Categories
- Beauty & Style
- Computers & Tech
- Education & School
- Entertainment
- Environmental Issues
- Food & Dining
- FunAdvice Community
- Gaming & Games
- General Knowledge
- Health
- Home & Garden
- Jobs & Money
- Kids
- Love & Relationships
- Music
- Nutrition & Fitness
- Parents & Family
- Pets & Animals
- Politics
- Religion & Spirituality
- Science
- Shopping
- Sports
- Travel
- Writing & Literature
If you go around saying all religious people are syupid, you have turned an earlier point against you. All I see are people being judgemental. It is sheer rudeness. I have heard many of complaints that we religious ones are judgemental. Take a good long look at your comments guys. Who do you see being judgemental?
Another point is that we who have faith are not all religious, and you cannot base the inexperience of one as the ground upon which to judge all others. I may not have an experience in science, but that is because I am poor, not because I am religious. Many of the people who attend my church have college degrees. Just because I do not, and do not understand some of the terminology is no reason to judge my fellow believers.
Take a few minutes and put yourself into another person's shoes BEFORE you call them stupid. I can tell you that it can emotionally hurt someone very deeply. That is how my abusive ex-husband treated me, and I did not come onto this site to see it from total strangers.
I agree I am not as smart as any of you, but do not asume that I or any of my compatriots is stupid just because we do not have scientific knowledge. There are other kinds of knowledge out there, and maybe in those areas we know more than you could ever learn because you don't see them as important. bbb was asking questions and giving answers based upon his experience and inexperience in certain subjects. Instead of calling him stupid, research the answers or tel him where to research the answers. Do not call him Stupid because he has different beliefs and/or values than you.
Thank you
You're so my herooo.
And it reminds me of something my friend said for some reason.
A scientist and God were all sitting around and the scientist said 'Well God I figured out how to make man.' and God says 'Prove it.' So the scientist picks up a bit of dirt. God raises an eyebrow and says 'Used your own dirt.'
I have been reading articles about many people who don't beleive in God, but due to the great number I can't respond to every comment. SO, I will just give scientific and logical proof as to why God must exist and you atheists try to figure out how everything in the Universe can exist without God, okay?
OK
-Modern science believes that life is a combination of chemicals,
Sure - life is made from matter, a combination of chemicals. One of which is deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a nucleic acid that contains the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all known living organisms. Of course we also need oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, and all the other chemicals to make it work.
and that a soul does not exist.
Show me evidence of one. Can you take a photo, run a test, measure it's weight, see it, taste it, touch it?
They speak of evolution from simple microbial life to human life. They say that microbial life was created from certain chemicals that created life.
Correct, but the details of abiogenesis are not fully understood. This is a continuing field of research.
There are problems with this theory. What chemicals can be put together to create life.
As above - oxygen, carbon, etc. All of them really.
If this is true, then scientists must create their own life from chemicals, and I am not talking about simple amino acids, or any of that crap, I am talking about real life created from chemicals like Carbon, Hydrogen and Oxygen.
While this may be technically possible it is extremely complex and difficult. Work it continuing and there are been a few interesting and encouraging developments recently.
It has never been done.
That does not mean it is not possible. You assume that we know all there is to know about the universe. The truth is we are only just making the first tentative steps to understanding the world around us. 100 years ago people would have thought it impossible to communicate in real time with people on the other side of the planet.
Another thing is that if God doesn’t exist and there is no soul then how come people must die? If people are just made up of chemicals then why can’t people live forever? If a person is just a combination of chemicals and not a soul then why can’t they just replace these chemicals.
We die because the process of life is not perfect. Mistakes are made when cells divide, chemical reactions within cells are damaging, nerve cells are intricately interwoven and cannot be replaced in the same configuration should they die.
Scientists and Atheists make these bold claims that make so sense without any proof.
Where as theists make claims based on solid experimental observations?
It is impossible to create life from matter.
So? As above - we may not have the technology yet, but that does not mean it's impossible.
If all life was made of matter and not a spirit soul then all life is just machines, and machines can be fixed, if not reassembled.
We already assist life through medicine (a science). The application of chemicals (via drugs) or intervention through surgery are examples of this.
How is it that conciousness can come from matter.
We are not sure yet, but it appears to be an emergent property. An interesting question is how other animals experience consciousness. What gives rise to it/ Do all animals have it? At what level does it appear?
I am looking for a logical and intelligent answer from the atheists. Why can’t scientists create humans in a lab by using the right chemicals?
Because we don't have the technology to do so yet. How should we obtain it - spend our lives praying, or conducting research, making careful observations, and using logic?
Evolution also does not make scientific sense because it is impossible for a monkey to give birth to a human. This is ridiculous.
It sure is! Nobody who understands evolution would make such a stupid comment. The idea that monkeys give birth to humans is as outrageous as a crocoduck. No species spontaneously gives rise to an entirely new and different species in one generation. The process is very slow and gradual and takes a very long time - lucky we have plenty of this.
In the billions of years man has been on the Earth there is not one instance of any species giving birth to another species.
True.
Even if one man was born from a monkey, how would the human race survive?
Uh? Are you suggesting that is one man came from a monkey the entire human race would be wiped out?
That man can’t produce humans with other moneky’s.
No, but we share 98% of our DNA with some of the great apes. We are great apes ourselves.
How can the universe be created without God? The Big Bang theory is there but it suggests that the universe extened for millions of light years in a nonillionth of a second or 10^-30 of a second. This is Centillions (10^303) times faster than the speed of light. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light so the Big Bang is false!
Actually things can (and do) travel faster than the speed of light - it's just a barrier that cannot be crossed. I don't know much about this area, or what it all means. Perhaps I should pray to god for the answer?
Science doesn’t answer the question of what force created the Big Bang.
Correct - it is difficult to determine what happened 13.7 billion years ago when space and time as we know it were forming.
No force know to physics or science can explain what caused the Big Bang and if nothing existed before the Big Bang how could it happen.
No one suggests nothing existed before the big bang except theists who believe their god was there (or somewhere).
This implies that God(who is above the laws of physics)
So you say - got any evidence of this?
miraculously created a universe that is impossible to be created naturally because no natural force could produce something as powerful as the Big Bang.
Where did you get the idea that the big bang breaks all known laws of physics? Physics scientists developed the idea - they did not throw away all they know in the process.
What natural force can make a universe that extended for millions of light years in a nonillionth of a second. The speed of light, the fastest natural force in physics would take millions of years to travel millions of light years. The force that caused the Big Bang expanded the Universe millions of light years in a nonillionth of a second. To demonstrate how much faster God created the universe than light can travel I will give a comparison. If God extended the Univerese 100 million light-years in a nonillionth of a second, then in one second light could travel 100 million times a nonillion light years in a second. This comes out to be a speed of 100 Undecillion light years per second. An Undecillion is 10^36. At this speed light would travel 100 Undecillion times 31.6 million seconds in a year. This would mean that the speed of the Big Bang would be over 3.16 Quattourdecillion light years in one year. A Quattordecillion is 10^45 or 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.
Pseudo science.
In contrast light travels only 1 light year a year. It is impossible for the Universe to be created by any physical force,
The big bang conforms to all known laws of physics, including quantum mechanics.
God must have done it because, The Big Bang happened 10^45 times faster than the Speed of Light.
That is your proof?
I can write on forever but I will stop.
I can see that.
So, atheists are you brave enough to answer this?
Yes.
Congratulations on proving that:
- humans have not yet created life from base chemicals
- that people die
- that consciousness is not well understood
- that monkeys don't give birth to humans
- that species don't give birth to other species
- that men can't make men with monkeys
- that astrophysicists are so dimwitted they forgot about the speed of light limitation when proposing the big bang, so the big bang is false, which means that God started the big bang
- that nothing in the universe has enough power to create the universe
- and that it takes light millions of years to travel millions of light years
Wow! You sure did make me look silly with this amazing analysis.
bbb...let's suppose that I buy what you're saying.
So, there is a God. Which one? Is it the Judeo Christian one, who forgot about 99% of the people in the world when he sent his son to save us?
Is it one of the many Norse gods, who are infallible? Or the Greco-Roman ones? Or the native gods of the American people before the slaughter by the Europeans? Or the gods of the native British, again, before the slaughter of their rules by the invading Catholics?
Tell me: given your theory, say you sold me, hook line sinker. Now, what theory says that there is a god which didn't ignore most of the Earth when their prophet was sent down?
Answer: there isn't one. Not a single major religion sent down a prophet to all people on the planet, speaking in all tongues. 
Of course, I could be wrong. But, I haven't heard of this prophet yet.
You rock BBB: How'd you learn all that? I'm dumbfounded.
Askegg: I can see that you put a lot of thought behind your answer, and I totally commend you for it.
I don't know anything about most of that, so I'll keep my coments for a later note!
Thedude: As for a prophet who spoke all languages, I've never heard of one. I do know that it is recorded in the bible that on the day of Penticost the Holy Spirit came down, and that since then people have been charged with delivering the world to all nations and all tounges. Also, Jesus broke the gates of Hades, so anyone there has heard of Him. Hopefully now that the know for sure what's coming they will decide for rather than against Him.
What I've read is that the BIG BANG formed/developed from what has been called the Primal Atom. Where did that come from?
The bible says that the world/universe came from god. Where did god come from?
Sorry, but the answer to both questions is the same. There is no knowledge (and may never be any knowledge) of the respective origins. Somewhere along the line we all have to say that it just IS.
The leading theory about the precursor to the big bang is called the M theory which is a continuation on superstring theory, look it up if you wish. In simple lay terms M theory suggests that two parallel dimensions came so close to one another that the outer membranes collided at specific intervals. The membrane itself is not rigid and looks more like ripples in the water. It also goes on to say that because of this there are even more parallel universes each with their own big bang. And physic's doesn't claim light speed is the fastest way to travel or expand anything Einsteins theory of relativity does. But his theory of relativity doesn't include gravity even. It claims that mass moving at high speeds gains mass, so if an object was moving at light speed it's mass would be infinite and to move beyond light speed would require infinite power. How then do black holes suck in light? And another oddity, tachyons. In 1967, Gerald Feinberg, a physicist at Columbia University, proposed the existence of these faster-than-light particles. In their mirror world above the light-speed barrier, tachyons would require infinite energy to slow down to the speed of light. But science and religion aren't mutually exclusive I believe the big bang sounds just like God's first day of creation. First he made light, the big bang started off in infinite blackness as a small ball of light.
Why do people even argue about this. We're here, aren't we? It hardly matters how we got here or why we're here. Sure, it'd be neat to know, something scientists are trying to figure out everyday, but how we got here isn't something that's going to make any difference about where we are now, or where we're going to be in the future. Why does every interested and ignorant layman who doesn't know or understand a fraction about science or religion that scientists and religious philosophers do always try to argue about which one is real and which one is better, without A) actually looking into this stuff before ignorantly attacking the opposite side, or B) realizing even the highly educated individuals listed cannot fully prove or disprove the existence of a god, or lack there of.
Just shut up and stop arguing about stuff you know nothing about. If you decided to stop being a moron and read a book or something for once, you'd get your fill of the most sufficient answers to your objectively criticizing question any highly educated scientist or religious philosopher could provide. Then you wouldn't be so quick to act like an idiot and try to show up the other side by pointing out some irrelevant tid bit of information that's been known to everyone for ages.
-Modern science believes that life is a combination of chemicals, and that a soul does not exist.
Abiogenesis - origin of life, the study of how life emerged from non-life.
They speak of evolution from simple microbial life to human life:
Not quite right, you might want to look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution
4.4 billion years of replicating molecules,
4 billion years of simple cells (prokaryotes),
2 billion years of complex cells (eukaryotes),
1 billion years of multicellular life,
600 million years of simple animals,
550 million years of complex animals
500 million years of fish and proto-amphibians,
360 million years of amphibians,
300 million years of reptiles,
200 million years of mammals,
60 million years of primates,
200,000 years since humans started looking like they do today.
They say that microbial life was created from certain chemicals that created life
All life is derived from Organic molecules
sources of organic molecules:
chemical disequilibrium, hospitable climate, active chemistry
organic synthesis by other energy sources (such as ultraviolet light or electrical discharges)
delivery by extraterrestrial objects (eg carbonaceous chondrites);
organic synthesis driven by impact shocks.
estimates of these sources within the early atmosphere made available quantities of organics
-Plausible pre-biotic conditions result in the creation of certain basic small molecules (monomers) of life, such as amino acids.
-Phospholipids (of an appropriate length) can spontaneously form lipid bilayers, a basic component of the cell membrane.
-The polymerization of nucleotides into random RNA molecules might have resulted in self-replicating ribozymes (RNA world hypothesis).
-Selection pressures for catalytic efficiency and diversity result in ribozymes which catalyse peptidyl transfer (hence formation of small proteins), since oligopeptides complex with RNA to form better catalysts, and protein synthesis becomes more prevalent.
-Proteins outcompete ribozymes in catalytic ability, and therefore become the dominant biopolymer. Nucleic acids are restricted to predominantly genomic use.
The origin of the basic biomolecules etc.
Stage 1: The origin of biological monomers (molecules)
Stage 2: The origin of biological polymers (self-replicating molecules)
Stage 3: The evolution from molecules to cell
There are problems with this theory:
Scientific Theory - Certain things must apply before a hypothesis is considered a theory. Theories in science , are mathematical or logical explanation, capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. In science a theory and fact do not necessarily stand in opposition. Theories in science are based on and describe facts.
What chemicals can be put together to create life.
Methane (CH4),
Ammonia (NH3),
Water (H2O),
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S),
Carbon dioxide (CO2) or carbon monoxide (CO), and
Phosphate (PO43-).
It has never been done.
Actually it has been expeiramented on, and found that very simple life does come from non-organic material in certain conditions. If that's what you mean.
Another thing is that if God doesn’t exist and there is no soul then how come people must die? If people are just made up of chemicals then why can’t people live forever? If a person is just a combination of chemicals and not a soul then why can’t they just replace these chemicals.
Life is chemistry, when the chemistry cease you die.
If this is true, then scientists must create their own life from chemicals, and I am not talking about simple amino acids, or any of that crap, I am talking about real life created from chemicals like Carbon, Hydrogen and Oxygen. It has never been done.
Maybe they could.
How is it that conciousness can come from matter:
Through evolution.
I am looking for a logical and intelligent answer from the atheists. Why can’t scientists create humans in a lab by using the right chemicals?
Why would they want to? That's kind of creepy.
Evolution also does not make scientific sense:
I guess all those thousands of scientist and people who actually understand it who accpet it as accurate don't have any sense because you're such a smart person. It's actually a scientific fact.
because it is impossible for a monkey to give birth to a human .
Good job on figuring that one out.
This is ridiculous. In the billions of years man has been on the Earth there is not one instance of any species giving birth to another species:
Billions of years? Are you exaggerating? Primates only been around for 60 mil. Modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago.
Even if one man was born from a monkey, how would the human race survive? That man can’t produce humans with other moneky’s.
No humans and monkeys can't reproduce. Are you applying this happened?Because only a stupid idiot would, but just incase. Species don't give birth to other species, the gradual progression to differ in species happens over a long period of time in most animals. Humans and monkeys shared a common ancestor millions of years ago the species diverged(split lines) Humans evolved from primates of H*mo species, to name them
H*mo, Homohabilis, Homorudolfensis, Homoergaster, Homogeorgicus, Homoerectus, Homocepranensis, Homoantecessor, Homoheidelbergensis, Homorhodesiensis, Homoneanderthalensis, Homosapiens idaltu, Homosapiens (Cro-magnon, modern human), Homosapiens sapiens (humans)
...but how we got here isn't something that's going to make any difference about where we are now, or where we're going to be in the future.
Actually, it makes all the difference.
We can either figure out how the universe works and employ that knowledge for survival and exploration, or we can sit back and wait for the second coming while the world disintegrates around us.
...cannot fully prove or disprove the existence of a god.
Complete knowledge is unattainable. Given the complete lack of evidence for the existence of a god I place it on the same level as a race of reptiles running the world (David Icke), or Russell's celestial teapot. That's why it's completely reasonable to be agnostic and atheist (like me).
I really like you last paragraph 
Ask a question related to: "God exists"
Popular questions related to God exists
- What does sylvia brown have to say about the rapture 2012 the
- Does anything in the Bible mention aliens?
- if god created the world in 7 days
- Is watching porno a sin?
- bible verse...
- Is 2011 the end of the world?
- How can Christianity say that the Earth is only 6,000 years old?
- Why do people hate Christians so much?
- Will God forgive me?
- Is it possible to kill the Devil?
- Why do people think the serpent in Genesis was 'the devil'?
- How to help my Agnostic boyfriend become Christian?
- Is there really no marriage in Heaven?
- Did Jesus eat meat or was he a vegetarian?
- Can a christian man marry a non christian woman?
- Was there life before Adam and Eve?
Share this question
Copy and paste this code:It will display on your blog or site like this:
God exists
God exists
I have been reading articles about many people who don't beleive in God, but due to the great number I can't respond to every comment. SO, I will just give scientific and logical proof as to why God must exist and you atheists try to figure out how...
everything in the Universe can exist without God, okay?
-Modern science believes that life is a combination of chemicals, and that a soul does not exist. They speak of evolution from simple microbial life to human life. They say that microbial life was created from certain chemicals that created life. There are problems with this theory. What chemicals can be put together to create life. If this is true, then scientists must create their own life from chemicals, and I am not talking about simple amino acids, or any of that crap, I am talking about real life created from chemicals like Carbon, Hydrogen and Oxygen. It has never been done. Another thing is that if God doesn’t exist and there is no soul then how come people must die? If people are just made up of chemicals then why can’t people live forever? If a person is just a combination of chemicals and not a soul then why can’t they just replace these chemicals.
Scientists and Atheists make these bold claims that make so sense without any proof. It is impossible to create life from matter. If all life was made of matter and not a spirit soul then all life is just machines, and machines can be fixed, if not reassembled. How is it that conciousness can come from matter. I am looking for a logical and intelligent answer from the atheists. Why can’t scientists create humans in a lab by using the right chemicals? Evolution also does not make scientific sense because it is impossible for a monkey to give birth to a human . This is ridiculous. In the billions of years man has been on the Earth there is not one instance of any species giving birth to another species. Even if one man was born from a monkey, how would the human race survive? That man can’t produce humans with other moneky’s. How can the universe be created without God? The Big Bang theory is there but it suggests that the universe extened for millions of light years in a nonillionth of a second or 10^-30 of a second. This is Centillions (10^303) times faster than the speed of light. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light so the Big Bang is false! Science doesn’t answer the question of what force created the Big Bang. No force know to physics or science can explain what caused the Big Bang and if nothing existed before the Big Bang how could it happen.
This implies that God(who is above the laws of physics) miraculously created a universe that is impossible to be created naturally because no natural force could produce something as powerful as the Big Bang. What natural force can make a universe that extended for millions of light years in a nonillionth of a second. The speed of light, the fastest natural force in physics would take millions of years to travel millions of light years. The force that caused the Big Bang expanded the Universe millions of light years in a nonillionth of a second. To demonstrate how much faster God created the universe than light can travel I will give a comparison. If God extended the Univerese 100 million light-years in a nonillionth of a second, then in one second light could travel 100 million times a nonillion light years in a second. This comes out to be a speed of 100 Undecillion light years per second. An Undecillion is 10^36. At this speed light would travel 100 Undecillion times 31.6 million seconds in a year.
This would mean that the speed of the Big Bang would be over 3.16 Quattourdecillion light years in one year. A Quattordecillion is 10^45 or 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. In contrast light travels only 1 light year a year. It is impossible for the Universe to be created by any physical force, God must have done it because, The Big Bang happened 10^45 times faster than the Speed of Light. I can write on forever but I will stop. So, atheists are you brave enough to answer this?