If there is no God. Then someone explain life.

[Unbeliever]

Does anybody here believe in the devil. Or is that made up as well.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

Yeah, it's made up: for any Superman you must have a Lex Luthor.

[mauricio]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS4PW35-Y00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZTCK8ZluEc

[g2perk]

Nice to meet you...

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[Unbeliever]

I'm a substance monist I do not believe in any being or thing which is made of some kind of supernatural substance. Be they ghost,gods,spirits,souls,magic,psychics,demons,angels, etc.

No ghosts, no goblins, no gods, as I like to say.

[Mike Cl]

You can read any book you want on God and or life but until you experience God you don't know him. I knew about Michael Jackson doesn't mean I could walk up to his house and he would of let me in. 

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

That is almost nonsensical.  Even if I did not know Michael Jackson I could see that he is real.  I don't know President Obama--but I do know he is real.  I don't have to experience him to know that he is real.  I can't experience a fiction, which is what your god is.  How does one experience a fiction????

[mauricio]

That is almost nonsensical.  Even if I did not know Michael Jackson I could see that he is real.  I don't know President Obama--but I do know he is real.  I don't have to experience him to know that he is real.  I can't experience a fiction, which is what your god is.  How does one experience a fiction????

I like to call this the god is Tinkerbell argument. You gotta believe it to see it!

[g2perk]

Ok. First off your on the wrong track. I said until you experience God, and that means having a relationship with God. You can know about a person but if you don't know them personally then you have nothing. You can make fun of this its fine with me but my experience trumps any of your words.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[Mike Cl]

I like to call this the god is Tinkerbell argument. You gotta believe it to see it!

I like that.

[Unbeliever]

You can make fun of this its fine with me

We wouldn't be able to make fun of it if it just wasn't so darned ludicrous.

[Solomon Zorn]

I can't understand when people talk as if they know there is no God or Higher power.  But yet can't explain the natural phenomena that happens everyday in front of them.

I can't understand when people talk as if they know there is a God or Higher power. But yet can't explain why he only communicated to men in odd little corners of the world, out of site from skeptical analysis, nor can they show me how he acts upon matter, to perform any interventions, when every event is clearly cause-and-effect, nor can they even simply explain why he is hiding himself now.

Your responses are closed minded and shallow. You can't see in the dark unless someone or something shines a light. But you are snuffing out the illumination that science offers you, and prefer the dark cave of myth and dogma. Free your mind g2perk. There is still love, an awe of nature, and a rich moral and ethical nature to behavior, without the scripture. You won't kill anybody. You won't start stealing. You won't turn gay. But you just might start questioning yourself, and your preconceptions about the world. The Bible is just a collection of ancient writings. It's only power is in the religion that has grown around it for so many centuries. If you were to read it, from front to back, without external input, you would dismiss it as mythology.

I'm done.

[g2perk]

Ok....let me get this straight. You are telling me to open my mind but you believe in a person that tell you guys you come from monkeys.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[mauricio]

Ok....let me get this straight. You are telling me to open my mind but you believe in a person that tell you guys you come from monkeys.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

We do not come from monkeys go google homo sapiens taxonomy and evolution. Monkeys are our cousins. We come from a common ancestor which was neither human nor monkey.

[mauricio]

here  i do the job for you:

Human evolution is the evolutionary process that led to the emergence of anatomically modern humans. The topic typically focuses on the evolutionary history of the primatesâ€"in particular the genus Homo, and the emergence of Homo sapiens as a distinct species of the hominids (or "great apes")â€"rather than studying the earlier history that led to the primates. The study of human evolution involves many scientific disciplines, including physical anthropology, primatology, archaeology, paleontology, neurobiology, ethology, linguistics, evolutionary psychology, embryology and genetics.[1] Genetic studies show that primates diverged from other mammals about 85 million years ago, in the Late Cretaceous period, and the earliest fossils appear in the Paleocene, around 55 million years ago.[2] Within the Hominoidea (apes) superfamily, the Hominidae family diverged from the Hylobatidae (gibbon) family some 15â€"20 million years ago; African great apes (subfamily Homininae) diverged from orangutans (Ponginae) about 14 million years ago; the Hominini tribe (humans, Australopithecines and other extinct biped genera, and chimpanzees) parted from the Gorillini tribe (gorillas) about 8 million years ago; and, in turn, the subtribes Hominina (humans and biped ancestors) and Panina (chimps) separated about 7.5 million years ago.[3]

The basic adaptation of the hominin line is bipedalism. The earliest bipedal hominin is considered to be either Sahelanthropus or Orrorin; alternatively, either Sahelanthropus or Orrorin may instead be the last shared ancestor between chimps and humans. Ardipithecus, a full biped, arose somewhat later, and the early bipeds eventually evolved into the australopithecines, and later into the genus Homo.

The earliest documented representative of the genus Homo is Homo habilis, which evolved around 2.8 million years ago,[4] and is arguably the earliest species for which there is positive evidence of the use of stone tools. The brains of these early hominins were about the same size as that of a chimpanzee, although it has been suggested that this was the time in which the human SRGAP2 gene doubled, producing a more rapid wiring of the frontal cortex. During the next million years a process of rapid encephalization occurred, and with the arrival of Homo erectus and Homo ergaster in the fossil record, cranial capacity had doubled to 850 cm3.[5] (Such an increase in human brain size is equivalent to each generation having 125,000 more neurons than their parents.) It is believed that Homo erectus and Homo ergaster were the first to use fire and complex tools, and were the first of the hominin line to leave Africa, spreading throughout Africa, Asia, and Europe between 1.3 to 1.8 million years ago.

According to the recent African origin of modern humans theory, modern humans evolved in Africa possibly from Homo heidelbergensis, Homo rhodesiensis or Homo antecessor and migrated out of the continent some 50,000 to 100,000 years ago, gradually replacing local populations of Homo erectus, Denisova hominins, Homo floresiensis and Homo neanderthalensis.[6][7][8][9][10] Archaic Homo sapiens, the forerunner of anatomically modern humans, evolved in the Middle Paleolithic between 400,000 and 250,000 years ago.[11][12][13] Recent DNA evidence suggests that several haplotypes of Neanderthal origin are present among all non-African populations, and Neanderthals and other hominins, such as Denisovans, may have contributed up to 6% of their genome to present-day humans, suggestive of a limited inter-breeding between these species.[14][15][16] The transition to behavioral modernity with the development of symbolic culture, language, and specialized lithic technology happened around 50,000 years ago according to many anthropologists[17] although some suggest a gradual change in behavior over a longer time span.[18]

[widdershins]

Are these questions serious?  I can't really tell if you are really asking these things are just being funny.  If you're serious, you do realize that if I am unable to explain why the sun is round, it's still round because of various physics, not the least of which is gravity, right?  If you explain it with magic and I don't have enough understanding to explain it, that doesn't mean that "magic" is the right answer by some default.

Likewise, if I can't answer all your questions about how life came about and evolved to its current form, that doesn't mean that some deity just poofed it into being.  That's just not how reality works.  I could ask you to explain something you know nothing about and then give you my own, made up explanation and it won't change how it really works.  I am not a biologist.  I am not a geneticist.  I am not a paleontologist.  I don't have a full and complete understanding of abiogenesis (the beginnings of life) and evolution (changes in life over time).  But that I admit to not knowing and you don't doesn't actually mean you "know" anything.

That being said, I do not believe in magic of any sort.  No gods, devils, angels, demons, spirits, psychic powers, magic spells, bigfoot, etc.  If you can't give a scientific explanation for it then it is not worth considering.

Consider this.  "How did we all get here?"  This question is important to many.  There are generally two answers:

One is long and wordy and not easy to understand.  It is the scientific answer, which covers many fields of research and is held to standards of research which demand observational data and testing and peer review.  Each answer leads to more questions and the likelihood of ever having all the answers is pretty slim.

The other is short and simple.  It is easily understood by all.  It is that some god made everything.  It requires no training, it requires no knowledge, it is held to no standards, there are no demands and it is the answer to all such questions.

One of these answers leads to real understanding and knowledge.  The other just makes us think we have understanding and knowledge.  Learning is tough, but pretending you know, that's easy.  "God did it" is the easy, lazy way out for people who just want all the answers right now, but don't care if they're right.  They will just pretend they're right because it's easier.  Science is the much harder, much more demanding approach.  It is for those who would rather have no answer at all than the wrong one.

Your computer works on magic.  Now, if you can't explain to me in great detail how it actually works, down to the atomic level, does that make me right?  Of course not.  You don't know, I claim to know.  Does that mean I am right?  Of course not.

[Hydra009]

Are these questions serious?  I can't really tell if you are really asking these things are just being funny.  If you're serious, you do realize that if I am unable to explain why the sun is round, it's still round because of various physics, not the least of which is gravity, right?  If you explain it with magic and I don't have enough understanding to explain it, that doesn't mean that "magic" is the right answer by some default.

That's what I was wondering, too.  "Oh, you don't believe in a God?  Then explain literally everything in a way I can grasp or goddidit"  Sheesh, talk about a tall order.  And for anyone genuinely curious about this stuff, there are plenty of online and offline resources.  So, I don't get the point of this sort of thread other than to hash out the basic arguments that we've hashed out a thousand times before.