Evolution as evidence for atheism

[Tiberius]

Evolution is a basis for Atheism even though it does prove anything.

Atheism was around before evolution. Evolution doesn't have anything to do with the existence of God, so I fail to see how it would even be a basis for atheism.

GOD did not use evolution as this puts Death before man. "Billions of years" of death had to occur then Adam appeared and Eve made from Adam. Then all of a sudden everything is perfect for however many years. Then death resumes it toll as Adam falls. The Bible says that Death entered in the world by man (Physical). If there was death before man then the Bible is wrong for this is a contradiction violating the law of non-contradiction.

Then it looks like your Bible is wrong. I'd also like to point out that evolutionary theory doesn't say there was billions of years of death and then Adam & Eve appeared. Adam & Eve don't come into it. Evolution is more about life (reproduction) than death.

If he made these earthly bodies in Billions of years through evolution why would He be able to give us our glorified bodies in a "Twinkling of an eye?"

Because your Bible isn't correct. It is wrong, and us looking at reality instead of reading and blindly believing what people say has led us to that conclusion.

In their worldview they believe that the universe Spontaneously started or the BB - Big Bang.

No we don't. Atheists don't believe in God. That is the only thing we find common amongst ourselves. Being an atheist doesn't mean you believe in the Big Bang. In fact, one of the main objectors to the Big Bang when it arose as a theory was Fred Hoyle, an atheist.

1) Where are all the Population III stars?

They all burned out in the early universe.

2) Where is the anti-matter the universe needs to prove a Big Bang?

The Big Bang produced both matter and anti-matter. When matter and anti-matter are brought together, they annihilate each other and convert to energy, however recent experiments have shown that there is a bias towards matter in these conversions. 1% of matter is left behind, which is why there is no natural anti-matter in the universe, but still matter. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/scienc....html?_r=1

3) Who was their to witness the beginning happen and document down its existence happening?
-- They have to assume the BB happened without 100% knowing it ever happened since they were not there billions of years ago - nor can you test the past. They say they look at the present evidence and draw conclusions. But how do they not know that over that "billions of years" it has or has not changed in which determines truly what happened? They cannot prove it - since they do not know the past.

Nobody was there. You have to say the same for your creation story though. Adam & Eve didn't write the Old Testament; it was written later, but how do you know it was written accurately? You have to assume...to take it on faith.

Whereas for our position, we have evidence. We have background radiation, we can see the universe expanding, red shift and blue shift. All the evidence we have points in one direction; to a smaller universe than was contained within a singularity, up until the moment of the Big Bang.

It could not happen spontaneously since Something cannot will itself into existence since it would have no nature. Without a nature it has no attributes, without attributes something cannot will itself into existence since it could not produce such actions. A stone knife could not become a knife unless someone acted upon the rock to make it that. A painting could not become a painting until the paper was acted upon by a painter. A building could not become a building until the materials to build a building were acted upon by an outside force to build a building. Just as the universe could not have been the universe until it was acted upon from an outside force to create the universe.

Look up quantum fluctuations. Alternatively, why are you assuming the universe had a creation? The current scientific theory puts it as always being there, since time started at the moment of the Big Bang, and the matter was already there.

Everything in Atheism and Evolution (which they both go together) is based upon relativism.

No...

If we are subject unto no one but ourselves that means we can believe whatever we want and cannot condemn others for they believe according to our standards.

But we aren't subject to no one but ourselves. We are subject to each other; we are a social species. We need each other to survive, because on our own we are one of the most useless species on the planet.

If everything was relative and we did not need absolutes to determine truth then how do we know 2 + 2 = 4?

Mathematics is a human invention. It doesn't have a place in the natural world; only in our minds. There is no universal law (as in, natural law) that states this, but there is a mathematical inductive argument that does.