and cruel force as they used to for milleniums, they „accept“ scientific accomplishments, and „recognize“ evolution, the B.B…..

    What with the Bible? Was it officially withdrawn?
    Did church apologize anyone for forcing nations by bestial cruelty to believe biblical bullshits for last 2000 years?
    More important: WHICH god „created“ universe? The biblical one, or the one they (churches) just, suddenly, „switched on“, without further explanations, when got feeling of losing their congregation (read: money!)?
    „Sorry, we several thosand years killed for „blasphemy“ of negating Bible, but, he, he, today we accept the B.B and evolution. Of course under condition god created them.“
    But WHICH god? Obviousli not the sam god who, according to Bible, their yestarady “book over all books”, „created“ man from mud and woman from his rib, then allowed them to “create” the entire human race by unnatural incestous relations emong their children.

    They (catholic churc steal theories from scientists even without any attempt to addapt them, and with the authority of a big and powerfull organization, they stayed accustomed to, continue to CLAIM things without any arguments. Elephant in a glass shop!

  15. on 16 Jan 2010 at 8:38 pm 15.Charles Allan said …

    A lot of typing severin but I’m not Catholic, sorry. You are still a good and loyal soldier to accept everything a scientist might tell you without question. That is how drones are programmed.

  16. on 16 Jan 2010 at 9:27 pm 16.Severin said …

    Thank you, Charles.
    Drones think and make fools working for them.

    Not to mention how typical is to see such an answer from someone who exhausted all the argumnets for further debate.
    We atheists are typically polite, so I will not call you names in your helpless anger.

    How do you live today if you do not accept science? Waiting for lightning to make a fire?
    Go to the tribe sorcerer when sic?
    And if you don’t, how is it that you accept some science, and some not? It is not quite faithfull. How can you look yourself in a mirror being such a hypocrite?

  17. on 17 Jan 2010 at 3:38 am 17.Charles Allan said …

    Really?

    Severin do you have any idea what you are talking about? What is sic and what is a tribe sorcerer?

    If I were really sic(k) I would get a second and maybe a 3rd opinion. Thats just me.

    I accept science, I don’t necessarily accept all interpretations. Big difference there Severin which is why I’m not so narrow minded.

    So you believe in Intelligent Design since the guys supporting it ARE scientist, right? And you believe in the paranormal because that is supported by scientist as well? And, you are an atheist, yes? What a mess!

    But hey, if you want others to do your thinking for you you have at it.

    lol, and you accept drone as a compliment. No need to say anymore. Good luck with ALL that.

  18. on 17 Jan 2010 at 8:02 am 18.Severin said …

    Charles Allan 17
    “So you believe in Intelligent Design since the guys supporting it ARE scientist, right? And you believe in the paranormal because that is supported by scientist as well?

    No, I don’t.
    It’s your fake, probably with the same purpose as your “drone” (to get me mad, or what?), but hey, that is you.

    While I am trying to offer arguments, you are offering “drones” and fakes – tyipical! And sad!
    Why starting a debate if you can not resist to go to personal level in lack of arguments?

  19. on 17 Jan 2010 at 8:41 am 19.Severin said …

    sic = sick, sorry for this error

  20. on 17 Jan 2010 at 8:20 pm 20.Charles Allan said …

    LOL, let me know when you make an argument.

    So, now you admit you don’t believe something a scientist tells you is true? But earlier you claim that…..ah never mind. You are so hypocritical (your term) and inconsistent.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply