creation vs evolution.

[Transcendence]

This guy just tried to say Kent Hovind's opinion on Evolution debunks someone with a degree in Biology...

Oh God NB, never change.

 

[Multiply]

This guy just tried to say Kent Hovind's opinion on Evolution debunks someone with a degree in Biology...

Oh God NB, never change.

C'mon trans, he only came with facts though. :bdpf:

 

[Brother Numpsay]

Im seeing alot of picking fun of creationist. At least they got a premise right, that the most logical conclusion of the beginning of universe was caused by a Creator.

 

[Multiply]

Im seeing alot of picking fun of creationist. At least they got a premise right, that the most logical conclusion of the beginning of universe was caused by a Creator.

How do you figure? Your logic is, "We can't explain it, must be a creator".

 

[Brother Numpsay]

How do you figure? Your logic is, "We can't explain it, must be a creator".

Wait a minute. Before I respond, whats the atheistic logic behind it?

Edit: I asked because Im sure we dont want to discuss the "God of the Gaps" nor "naturalism of the gaps" argument.

 

[Tarinth]

Wait a minute. Before I respond, whats the atheistic logic behind it?

The atheist logic behind it is: The universe is mysterious and its origins is unexplainable (going before the Big
Bang that is) with what we know now.
The religious logic behind it is: The universe is mysterious and its origins is unexplainable so a Creator that we
cannot understand or explain must've caused it.

Both sides face the same underlying issues so I don't see a real point for either side to argue that their side
is right based on this kind of how the universe began pondering.

And saying that God is too mysterious to understand and humans cannot even begin to understand Him is a cop-out
explanation. Even if God exists and this explanation holds true, this still doesn't make it a legitimate way of proving
that it was God that created the universe.

 

[Brother Numpsay]

The atheist logic behind it is: The universe is mysterious and its origins is unexplainable (going before the Big
Bang that is) with what we know now.
The religious logic behind it is: The universe is mysterious and its origins is unexplainable so a Creator that we
cannot understand or explain must've caused it.

Both sides face the same underlying issues so I don't see a real point for either side to argue that their side
is right based on this kind of how the universe began pondering.

And saying that God is too mysterious to understand and humans cannot even begin to understand Him is a cop-out
explanation. Even if God exists and this explanation holds true, this still doesn't make it a legitimate way of proving
that it was God that created the universe.

Good point. But my reasoning wasn't going to be by what Cole think my logic is (The God Gap). What I was heading towards was the "kalam cosmological argument", which leads a logical standpoint of the origin of the universe.

 

[Multiply]

Good point. But my reasoning wasn't going to be by what Cole think my logic is (The God Gap). What I was heading towards was the "kalam cosmological argument", which leads a logical standpoint of the origin of the universe.

Explain your logical standpoint then.

 

[Benjamin King]

I agree with what Bronze said.

 

[Brother Numpsay]

Explain your logical standpoint then.

It was the kalam cosmological argument. Its better put in words by video/presentation:

 

[Multiply]

It was the kalam cosmological argument. Its better put in words by video/presentation:

Just looking at the time stamp on the link, it's already just a bad idea for me to watch this.

"If the universe had been here forever, it would have run out of usable energy by now". Now where could they pull that ass backwards logic from? That's enough for me to dismiss the entire video without watching it tbh.

 

[Brother Numpsay]

Just looking at the time stamp on the link, it's already just a bad idea for me to watch this.

"If the universe had been here forever, it would have run out of usable energy by now". Now where could they pull that ass backwards logic from? That's enough for me to dismiss the entire video without watching it tbh.

That was most likely a typo from their presentation. Replace "would" for "wouldn't", then problem solved.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

Darwin's contemporary Asa Gray was a prominent Botanist, Darwinist and Christian and in Darwin's correspondence he said "It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent theist & an evolutionist."

 

[Lia]

Evolution, because God is a creation of the human mind. A really ridiculous one.

 

[Your Creepy Stalker]

Bud...

You must be registered for see images

Look through every scientific document in existence, and show me the one that says "This is why Religion is wrong". No scientific study has directly sought to disprove creation, since "God" does not have any solid proof, and there's no need to disprove a negative.

 

[SasukeTheEmo]

You have zero idea on what Evolution is if you believe it is a rip off of reincarnation.

It is YOU who doesn't know what evolution is.

All Darwin did was adapt the Vedic version of transmigration of the soul from lower to higher bodies, to the grossly materialistic western view by propounding his atheistic views of physical evolution.

That, is in essence, a rip off.
Then again, Europe (and whitey in general), has been leeching off Vedic civilisation ever since it was colonised. Which funnily enough is when most of Europe's "discoveries" occurred any ways.

 

[Your Creepy Stalker]

It is YOU who doesn't know what evolution is.

All Darwin did was adapt the Vedic version of transmigration of the soul from lower to higher bodies, to the grossly materialistic western view by propounding his atheistic views of physical evolution.

That, is in essence, a rip off.
Then again, Europe (and whitey in general), has been leeching off Vedic civilisation ever since it was colonised. Which funnily enough is when most of Europe's "discoveries" occurred any ways.

What? How can you possibly see any link between Reincarnation and Evolution? Evolution is tiny changes in a species genes slowly changing that species over time.

 

[SasukeTheEmo]

What? How can you possibly see any link between Reincarnation and Evolution? Evolution is tiny changes in a species genes slowly changing that species over time.

The link is pretty simple. If reincarnation is the transmigration of soul from a lower to higher body, then "evolution" is the materialistic view that we evolved via phantasmagorical transformation of matter.

 

[Multiply]

The link is pretty simple. If reincarnation is the transmigration of soul from a lower to higher body, then "evolution" is the materialistic view that we evolved via phantasmagorical transformation of matter.

You're reaching fam.

 

[Your Creepy Stalker]

The link is pretty simple. If reincarnation is the transmigration of soul from a lower to higher body, then "evolution" is the materialistic view that we evolved via phantasmagorical transformation of matter.

Not seeing a link. You might, but i need it in simpler terms, because right now i may as well be arguing with a 3 year old who owns a thesaurus. No rational arguments but lots of long words.