The Resurrection and the Death of Atheism

No, it really has nothing at all to do with what people think they "need".

That framing is just for political purposes of argument.

It then allows Christians an opening for all sorts of ad hom. They think they are too good. They think they are above it all. They want to continue killing babies (or whatever else).

All that misses the central point of whether there is a God of the specific form YOU demand that I believe exists.


I'd really like it if Christians were more honest about their arguments.

And, I would think that Christians would like that, too, as having their religion promoted by lies and ad hom seems more than just counter productive.

 

Im sorry dealing with the likes of you makes me feel dirty, I need to go take a shower wipe all the **** you spray off me.

"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of Spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei ["the voice of the people = the voice of God "], as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certain the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, should not be considered as subversive of the theory."

So is it deceit or ignorance that makes you do this?

 

Other belief systems believe in God, but Islam and Judaism don't understand the love of God for His creation. Judaism follows the law and rejects the Messiah, and Islam believes that Christ was a prophet. Jesus fulfilled all of the messianic prophecies and Jesus said He was God. https://www.gotquestions.org/Old-Testament-Christ.html

https://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-say-He-is-God.html

 

Look at the flagellum of some bacteria-a marvel of engineering. Harvard biologist Howard Berg refers to in his public lectures as "the most efficient machine in the universe."

The flagellum is a little motor-driven propeller that sits on the backs of certain bacteria and drives them through their watery environment. It spins at 100,000 rpm and can change direction in a quarter turn. The intricate machinery in this molecular motor-including a rotor, a stator, O-rings, bushings, and a drive shaft-requires the coordinated interaction of approximately forty complex protein parts.

If any part is missing or not available in the right proportions, no functional flagellum will form. So, how could it have evolved?

 

Before detection of light, predators and prey had to depend on touch, vibration, smell - all requiring extremely close proximity.

The advent and development of light detection was a GIGANTIC improvement. And, the continued improvement of that feature could not be more closely tied to natural selection.

One might also point out that more than one basic eye design can be found in nature, having developed along different evolutionary paths. There are ocopus eyes, bird eyes (flat, closer to reptile eyes, dinosaur eyes?), various insect eye designs, human eyes, etc. Eyes of fish and snakes have fixed lenses and focus by moving the lens forward and back, like a camera does. Eyes of mammals have muscles that distort the lens shape.

Crab eyes seem to have evolved from compound eyes that became simple single eyes. Caterpillers have compound eyes that seem to have evolved from single eyes.

Simply pointing to a human eye and noting that it is a coplex structure is not even slightly good enough if what you are actually trying to do is refute evolution.

There are examples of eye evolution everywhere!

 

According to Michael Behe, we know of only one sufficient cause that can produce functionally integrated, irreducibly complex systems: an Intelligent Designer.

Molecular biology has shown that even a single cell is incredibly complex. Bruce Alberts, a leading cell biologist and president of the National Academy of Sciences, writes:

We have always underestimated cells. The entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines, each of which is composed of a set of large protein machines. Why do they call them machines? Precisely because, like machines invented by humans to deal efficiently with the macroscopic world, these protein assemblies contain highly coordinated moving parts.

And all the parts must be in place simultaneously or the cell can't function.

Since life is built of these "machines," the idea that natural processes could have made a living system is absurd.

Behe acknowledges that:

Systems of horrendous, irreducible complexity inhabit the cell. The resulting realization that life was designed by an intelligence is a shock to us in the twentieth century who have gotten used to thinking of life as the result of simple natural laws.

 

Irreducible complexity is poorly defined. It is defined in terms of parts, but it is far from obvious what a "part" is. Logically, the parts should be individual atoms, because they are the level of organization that does not get subdivided further in biochemistry, and they are the smallest level that biochemists consider in their analysis. Behe, however, considered sets of molecules to be individual parts, and he gave no indication of how he made his determinations.

 

Yes, Islam believes Jesus was a prophet, revered as the prophet second only to Muhammad and the only prophet to have through the power of god carried out miracles.

Yes, Judaism believes Jesus was a man and that his claims of godhood make him a false prophet, as they note that he did NOT fulfill OT prophecies and that the events declared to presage his coming had not yet taken place.

So, you have a different set of claims. Nobody in their right mind can be surprised by that.

Look at the variety of religions. Even just consider the gigantic number of branches of the Abrahamic faiths.

The main point here is that religion has NO methodology for making decisions of any kind. There is no basis upon which the numerous and often belligerant religious variations can come to any conclusion.

Yet, so many want to suggest that they know better than what is seen simply by observing how this universe actually works.

Seriously unfortunate.

 

Although the highly intricate machines in cells often resemble those designed by humans, in many cases they are much more advanced than what man has been able to create!

Evolutionist Richard Dawkins said of the DNA in cells, "The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like."

Microsoft's cofounder Bill Gates stated, "DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software we've ever created."

 

This idea of irreducible complexity has failed. The scientific community has resoundingly rejected it.

Even his own university published a statement dissociating itself from this false idea.

 

How can a final prophet be greater than a sinless prophet?

 

Nothing more than deceptive quote mining.

 

Although the highly intricate machines in cells often resemble those designed by humans, in many cases they are much more advanced than what man has been able to create!

 

Since Gates hires programmers to design his software, doesn't it make sense that the "software" in a cell-which is far more advanced than any man-made software-had a designer also?

In fact, researchers believe DNA could be the basis of a staggeringly powerful new generation of computers.

 

Social welfare, well, that’s just your typical atheist rip- off of religion. Indeed, America is the most charitable country in the world (which you failed to mention), for God spends on those who spend in the name of God.

Americans are not expected to rely on government handouts like a bunch of lazy losers, but to utilize individual spirit. And the spirit is pretty much dead all over those Western Europe ****holes anyway. I heard that they’re trying to call the army to help stem the chaos in French suburbs.....

Need or no need, like I said, the universe will continue to do as it has always been doing, regardless of what you or anyone thinks about it. Not believing in God make no difference whatsoever, you’re only kidding yourself.

 

What a ridiculous question!

Are you looking to choose your religion based on which one you think is "best"?

How is being "best" a deciding factor in selection of a religion?

Wouldn't you first want to know which one is real and which one is fake?

 

There is nothing rational in that argument.

The fact that someone designed something doesn't mean that this universe was designed by an all powerful, eternal god.

And, that last sentence is interesting, but totaly irrelevant.

 

Many beliefs are the result of our desires, rather than our ability to follow the truth. We'd rather follow our traditions, as Jesus said, than we will follow the truth.

https://www.oneforisrael.org/bible-...lmud-rabbinic-tradition-vs-the-new-testament/

 

After computer scientist Leonard Adleman realized that human cells and computers process and store information in much the same way, researchers around the world began creating tiny biology-based computers, using test tubes of DNA-laden water to crunch algorithims and spit out data.

Researchers are also hoping that genetic material can self-replicate and grow into processors so powerful that they can handle problems too complex for silicon-based computers to solve.

 

You want evidence that an object (the universe) didn’t spring out of nothingness? That’s pretty stupid....

I see, so believers believe in “an invisible magic man.” So, the atheists arrogantly get to decide who we believe in (which is anything but Reality), and then consequently claim that that belief is erroneous. I forgot what logical fallacy this could be categorized as....

 

Do you not see that as a serious problem?

As I pointed out above, religion doesn't include any mechanism for determining truth.

If it did, there wouldn't be literally hundreds of significant variations just involving the Abrahamic faiths that accept the Bible.

And, those of the variants wouldn't have such an amazing history of hating each other to the point of war BECAUSE of their religion.

 

God is about relationship, not religion. Religion is manmade https://www.gotquestions.org/Christianity-religion-relationship.html

 

I'm reminded of a rebuttal to this argument that compared the flagellum to a mouse trap. Take away any part of a common mousetrap and it won't trap a mouse. However, you can remove parts and have a different functioning tool. The base, spring, and bar, for instance, can function as a clip (like those things that hold chip bags shut). Similarly, with the flagellum, if any part is missing it doesn't function as a flagellum. However, there are parts that can function as something else, and do so. The motor proteins, for instance, function in other species of bacteria to inject pathogens across the membranes of neighboring cells. While you may not be able to imagine how something like the flagellum can evolve, there are plenty of other folks who see the evidence of incremental change and can imagine it just fine.

 

Firstly I make no assertions that the Universe did or didn't spring out of nothing.

You seem to make an assertion that because science can't provide an explanation for creation of the Universe (at least prior to the big bang) you get to claim God did it. This is called an Argument From Ignorance fallacy.

I state that you can't provide proof that your God exists and you claim I am deciding what you can believe in. That is an example of a Strawman Fallacy. Now prove me wrong and provide your proof that God exists.

 

God is about humans wanting a magic man to protect them after they learn their parents are not all powerful. In other words a way to cope with anxiety. You yourself keep referring to your God as a child would refer to a parent. Of course the difference is parents are in most cases not invisible.