The Problem with Christians

[Esquilax]

@AJ, it seems you are very proud of your probability figures...

I'm sure you've taken into account the fact that those features don't just pop into existence in one go, right?
The eye... luckily, there are many living beings with light sensitive apparatuses.
Some are simple light sensitive cells on the outer covering of the animal letting it know if it's in the light or shade... that provides some survival advantage - better stay in the dark, for less chance of being eaten by something else. But, in a time when no more complex eye existed, that would not be the main concern. It would be availability of resources for breeding - perhaps light would bring with it warmer conditions that could provide for better nutrition.

It bears mentioning that I linked the guy to a literal diagram showing that progression. In his next post he claimed to have seen it, and then proceeded to continue the strawman of the features of the eye popping in in one go, despite apparently having seen the diagram showing the opposite.

Either he's not really listening to us, or he's so committed to his script that he'll continue with it even when he knows it's wrong.

[LadyForCamus]

It's so unfortunate that you guys have to waste precious time and energy on people who are in no way interested in learning...it must take a toll after a while.

[pocaracas]

Yeah,I know, Esq... I just tried to make sure he'd see some of the evolutionary stages... Links require too much reading

[AJW333]

The multiverse theory is basically saying that other dimensions exist. This isn't in conflict with the Scriptures. The 12th century Hebrew scholar Nachmonides concluded from his studies of the book of Genesis that the universe has ten dimensions: four are knowable and six are beyond perception..

Citation needed.

He claimed a 13th century Rabbi named Nachmanides had determined from Genesis that the Universe contained 10 dimensions, and thus discovered something in the Bible that scientists would not learn for another seven centuries. Thus the literal interpretation of Genesis was validated. I had to point out to him that there is no record of Nachmanides making this claim...

http://www.apatheticagnostic.com/article...d1037.html

Couldn't find one so I will concede that there is insufficient evidence for the statement. Interestingly the same website you sited for there being no reference did say this;

Note:
* Interestingly, Nachmanides, in an attempt to describe how God created everything out of nothing, did suggest the universe was originally the size of a mustard seed which then expanded.
...At the briefest instant following creation all the matter of the universe was concentrated in a very small place, no larger than a grain of mustard. The matter at this time was very thin, so intangible, that it did not have real substance. It did have, however, a potential to gain substance and form and to become tangible matter. From the initial concentration of this intangible substance in its minute location, the substance expanded, expanding the universe as it did so. As the expansion progressed, a change in the substance occurred. This initially thin noncorporeal substance took on the tangible aspects of matter as we know it. From this initial act of creation, from this ethereally thin pseudosubstance, everything that has existed, or will ever exist, was, is, and will be formed.

[The Atheist]

Citation needed.

Couldn't find one so I will concede that there is insufficient evidence for the statement. Interestingly the same website you sited for there being no reference did say this;

Note:
* Interestingly, Nachmanides, in an attempt to describe how God created everything out of nothing, did suggest the universe was originally the size of a mustard seed which then expanded.
...At the briefest instant following creation all the matter of the universe was concentrated in a very small place, no larger than a grain of mustard. The matter at this time was very thin, so intangible, that it did not have real substance. It did have, however, a potential to gain substance and form and to become tangible matter. From the initial concentration of this intangible substance in its minute location, the substance expanded, expanding the universe as it did so. As the expansion progressed, a change in the substance occurred. This initially thin noncorporeal substance took on the tangible aspects of matter as we know it. From this initial act of creation, from this ethereally thin pseudosubstance, everything that has existed, or will ever exist, was, is, and will be formed.

Holy Jesus bloody Christ dressed up for Hannukah! Stfu!

[AJW333]

To make matters worse, the fossil record shows no intermediate length giraffe necks. If the evolution of the long neck took millions of years, where are the intermediates?

No? Then what is this right here?

How do we know that the existence of Samotherium represents a species that evolved into the giraffe and wasn't simply a separate animal?

---

Actually the complexity of the human eye is a good argument against design.  Why would a designer make something more complicated than necessary?  The only reason a designer would make something so complicated is because they have limitations.  This goes against the Christian God who is said to have made man from Dirt.  That's magic.

It's actually consistent with science insofar as everything that is necessary to create man can be found in the dirt. 

Then you have to consider: The Bible states we were made in his image.  If he looks like us, and we appear designed, then he too must appear designed.   So who designed him?  If he wasn't designed, why is his eye less complex than ours?  Was he restricted by laws he didn't create?  Or does his eyes work the same as ours, and thus give an appearance of design?

"Some people think that being made in the image of God deals with the physical likeness as if God has a body of flesh and blood. This is not the case. Jesus tells us that God, in reference to the Father, is spirit (John 4:24) and that spirit does not have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39). Therefore, it cannot be true that we are made in the image of God the Father in the sense that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones.

So then, what does it mean to be made in the image of God? It means that we are made in His likeness in that we have some of the same attributes that God has. For example, God is rational (Isaiah 1:18) and so are we. God can love (John 3:16) and so can we. God can hate (Psalm 5:5, 11:5) and so can we. Because we are made in God's image, we are able to have compassion, mercy, grace, fellowship, friendship, etc. However, as God is all-knowing, we are not. God is ever-present, but we are not.

So, the image of God in us means that we are like Him in some, not all, of His attributes." https://carm.org/image-of-god

[LadyForCamus]

No? Then what is this right here?

How do we know that the existence of Samotherium represents a species that evolved into the giraffe and wasn't simply a separate animal?

Yeah...cuz that makes more sense then the other option, lol. You are purposefully refusing to see the forest through the trees.

[IATIA]

Brain dead morons refuse to accept evolution because we cannot see it, yet if we were able to show evolution in a lab, they would refuse to accept it because it was not natural. There is no way to satisfy a brain dead moron with anything but faery tales.

[Cecelia]

---

Actually the complexity of the human eye is a good argument against design.  Why would a designer make something more complicated than necessary?  The only reason a designer would make something so complicated is because they have limitations.  This goes against the Christian God who is said to have made man from Dirt.  That's magic.

It's actually consistent with science insofar as everything that is necessary to create man can be found in the dirt. 

Then you have to consider: The Bible states we were made in his image.  If he looks like us, and we appear designed, then he too must appear designed.   So who designed him?  If he wasn't designed, why is his eye less complex than ours?  Was he restricted by laws he didn't create?  Or does his eyes work the same as ours, and thus give an appearance of design?

"Some people think that being made in the image of God deals with the physical likeness as if God has a body of flesh and blood. This is not the case. Jesus tells us that God, in reference to the Father, is spirit (John 4:24) and that spirit does not have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39). Therefore, it cannot be true that we are made in the image of God the Father in the sense that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones.

So then, what does it mean to be made in the image of God? It means that we are made in His likeness in that we have some of the same attributes that God has. For example, God is rational (Isaiah 1:18) and so are we. God can love (John 3:16) and so can we. God can hate (Psalm 5:5, 11:5) and so can we. Because we are made in God's image, we are able to have compassion, mercy, grace, fellowship, friendship, etc. However, as God is all-knowing, we are not. God is ever-present, but we are not.

So, the image of God in us means that we are like Him in some, not all, of His attributes." https://carm.org/image-of-god

It's also consistent with science that we share most of our DNA with Apes, and that we both evolved from a common ancestor.  But you'll ignore that because it's inconvenient for you.  You'd have to admit that the Adam and Eve story is complete bullshit (which it is.  The story 100% never happened.)  Also note that for some reason your God is said to have needed Adam's Rib to make a woman.  That makes absolutely no sense.  But then again the bible makes no sense at all.

The argument for design can basically be applied to everything, and therefore you have nothing to compare it to. 

Adam and Eve weren't real people. I'm sorry you have a hard time with this because it conflicts your confirmation bias, and you'll do anything to convince yourself that it's real.  But it's not.  There never was such a bottleneck of a population.  And certainly not TWICE.  Cain and Seth would have had to have married their sisters--unless you want to make up stuff and say god created other people too-- and even then Noah descended from Seth, and then had three sons who had three wives, and their cousins had to marry each other again.  You can say "GOD MADE THEM GENETICALLY SAFE" but that's just saying MAGIC DID IT.  And when you rely on magic, your argument isn't rational in the least bit.  There's certainly no reason for any rational person to take your word for it.   If we can use magic, then I could easily just say that it wasn't Yahweh who did anything, it was the great god Odin.

[Minimalist]

It's so unfortunate that you guys have to waste precious time and energy on people who are in no way interested in learning...it must take a toll after a while.  

Sometimes you just have to put in the work in practice.  I tend to think of jesus freak morons as 'warm-up blocks.'