Abiogenesis is impossible

[Fidel_Castronaut]

hey atheist, they're playing you like a drum and you don't even know it. scientists using the naturalism methodology can't make reference to a designer or they lose their funding because there would be nothing for them to study.

Do you ever grow tired of talking nonsense?

Simply invoking a creator answers nothing. It stymies advancement and learning because it presumes itself to the be the only answer and this disengages the interest of people.

There is no evidence of a 'creator'. Occam's razor alone demolishes your baseless assertion.

And for the record, there are no scientists that I know of (and I know a lot ) who care one iota about 'creators' in their day to day research. It's just something guys like you are hung up on and like to think people are pulling their hair out about how to counter your ludicrous claims. Well, they're not.

[Tonus]

here's are some thoughts: 1) the biblical Hebrew vocabulary has only about 3,000 words. consequently, the interpretation dependents on grammar, sentence structure, and context since there are multiple literal definitions of common usages. the frame of reference of ancient people is how words and phases such as 'the entire heavens', 'face of the earth' are correctly interpreted. using our modern day global perspective wouldn't give the correct meaning.

You'd think that god could either come up with a language that was simple enough to interpret clearly, or make sure they wrote in a manner that could be interpreted clearly, or not create new languages when men were constructing the tower of Babel. His direct message to humankind, the conduit by which he delivers wisdom and offers salvation, and he can't even manage a way to make it consistent or coherent enough. Can't god do anything right?

[RobbyPants]

None of these conditions are outside the realm of possibility but in your arrogance you assume that because we cannot detect them, they are not, never have been and never will be there.

And yet, even though we can't detect God, he's still totally there. For realsies. Compartmentalization at it's finest. He's so close, and he doesn't realize it.

[snowtracks]

here's are some thoughts: 1) the biblical Hebrew vocabulary has only about 3,000 words. consequently, the interpretation dependents on grammar, sentence structure, and context since there are multiple literal definitions of common usages. the frame of reference of ancient people is how words and phases such as 'the entire heavens', 'face of the earth' are correctly interpreted. using our modern day global perspective wouldn't give the correct meaning.

---

2) then there are some nuttie Christian insisting on the word 'world' meaning entire surface of the earth, and 'day' always meaning 24 hours to confuse the issue.

Nutty meaning the world means the whole world? Or the face of the earth means all the earth? Nutty meaning a day means 24 hours? Sorry, I think that is exactly what the Hebrews meant.

---

[Cyberman]

Is there a similar example of the text making clear the flood was anything other than global?

[The Grand Nudger]

It doesn't really matter, even if we redefine 90% of the words in the text so as to not look like imbeciles for believing the story - we'll be left with a redneck hanging on to the roof of his chicken coup with his toothless wife and inbred children, two donkeys and a goat- while some rinky dink creek damn releases it's "floodwaters". The narrative will still be wholly untrue.

Hallelujah!

[Tonus]

Wait, so you're doubling down on the ridiculousness of a global flood by claiming that Egypt once fed the ENTIRE WORLD during a near-global famine?

[pocaracas]

Maps from the 1400's show no Americas, because the known world had no Americas.
The Egypt thing that feed the whole world should read "the whole known world"...
Now, we're left with the question: Known to whom?
Why... the egyptians, of course!
At a time when boat travel was only available to a very select few, these would be the carriers of knowledge of the "known" world. And Egypt must always look good, so they were the ones feeding the entire known world... Egypt and a few more provinces around there...

So the book was written by people who had no idea what the world was like in its fullest... why am I not surprised?

[RobbyPants]

It doesn't really matter, even if we redefine 90% of the words in the text so as to not look like imbeciles for believing the story - we'll be left with a redneck hanging on to the roof of his chicken coup with his toothless wife and inbred children, two donkeys and a goat- while some rinky dink creek damn releases it's "floodwaters". The narrative will still be wholly untrue.

Hallelujah!

And yet, proponents of this method never extend it to their "core" beliefs. There's no way Jesus was just a street magician who got more caught up in politics than he'd originally planned. He's the son of an infinitely powerful god, and simultaneously is that god.

There's no way Satan is a metaphor, originally meant to be "the accuser" or "the adversary" to represent opposition to the religion. He's really a super-powerful entity responsible for all the doubts and misunderstandings of the One True Faith.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Even the Bible says that the Noah flood story is B.S. so why is it always discussed as if it was a reality?

In Genesis 2:14 is states that the Garden of Eden was just down the road from Assyria. That's the Garden of Eden with Adam & Eve and the talking serpent.

In Genesis 10:11 after the flood Nimrod waltzing into Assyria and builds four cities, including the famous Nineveh.

So Assyria existed at the same time as the Garden of Eden and it was just fine after the flood that covered the entire world.

Draw your own conclusions.