Its rather funny watching the usual religion vs science banter on here... amusing to get involved even. Theres some really solid arugments for evolution, and all religion can do these day is blow smoke and make lots of noise.

Rarely does one have a personal life experience that kind of drives home reality......

Its funny, my day job as a programmer I get to work on interesting projects that USE evolution.

To make more effcient programs rather than intellegently designing them which is exhaustive and time consuming we use a system of evolution. I got to work on a controller for a factory robotic arm, and more reccently a intellegent clustered web server, with many more 'lunch hour' projects too.
We'd use the basic principals of, natural selection - survival of the fitest, mutation also exergy and entropy.
The initial programs are set in motion, and multiply depending on sucess. The programs worse at their tasks and reacting to unpredictable sitations are culled, and the more sucessful get to 'have sex' with other programs to share their genetic learning.

We end up with something that WE didn't program and WE didn't create, quite often something far far more complex than we ever thought of, usually with features we never intended to program. All we did was set some initial values and let it all happen...

Evolution in a nutshell......

All we did was set some initial values and let it all happen...

Evolution in a nutshell......

==================


You had to "have" certain materials to begin with though, didn't you...?

Only God can create something from nothing.
Satan is equal to God in amost every way.....except he can't create something from nothing.
This is what he told Eve, how to be a god and create life through sex, he has taken what God has created and changed it, or perverted it into another form, thats all he can do.
This includes mankind under his influence.
This world today has become "Satan's Eden"
He has had 6,000 years to design it.
It is the "world", which has been pulled over your eye's.
You were born a slave,...... born into the slavery of sin, which is unbelief.
Only through the revelation of Jesus Christ, can you be healed of this unbelief and come to realize your full potential as a son or daughter of God.
Jesus said; "He that I set free, is free indeed."

Originally posted by TheVisitor
Only God can create something from nothing.
We've told you before, and I'll tell you again. This isn't true. There is no reason to think that only your God has this ability, and many reasons to think that it is the nature of the universe.

Jesus said; "He that I set free, is free indeed."
God said; "He that believe blindy, is blind indeed." He told me this last night... honest.

Science does not claim that the universe came from nothing. Unless you believe that 2+2=0 (i.e. nothing).

The universe can be described mathematically. The fundamental laws of physics are described using the language of mathematics. The success of physics in describing the natural world is exceptional. It is no accident that the universe behaves according to physical laws based upon mathematics. There is no need to explain the existence of the universe in terms of a creator. The simple truth is that mathematical concepts such as 2+2=4 were not created by "God," nor was the universe. The universe is merely a wonderful consequence of the beautiful complexities of mathematics. Not even a "God" can change the fact that 2+2=4. And what about life, can mathematics create life? In other words how can such a wonderfully complex universe arise simply from mathematics/physics. With only three simple rules the game of life demonstrates that complexity can arise from simplicity:

http://www.math.com/students/wonders/life/life.html

There are so many wonderfully complex and beautiful things that arise in mathematics (fractals as just one example), that it does not take a lot of imagination to understand the complexity of the universe. However, it takes a lot of imagination to believe in a creator.

Posted by TheVisitor
"Only God can create something from nothing".

We've told you before, and I'll tell you again. This isn't true. There is no reason to think that only your God has this ability, and many reasons to think that it is the nature of the universe.

========

The universe which God created........

"A mystic is someone who wants to understand the universe, but is too lazy to study physics."

From thewaronfaith.com

From thewaronfaith.com
=============
There's a "credible" source............:rolleyes:

I never stated it was a credible source (nor a non-credible source), just a source. I am not interested in plagarism. I believe in honesty.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
The universe which God created........ Regardless of what you think, there is no credibleproof for your god creating this universe... and regardless, that doesn't change that in some cases something can come from nothing WITHOUT DIVINE INTERVENTION.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
Jesus said; "He that I set free, is free indeed."
Jesus said, "If one blind person leads another blind person,
both of them will fall into a hole." -The Gospel of Thomas

that doesn't change that in some cases something can come from nothing WITHOUT DIVINE INTERVENTION.
===============
Ok, well by all means.........please feel free to provide us even one example.

The power of the spoken Word, to create something from absolutly nothing.......belongs to God alone.
And He has children, the Sons of God who in them also such power shall reside, but first the character of God to control such power must be molded in them.
By the trails and testing of our faith, through suffering we (as Jesus did before us) learn obediance, and faith by the hearing of the Word of God.
Jesus was "the beginning of the creation of God", also "the first begotton of many brethren."
Each son that cometh to God must be able to stand chastisment, or he is bastard born.


This is what life is all about....man was created in the image of God.
Mankind as he is today is not worthy to receive such power, he is in a fallen state, only by Jesus Christ and being IN Him, are we redeemed back across the chasm, and restored to our rightfull position as heirs of all things.
He is the Word of God.

Hebrews 12
"For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? 8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. 9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? 10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. 11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby."

Originally posted by TheVisitor
that doesn't change that in some cases something can come from nothing WITHOUT DIVINE INTERVENTION.
===============
Ok, well by all means.........please feel free to provide us even one example.
Virtual particles.

Yes virtual particles are an excellent example! In fact in addition to 2+2=4 (see previous post) I could have used the example of +1-1=0. On the left you have something and something else, the sum of which is nothing. Ultimately, however, you can go on believing in God, and that God created everything (and God came from nothing). It's your choice. The simple alternative is the one I have alluded to, which no one seems to have refuted. Namely, 2+2=4, nor +1-1=0 for that matter need to be created. These mathematical equations (and the mathematical equations that describe the universe) did not need to be created. There is no logical reason to believe that +1-1=0 was created (it just is). Is the fact that the derivative of sine is cosine something that was created? No, absolutely not. By the same token, electromagnetic waves (light) was not created by God. Light obeys mathematical rules, not the rules of some deity.

A mystic is someone who wants to understand the universe, but is too lazy to study physics.

Can I grab a sample of your source code? I've always wanted to create a graphical visualization of the concept that you
implemented.

Originally posted by Vatsinanaem
The universe is merely a wonderful consequence of the beautiful complexities of mathematics. No: the map is not the territory.

Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
No: the map is not the territory.

Please define your terms "map" and "territory." Are you talking about the mapping of differential manifolds? Are these words intended to have some meaning in mathematical terms? Are these words intended to have philosophical meaning? Please elaborate on your answer.

Originally posted by Vatsinanaem
Please define your terms "map" and "territory." Are you talking about the mapping of differential manifolds? Are these words intended to have some meaning in mathematical terms? Are these words intended to have philosophical meaning? Please elaborate on your answer.
The terms are well defined in any standard dictionary. I gave no answer - I made an observation (actully a well known quote from the world of general semanics).

To assert that "The universe is merely a wonderful consequence of the beautiful complexities of mathematics.", is to confuse the explanation with the explained and the a priori with the a posteriori.

Virtual particles.

==================

Explain how these can create matter, from nothing to begin with...?
If you can do this, and actually sound convincing....I'm all ears.

I know God has the ability and Adam to some extent did too, as a Son of God before he fell.

So.......I'm listening

Originally posted by TheVisitor
Virtual particles.

==================

Explain how these can create matter, from nothing to begin with...?
If you can do this, and actually sound convincing....I'm all ears.

I know God has the ability and Adam to some extent did too, as a Son of God before he fell.

So.......I'm listening
Empty space is not actually "empty". It is filled with pairs of virtual particles and antiparticles that pop into existence, move apart, and them come back together and mutually annihilate. Virtual particles are the quantum fluctuations in the value of an electromagnetic or gravitational field.

The existence of these particles shows an example in nature where something can come from nothing.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
Explain how these can create matter, from nothing to begin with ... I, for one, do not know.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
I know God has the ability and Adam to some extent did too, as a Son of God before he fell. You "know" nothing of the kind. You simply have a pretentious faith in a fairy-tail.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.

-- Charles Darwin, Introduction to The Descent of Man (1871)How prophetic that someone back in 1871 should be so aware of pompous fools such as you.

Empty space is not actually "empty". It is filled with pairs of virtual particles and antiparticles that pop into existence, move apart, and them come back together and mutually annihilate.
============
Your still not going back far enough....mater and anti mater colliding state something has already been seperated....
God created these things from nothing....and seperated out positive from negative, good from evil , day from night, darkness from light.......mater from anti mater.....
God and Satan, who is equal in every way I stated except the ability to create something from nothing.

The power of the spoken word of God creates something from nothing....no particles of anti-mater reqiured.

Empty space is in itself a creation, your haven't nearly gone far enough to say anything disproving God at all.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
Your still not going back far enough....mater and anti mater colliding state something has already been seperated....No, you're simply not understanding. These particles appear out of empty space for no reason; there is no causal event it just happens. Thus the assertion that "something cannot come from nothing (excepting God)" is incorrect; it has been proven to be factually inaccurate.


The power of the spoken word of God creates something from nothing....no particles of anti-mater reqiured.The Universe exhibits this same ability... to create something out of nothing.


Empty space is in itself a creation, your haven't nearly gone far enough to say anything disproving God at all.It isn't an argument against God, it is proof that the claim, that only God can create something from nothing, is false.

~Raithere

These particles appear out of empty space for no reason; there is no causal event it just happens
==============

There is a reason for everything.....Just because you don't understand it, does not naturally imply that there must be no reason for it.....

That's quite a leap, And you say christianity is blind faith..... :p

That's the arrogance of scientist's today..............

Also like I said, Empty space is in itself a creation......
You apparently don't realize what "nothing" means.......

He created heavens and earth and all that are in them.....including "empty" space.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
Your still not going back far enough....mater and anti mater colliding state something has already been seperated....
God created these things from nothing....and seperated out positive from negative, good from evil , day from night, darkness from light.......mater from anti mater.....
Are you saying that God is constantly creating all these virtual particles every moment? Why would he create a universe that he had to constantly maintain?


Empty space is in itself a creation, your haven't nearly gone far enough to say anything disproving God at all.
I'm not trying to disprove the existence of God (I don't even believe that is possible). As Raithere said, I was simply providing an example of how something can come from nothing without divine intervention. Of course, if you believe that God is controlling each pair of virtual particles, then that won't help you. But you did ask for an example.

Originally posted by TheVisitor
There is a reason for everthing.Care to prove that? :grin:


Just because you don't understand it, this don't naturally imply that there must be no reason for it.No, once again, it is you who does not understand. As with radioactive decay there is no causal event there is simply a certain probability that it will happen within a certain amount of time.


Also like I said, Empty space is in itself a creation.Care to prove that one too?


He created heavens and earth and all that are in them.....including "empty" space.Proof?


Your demand for causation is entirely arbitrary; you have no evidence that supports the assertion that everything (except God of course) must have a cause. Your entire argument is based upon unfounded supposition. As such it is a rather unconvincing argument. It most definetly does not constitue proof.

~Raithere

visitor


That's the arrogance of scientist's today..............

same applies to you buddy, just wonderin, all your quotes from the bible, are they off the top of your head because if they are that is quite impressive. scientists cannot be sure how this anti-matter exists, its just a hypothesis that they hopefully will one day understand and prove or disprove, many christians are scientists, are you calling them arrogant aswell?

Hey fellow freethinkers.
I was arguing with a theist on another message board, and he hit me with this



Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance). This is the fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false. For example, someone might argue that global warming is certainly occurring because nobody has demonstrated conclusively that it is not. But failing to prove the global warming theory false is not the same as proving it true.

Since the manner of presentation has already been addressed, I shall simply point out the logical fallacy in the argument.

In debate, the proposing team in a debate round is usually (but not always) assumed to have the burden of proof, which means that if the team fails to prove the proposition to the satisfaction of the judge, the opposition wins. In a sense, the opposition team's case is assumed true until proven false. But the burden of proof can sometimes be shifted; for example, in some forms of debate, the proposing team can shift the burden of proof to the opposing team by presenting a prima facie case that would, in the absence of refutation, be sufficient to affirm the proposition. Still, the higher burden generally rests with the proposing team, which means that only the opposition is in a position to make an accusation of argumentum ad ignorantiam with respect to proving the proposition.

The way I am interpreting your argument you are proposing that those that believe in God are essentially idiots. You are proposing that it is up to the theist to prove that God exists. As such I shall oppose such a claim. By the rules of debate you are welcome to present your case and if you would like I am sure many others and I would love to cross-examine. I am anxiously await your proposition and its proof.

Note: My attempt here is to help the topic get back to a point of discussion and debate as opposed to posts that regurgitate existing posts.

:bugeye: :confused: :confused:

Ummm, whaaaa? He's asking me to prove that the burden of proof is on the theist!

What do I say? This is extremely confusing? Any ideas or arguments? grrr, that little rat.

Mountainhare;
what a rat indeed:D
and what a load of garbage.
The fact is there are more indications for you being right than there are for him, so be confident.
Challenge him to a 'proof-off', rather than deciding which one of you should have proof you should both put the proofs you have on the table and see who has more:cool:

Originally posted by TheVisitor
All we did was set some initial values and let it all happen...

Evolution in a nutshell......

==================


You had to "have" certain materials to begin with though, didn't you...?


Only God can create something from nothing.
Satan is equal to God in amost every way.....except he can't create something from nothing.
This is what he told Eve, how to be a god and create life through sex, he has taken what God has created and changed it, or perverted it into another form, thats all he can do.
This includes mankind under his influence.
This world today has become "Satan's Eden"
He has had 6,000 years to design it.
It is the "world", which has been pulled over your eye's.
You were born a slave,...... born into the slavery of sin, which is unbelief.
Only through the revelation of Jesus Christ, can you be healed of this unbelief and come to realize your full potential as a son or daughter of God.
Jesus said; "He that I set free, is free indeed."

How is all that revelant? I surpose you think you are doing gods work randomly quoting the bible in this forum... ? Did you even give a momments thought to the topic I started? What's your opinion (ie not what you are told to think in the bible) ... any intellegent toughts on this topic.... no?

You don't have to be a god....
Information can be created and destroyed ad infinitum. If i write a software program its really all electronic pulses in a computer... but it contains information and has complexity and form.... so it does exist... you could sort of say it has been 'created' its really just a logical arrangment of electrical charges... but what if that software then goes about creating something itself?

We didn't have materials to begin with. Just some choosen values and booleans but even if we put in all zeros, or random garbage the algorthims still would have created something useful that didn't previously exist.

:D

also, to rark you up some more, do you know that 'true satanists' believe that god wrote the bible (yes they believe the bible is true and divinely inspired) to decieve us into thinking we were made by him when we are really just fallen angels inhabiting animal bodies. and that satan was kicked out of heaven for challenging god's scheme to brainwash us all?
garbage, but its actually more believeable than the christian version. Gosh its hard to know which deity to trust these days, so just believe nothing, its safer that way, at least theres zero chance someone is trying to decieve you.

Originally posted by Jade Squirrel
Virtual particles.

nice one ;)

Originally posted by Crunchy Cat
Can I grab a sample of your source code? I've always wanted to create a graphical visualization of the concept that you
implemented.

yes, i'll post some. but i'm not owner of any the actual code i've worked on, nor have much acess anymore. Would have to ask my boss who would react: "you want to do what?". haha.
i'll post a link later to some .zips with C++ examples i've done in my own time thus wont get me a law suit. :D
for now, this site is a good intro to the concept:
http://cs.felk.cvut.cz/~xobitko/ga/

Originally posted by mountainhare
Ummm, whaaaa? He's asking me to prove that the burden of proof is on the theist!The proposition under debate between Theist and Atheist is the Theistic assertion that God exists; unless you are proposing the strong atheistic position that God does not exist. So it depends upon whether you are asserting the strong or weak position. Of course, if you're asserting that people who believe in God are idiots (as he suggests) then the burden of proof is indeed upon you.

~Raithere

TheVisitor-


The power of the spoken Word, to create something from absolutly nothing.......belongs to God alone.

Somehow I feel this claim backs you into a corner. You say God is the only thing that can create something from nothing, but then the same question is plaguing the creation of God. To say everything is created leaves open your God to the same scrutiny of this idea you propose.

To say God has always been in existance is the same thing as saying the universe has always been in existance(in terms of an infinity based concept) Why does thinking God has always been in existance hold more intellectual weight than thinking the universe has always been in existance? I think they both raise the same questions and show our awesome lack of understanding on this momentous concept of the universe and to how it functions.

Why does thinking God has always been in existance hold more intellectual weight than thinking the universe has always been in existance?

===============

Because God said it is so in His Word.
More and more, His Word is proven to be right in every infinite detail, only Man's interpretation of it's meaning was in error.

I could attempt to explain how this creation took place but unless you see the Word of God as a static true, and use it for an absolute my explaination will prove little to the critic.

In the beginning God....(Elohim) dwelt alone as a spirit, before the "beginning" he had in Him attributes to be expressed. Like genes. They were in His mind before the foundation of the World, as a thought. These are the sons of God.
A Word is a thought expressed, and when God spoke He began to form into the material. He created the heavens and the earth, and all therein.
He created Adam, a son of God, Spirit...made in His own image, for God is a Spirit. The Word body is a body created by the spoken word without hands. A theophany body.
Then God created a body from the dust of the earth, to till the soil. Adam was a son of God. He could not be deceived. And He like the type of God he represented dwelled alone.
When God took Eve from adam , she was created a by-product from Man , in His Image, not Gods.
She was made vastly different from all the other females in that she was the most beautiful, not the male of the human species, and she could be touched anytime, not just when in "season" for her babies as the other animals.
She was created so She could be deceived.....
Adam was not deceived. He went with her willingly after she fell to save her, just as Jesus came down from heaven and died to redeem His Bride.
Elohim did not cause man to fall, but in Him was the attribute to be a saviour, a healer, a son, a daughter, a father...ect...
He knew by foreknowledge what Man would do, and let it happen so He could be our saviour, and reddem us even after we disobeyed and denyed His Word was true essentially calling God a liar, by our actions.
His word, every Word is true, only what was in His mind when he wrote it is sealed to be revealed to whom He wills it.

The bible says "God himself came down in the cool of the evening, and talked with Adam".
The Tree of Life, is the Word of God (In the book of Proverbs it says, "the words of a righteous man are as the fruits of the tree of life")
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil , was the serpent , which they were commanded not to eat of least they die. ( a mixed tree containing the truth mixed with lies) The best lie is the one that contains 99% of the truth, and only 1% lie.
The Serpent said to Eve, "surely you shall not die, but your eyes shall be opened and you shall be like gods". Adam was created by the spoken Word. Satan can not create something from nothing, he can only pervert something God has already created, so he used the serpent to seduce Eve and thereby create a hybrid race.
Only after God cursed it and changed evey bone in it's body was it turned into a snake as we see it today....but the damage was already done. Eve was pregnate with Cain, the serpents seed.
Then we have two races on the earth - The sons of God, Adam and Eves true children, and the sons of men....the offsring of the Serpent through Eve.
She was the "mother" of all living, but Adam was not the "father" of all living.
The bible says "Cain was of his father the wicked one"
Just a perfect type of the church today......
Jesus said of the religious leaders of His day...
"Ye serpents, Ye generation of Vipers you do always resist the Holy Ghost"...also He said..."You are of your father the devil and his works you will do"
He called them "whited sepcatures full of dead mens bones".
Ever wonder why....? Now you know.

Ok.. because he said so in his word? thats not a satisfactory answer, and again your quoting the bible. you have yet to speak your own words o mysterious TheVisitor

in rebuttal: "god said so in his word", implies of course that the bible is the divine word of god... this knowledge comes to us via the bible, the divine word of god, which clearly stats that it is the true divine word of god.

... is this not a paradox?

I'm right, I'm always right.
What I say is true because I stated so, so it must be true.
But wait everything I say is a lie... (but that isn't a lie? or is it?)
This statement is false...

As for ... "Man's interpretation of it's meaning was in error" .... thats scraping the bottom of the barrel isn't it?
Your also suggesting that the whole of christianity has gotten the meaning of the bible completely wrong..... in which case I wholeheartedly agree.....

TheVisitor-


Because God said it is so in His Word.

This is probaby the most unsatisfying answer I have ever received on this forum.


I could attempt to explain how this creation took place but unless you see the Word of God as a static true, and use it for an absolute my explaination will prove little to the critic.

You know why your explanation will prove little, because it is just a appeal to authority. "the bible says so, and this is all you need to come to a conclusion."


only Man's interpretation of it's meaning was in error

So which interpretation do you use? Let me guess.......human???? You are awesome at using the best copouts ever. I'll give you that. It appears to me that no matter what opposing evidence comes to light, you will always go back to the lack of human understanding to be the cause of the contradiction.

Hypothetical situation- The bible says the world is flat. Humans say no thats wrong, the world is round. Look here are the reasons why the world is round.....then you say "no you humans are wrong because you see.... the bible is always right. "

You made up your mind of the bible's validity on the basis of nothing. You need to reason and find facts, but you have turned your back on the quest for truth. You found something that sounds pretty and happy and sugar coated and decided that it would become your truth. "forget intelligence, I chose self deception!!!"

Originally posted by Jade Squirrel
Virtual particles. I could almost swear these are hypothesised to orignate from parallel universes/dimensions. But hey, what do I know?:p

What does evolution have to do with atheism anyway? You poeple have a loooooooot of time on your hands. I guess the moderators have to keep the threads going but, man, can't you guys come with something better???

I think Evolution might be directed at invalidating 'Adam
and Eve' for the Christian religion specifically. In theory,
that could lead to some Christians turning Athiest.

well those people who's conviction in christ it's weak may change but for me, when i hear those arguemnts it just toughens my stance with god.

'Conviction' in reference to religion is defined as 'Strong Belief'.
To 'Believe' is to 'Accept Without Proof'. Having 'Conviction'
is the same thing as having 'Strong Acceptance Without Proof'.
It might toughen your stance with 'God' but it weakens your
stance in thinking. The less you think the more easily influenced
you are by those who would take advantage of your 'Conviction'.
I don't think that Atheists would take advantage of you in this
manner which is why (for the most part) we try to bring reason
into the mix.

Originally posted by Crunchy Cat
I think Evolution might be directed at invalidating 'Adam
and Eve' for the Christian religion specifically. In theory,
that could lead to some Christians turning Athiest. You would have to expound a bit on that before I can accept it. How on earth does evolution invalidate the existence of a man and a woman?

Genesis. 'God' took a rib from Adam and made the first known
human female. In Evolution (just looking at mammals) you always
need make/female pairs to reproduce. Because of this, human
females would have had to exist before 'Adam' (from an
evolutionary perspective); however, Genesis says Adam's rib
was made into the first female when 'God' felt sorry about Adam's
lonlinesss.

well those people who's conviction in christ it's weak may change but for me, when i hear those arguemnts it just toughens my stance with god.
how? that stance is one an old person would take in reference to trying to teach them something new that contradicts what they previously thought- you, like old people, are too stubborn and set in your ways to even contemplate a new idea, whereas people should constantly be re-evalutating their thoughts and beliefs if they are able to do so. old people have a reason- they're old, you are not, what is your reason?


How on earth does evolution invalidate the existence of a man and a woman?
it invalidates the idea of adam and eve- who can't of existed soley by themselves- anyone heard of inbreeding and the problems that stem from it?


Genesis says Adam's rib was made into the first female
lol, awesome. i didn't know this is what religious people thought. that is ridiculous, it takes the idea of inbreedig to further extremes.

Originally posted by Crunchy Cat
Genesis. 'God' took a rib from Adam and made the first known
human female. In Evolution (just looking at mammals) you always
need make/female pairs to reproduce. Because of this, human
females would have had to exist before 'Adam' (from an
evolutionary perspective); however, Genesis says Adam's rib
was made into the first female when 'God' felt sorry about Adam's
lonlinesss. Actually, none could have existed before the other. How would the females get pregnant? Through the Spirit of God right? Cause they surely need somethin' to jump-start the whole process. Intrestingly, this is not taken literally by many, including me. The removal of the rib to form a woman is taken to symbolise the closeness that men and women should share. A woman is from the man's side, she makes him complete. In the language of that time 'rib' also meant 'side'. Arabs will use the term 'He is my rib' to say 'He is my close friend'. An interesting point - a species of fish exist where the males will spontaneously change into females if there is not a certain balance in the numbers. A good thing for you to do now would be to go and research how male and female are hypothesised to have evolved in the first place. You might realise why evolution is a far from complete theory.;)

Actually, none could have existed before the other

Yep, I was just picking on one tiny detail.



The removal of the rib to form a woman is taken to symbolise the closeness that men and women should share

No, it's very clear that a technical procedure was being
referenced. Whether it was a bone or a chunk of Adam's side,
it still spawned a woman. One of the problems I see with religions
is that when something literal is contradicted, people come to
it's rescue with alternate interpreations (symbolism in this case).




A good thing for you to do now would be to go and research how male and female are hypothesised to have evolved in the first place. You might realise why evolution is a far from complete theory.

I don't research other people's hypothesis'. That's just laziness
for the hypothesizer... 'hey I have an idea... now you go research
it'. I find peoples ideas interesting; however, they are just ideas
until there is evidence to back them up. I do use peoples
theories as a source of research (amongst many others).

Originally posted by mountainhare
Hey fellow freethinkers.
I was arguing with a theist on another message board, and he hit me with this


:bugeye: :confused: :confused:

Ummm, whaaaa? He's asking me to prove that the burden of proof is on the theist!

What do I say? This is extremely confusing? Any ideas or arguments? grrr, that little rat.

Haha the person that you quoted in this post (hate that that doesn't show up) doesn't realize that he's just made an argument against God, and admited that the burden of proof lies with him.

Originally posted by Crunchy Cat
To 'Believe' is to 'Accept Without Proof'.

To believe is simply to consider to be true or to accept the evidence of. Faith, on the other hand, is to believe or accept without proof. I believe that the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution are true because there is evidence to support those theories. Anyone who believes in God does so without proof; therefore they have faith.

Originally posted by MarcAC
I could almost swear these are hypothesised to orignate from parallel universes/dimensions. But hey, what do I know?:p
Yes, I think string theory addresses that, as well as the origin of the mass from the Big Bang.

To believe is simply to consider to be true or to accept the evidence of. Faith, on the other hand, is to believe or accept without proof. I believe that the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution are true because there is evidence to support those theories. Anyone who believes in God does so without proof; therefore they have faith.

Interesting point. I checked a dictionary on 'belief' and it simply
said to 'accept as true'. Faith seems to be more on the lines
of unconditional trust in 'God'. Do you really 'believe' that
Evolution and the Big Bang are fact or do you simply give them
the highest probability of being true based on supporting data?
After all, a theory can be incorrect.

"The truth of a theory can never be proven, for one never
knows if future experience will contradict its conclusions."
-Albert Einstein

Originally posted by Crunchy Cat
Do you really 'believe' that
Evolution and the Big Bang are fact or do you simply give them
the highest probability of being true based on supporting data?
After all, a theory can be incorrect.
I believe they are true because the evidence is most consistent with those theories. True, evolution and Big Bang could be incorrect theories, and if evidence comes along to demonstrate this, then I will no longer believe that they are true.

Originally posted by EvilPoet
"The truth of a theory can never be proven, for one never
knows if future experience will contradict its conclusions."
-Albert Einstein
Precisely! Gotta love that Albert!

Originally posted by Mystech
Haha the person that you quoted in this post (hate that that doesn't show up) doesn't realize...
But can you imagine all the clutter in the forum if that were allowed to happen? It would be a nightmare to read anything. Plus I'm sure the server space would fill up quickly.

Originally posted by Jade Squirrel
Yes, I think string theory addresses that, as well as the origin of the mass from the Big Bang. So some of us might want to review our arguments about "something from nothing" eh? Virtual particles was used as an example of "something from nothing". So it goes back to God alone being able to produce something from nothing. Any better examples?

Edit

No, it's very clear that a technical procedure was being referenced.It is also clear that a 'technical procedure' was being referenced in Genesis 1. But it is stated that with God a day can be a nanosecond or an eon. That tells you that the 'day' you see in Genesis 1 according to what God was doing... could be any amount of time. It is open to interpretation. What you believe about that doesn't change anything where you stand with God. You only need to accept Jesus as you Lord and Saviour.
Whether it was a bone or a chunk of Adam's side, it still spawned a woman.Well I was more thinking in a spiritual sense when I said side.
One of the problems I see with religions is that when something literal is contradicted, people come to it's rescue with alternate interpreations (symbolism in this case).As long as it does not affect the fundamental truths of the religion - in this case however woman was made doesn't really affect the Christian conviction - it is open to interpretation.

Originally posted by MarcAC
So some of us might want to review our arguments about "something from nothing" eh? Virtual particles was used as an example of "something from nothing". So it goes back to God alone being able to produce something from nothing.
Hehe. Nice touch. But first of all, string theory doesn't have anywhere near as much evidence as other generally accepted theories have (such as relativity and quantum physics).

Second, even if the evidence for string theory were overwhelming, that doesn't give any credence to the notion that God must have produced the something from nothing. Also, the question still remains about where God came from. And if the answer is that God doesn't need a cause, then the question arises as to why the universe needs one.

Third, the whole argument of "something from nothing" is very likely moot because this implies causation. When we combine general relativity with the Big Bang theory, we find that the universe could not have been "created" because time didn't begin until the instant of the Big Bang.

I don't know what all of this "something from nothing" business is about. Virtual particles aside, where in the universe do we see anything sprouting from nothing? What exactly are we arguing here, if God can create something from nothing, then he sure as hell isn't keeping himself very busy with that task, as I certainly don't see anything like that happening, and I have been keeping my eyes open.