Atheist Eschatology

[NY8123]

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
Now you're dodging the issue that you raised when you said everything in existence does not require God to create them because all created things are actually God. I don't care how many different scenarios of the "Builder Metaphor" you present. This one with the woman and child is just another builder metapor that you refuse to recognize as such. Below is your comment that started this entire debate between us.



ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
Using your logic that the entire universe and everything in existence are part and parcel god, let's apply it to the woman and child you are now presenting. When your logic is applied in this example, we wind with this: The child is the woman because the child came from the woman. Likewise, since everything in existence came from God, everything in existence is God. That's your logic, not mine.

You have bounded your mind in the realm of absolutes either you have to prove or not prove something in order to believe in something. If you cannot prove certain things they are false but others become faith in case of religion but in the case of evolution the lack of proof becomes a false belief and misguided truth lacking in faith.

The actuality of the conversation is that not only can neither belief be proved or disproved there is a distinct and possible scenario where both evolution and religious views align into a "theory of everything". Even atheists views could be covered in the theory and all could be proven right given the right set of events but of course that is only under ideal circumstances, usually something has to drop out as false but in this case there is no definitive way to prove or disprove anything in the debate so the only thing it can even be is a debate. Anything evidence you provide for the debate is defined be human understanding of the events surrounding the events of history but if humans do not fully understand the event the definition is skewed by the lack of knowledge. It is no diffenerent than giving a earthworm a wrist watch, it is pointless to the worm.

[Alter2Ego]

And if you want to see evidence of an organism that is created by entities within itself, you need not look any further than yourself. You are comprised of systems within systems. Each cell in your body works together to create the form that is you. Yet, you did not create each cell, did you? So how would that be any different than viewing you as a "cell" in a larger organism that we shall call God?"

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
Your argument about humans being a "cell" in a larger organism called God falls on its face. The reason is that humans are flesh and blood and the Bible says God is a spirit. Therefore, humans cannot be considered part of a cell in a larger organism that is your version of God because a spirit being and a flesh and blood creature are exact opposites.

"God is a SPIRIT, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth." (John 4:24)

And I haven't even touched the millions of planets in the heavens and land masses and the seas on planet earth, in addition to the various life forms that are on earth. They are not parts of God because they are created things that are solid masses in many instances. God is a spirit.

[SkapePhin]

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
Your argument about humans being a "cell" in a larger organism called God falls on its face. The reason is that humans are flesh and blood and the Bible says God is a spirit. Therefore, humans cannot be considered part of a cell in a larger organism that is your version of God because a spirit being and a flesh and blood creature are exact opposites.

"God is a SPIRIT, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth." (John 4:24)

And I haven't even touched the millions of planets in the heavens and land masses and the seas on planet earth, in addition to the various life forms that are on earth. They are not parts of God because they are created things that are solid masses in many instances. God is a spirit.

So my argument fails because it doesn't mesh with something written in a book that you so happen to view as infallible?

Convenient, but my argument wasn't based on the Bible, so it can't fail on those grounds...

[Alter2Ego]

Fact is, if you use the argument that for every thing that is built, there must be a designer and builder, you will always run into the problem that the designer and builder would in turn need a designer / builder to build IT. How far back does that go? And if you say, the builder / designer built itself or was always built, you are essentially defeating your own logic.

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
Defeating my own logic? Hardly. The Bible makes it clear God does not have a beginning and therefore does not require a builder.

"Before the mountains themselves were born, or you proceeded to bring forth as with labor pains the earth and the productive land, even FROM TIME INDEFINITE to TIME INDEFINITE you are God." (Psalms 90:2)


You cannot put human limitations on God for the simply reason that he is not human. The fact that he created the universe with millions of planets is evidence that he is all-powerful and that he is definitely not like humans who needed God to create them.

Do I expect you to accept that? Of course not. Atheists prefer to believe the universe created itself--despite all the evidence that it was done with precision and despite the logic that precision indicates an intelligent being intervened and guided the outcome.

[SkapePhin]

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
Defeating my own logic? Hardly. The Bible makes it clear God does not have a beginning and therefore does not require a builder.

"Before the mountains themselves were born, or you proceeded to bring forth as with labor pains the earth and the productive land, even FROM TIME INDEFINITE to TIME INDEFINITE you are God." (Psalms 90:2)


You cannot put human limitations on God for the simply reason that he is not human. The fact that he created the universe with millions of planets is evidence that he is all-powerful and that he is definitely not like humans who needed God to create them.

Do I expect you to accept that? Of course not. Atheists prefer to believe the universe created itself--despite all the evidence that it was done with precision and despite the logic that precision indicates an intelligent being intervened and guided the outcome.

Why do you require logic from others, but not for yourself? You, yourself, posited that since things are created, they must have a creator. For you to then say that the creator does not need a creator flies in the face of your entire argument.

In essence, if you take that route, there is only a cursory difference between your belief, and the one that you find so ridiculous. Afterall, is there much difference between the universe creating itself, and God creating Himself?

Also, do not confuse me for an atheist. My belief is not an atheistic one.

[DisturbedShifty]

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
Defeating my own logic? Hardly. The Bible makes it clear God does not have a beginning and therefore does not require a builder.

"Before the mountains themselves were born, or you proceeded to bring forth as with labor pains the earth and the productive land, even FROM TIME INDEFINITE to TIME INDEFINITE you are God." (Psalms 90:2)


You cannot put human limitations on God for the simply reason that he is not human. The fact that he created the universe with millions of planets is evidence that he is all-powerful and that he is definitely not like humans who needed God to create them.

Do I expect you to accept that? Of course not. Atheists prefer to believe the universe created itself--despite all the evidence that it was done with precision and despite the logic that precision indicates an intelligent being intervened and guided the outcome.

So what about other life on those other planets? And I don't mean animal life. I mean self aware intelligent life life humans.

[Alter2Ego]

Why do you require logic from others, but not for yourself? You, yourself, posited that since things are created, they must have a creator. For you to then say that the creator does not need a creator flies in the face of your entire argument.

In essence, if you take that route, there is only a cursory difference between your belief, and the one that you find so ridiculous. Afterall, is there much difference between the universe creating itself, and God creating Himself?

Also, do not confuse me for an atheist. My belief is not an atheistic one.

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
I am presenting you with logic. The scientific evidence says the universe is precise. Something precisely done indicates it was deliberately done. In turn, something deliberately done leads us logically to an intelligent being who intervened and guided the outcome.

You are trying to apply your degraded human logic and insist God must have been created. What logic can you apply to a supernatural being that created the universe with millions of planets that have their individual field of gravity, which in turn keeps them within their individual orbits? Humans didn't do that and clearly the precision says someone did it.

The Bible contains nearly 2,000 accurately fulfilled prophecies from this same God whose name is YHWH/Jehovah/Yahweh. In his inspired Word he tells us he does not have a beginning. You, meanwhile, insist on applying human logic to a God that clearly is beyond the realm of human understanding. So much so, that he was able to create the universe and all life forms. You insist that according to YOUR logic, God must have been created.

You cannot apply human limitations to a God that clearly is not human. However, if that works for you--including your belief that everything in existence are all part and parcel "God," then go for it. You are still left with the problem of explaining how the universe with its precision came into existence by itself.

[SkapePhin]

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
I am presenting you with logic. The scientific evidence says the universe is precise. Something precisely done indicates it was deliberately done. In turn, something deliberately done leads us logically to an intelligent being who intervened and guided the outcome.

You are trying to apply your degraded human logic and insist God must have been created. What logic can you apply to a supernatural being that created the universe with millions of planets that have their individual field of gravity, which in turn keeps them within their individual orbits? Humans didn't do that and clearly the precision says someone did it.

The Bible contains nearly 2,000 accurately fulfilled prophecies from this same God whose name is YHWH/Jehovah/Yahweh. In his inspired Word he tells us he does not have a beginning. You, meanwhile, insist on applying human logic to a God that clearly is beyond the realm of human understanding. So much so, that he was able to create the universe and all life forms. You insist that according to YOUR logic, God must have been created.

You cannot apply human limitations to a God that clearly is not human. However, if that works for you--including your belief that everything in existence are all part and parcel "God," then go for it. You are still left with the problem of explaining how the universe with its precision came into existence by itself.

For someone who completely rejects any and all scientific evidence in regard to evolution, you sure seem to like "scientific evidence" when it comes to trying to prove the existence of the Biblical God.

What exactly do you mean by precision? You are throwing around that term like it actually means something.

Something precisely done indicated a deliberate action? A hurricane is precisely done. Science gives us a pretty good picture of how and why a hurricane occurs, but I suppose, since it is so "precise" it must have been created by God? So you believe God creates each and every hurricane and sets them on their way to kill and destroy at random?

Again, its easy to fulfill a prophecy when you have prior knowledge of the prophecy. Any author could write updates to a book and say "this prediction happened" without ever providing any tangible evidence. The fact is, NONE of the "fulfilled prophecies" in the Bible have ever been independently verified by anyone. If the fulfillment of prophecy was so self-evident at the time, there wouldn't be such a thing as Christianity at all because there never would have been a split from Judaism. You would think that Jews at the time, who were quite aware of the prophecy of the Messiah and were attentively waiting for his arrival would not have questioned direct evidence of the fulfillment of prophecy. The mere fact that all Jews did not view Jesus as the prophesized Messiah is "evidence" that the prophecy was not fulfilled in reality, but only by the pen of an unknown author who had prior knowledge of the prophecy.

It is also quite convenient how you say humans cannot begin to understand God, when there are people like you who claim to know and understand God with such conviction.

[Alter2Ego]

For someone who completely rejects any and all scientific evidence in regard to evolution, you sure seem to like "scientific evidence" when it comes to trying to prove the existence of the Biblical God.

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
I didn't tell you I "completely reject any and all scientific evidence in regard to evolution." I've debunked evolution theory numerous times at other forums where I debate, and I always debunk it with scientific evidence. That theory is so full of holes that I can't understand how anyone could continue believing it explains how the various forms of life came into existence.

What exactly do you mean by precision? You are throwing around that term like it actually means something.

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
If you don't know the meaning of the word "precise," then I suggest you pull out an English dictionary or check it out online.

Something precisely done indicated a deliberate action? A hurricane is precisely done. Science gives us a pretty good picture of how and why a hurricane occurs, but I suppose, since it is so "precise" it must have been created by God? So you believe God creates each and every hurricane and sets them on their way to kill and destroy at random?

ALTER2EGO -to- SKAPE PHIN:
It sounds to me like you're grasping at straws at this point. Hurricanes are not precise. If they were, they would not die out at sea when when they were predicted to make land. And if they were precise, they would be far more destructive.

[SkapePhin]

I am really not interested in playing on your semantic merry-go-round, so I feel no need to dive in those waters with you. Its quite obvious that you use vague language as "proofs" to suit your beliefs.

Since you seem to bypass this time and time again, I want you to respond to this:

Again, its easy to fulfill a prophecy when you have prior knowledge of the prophecy. Any author could write updates to a book and say "this prediction happened" without ever providing any tangible evidence. The fact is, NONE of the "fulfilled prophecies" in the Bible have ever been independently verified by anyone. If the fulfillment of prophecy was so self-evident at the time, there wouldn't be such a thing as Christianity at all because there never would have been a split from Judaism. You would think that Jews at the time, who were quite aware of the prophecy of the Messiah and were attentively waiting for his arrival would not have questioned direct evidence of the fulfillment of prophecy. The mere fact that all Jews did not view Jesus as the prophesized Messiah is "evidence" that the prophecy was not fulfilled in reality, but only by the pen of an unknown author who had prior knowledge of the prophecy.

---

Also, if you want to present your incredible evidence against evolution, please do so. But please, don't use the mythical argument that there is some "missing link", because there is a stupefying amount of transitional fossils that show intermediate steps between species throughout history. We literally have THOUSANDS of missing links.