Explaining Evolution And Why GOD is NOT LIKELY
After reading through the thread on Christianity and why one believes, I have to state...it's why I incapable of ever doing such in my life. There are some grossly blatant incorrect things about evolution as well. Evolution is not a game of chance like in Monopoly or Blackjack. After shooting down some misconceptions about evolution, we'll talk about GOD strictly from a philosophical sense then dismantle Christianity.
The chances that life just occurred are about as unlikely as a typhoon blowing through a junkyard and constructing a Boeing 747. Evolution by natural selection is a two-step process, and only the first step is random: mutations are chance events, but their survival is often anything but. Natural selection favors mutations that provide some advantage. And the physical world imposes very strict limits on what works and what doesn't. The result is that organisms evolve in particular directions.
The phrase "survival of fittest" is widely misunderstood!!
Many wrongly assume it means that evolution always increases the chances of a species surviving.Evolution sometimes results in individuals or populations becoming less fit and may occasionally even lead to extinction.
There are several ways in which evolution can reduce the overall fitness of individuals or of populations. For starters, natural selection can take place at different levels – genes, individuals, groups – and what promotes the survival of a gene does not necessarily increase the fitness of the individuals carrying it, or of groups of these individuals.
(See sickle cell trait vs sickle cell anemia...one reduces malaria, the other devastating completely)
Now let's talk about Christianity...you first have to talk about it's origins.
When Osiris is said to bring his believers eternal life in Egyptian Heaven, contemplating the unutterable, indescribable glory of God, we understand that as a MYTH.
When the sacred rites of Demeter at Eleusis are described as bringing believers happiness in their eternal life, we understand that as a MYTH.
In fact, when ancient writers tell us that in general ancient people believed in eternal life, with the good going to the Elysian Fields and the not so good going to Hades, we understand that as a MYTH.
When Vespatian's spittle healed a blind man, we understand that as a MYTH.
When Apollonius of Tyana raised a girl from death, we understand that as a MYTH.
When the Pythia , the priestess at the Oracle at Delphi, in Greece, prophesied, and over and over again for a thousand years, the prophecies came true, we understand that as a MYTH.
When Dionysus turned water into wine, we understand that as a myth. When Dionysus believers are filled with atay, the Spirit of God, we understand that as a MYTH.
When Romulus is described as the Son of God, born of a virgin, we understand that as a MYTH.
When Alexander the Great is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a MYTH.
When Augustus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal , we understand that as a MYTH.
When Dionysus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, we understand that as a MYTH.
So how come when Jesus is described as the Son of God, born of a mortal woman, according to prophecy,turning water into wine, raising girls from the dead, and healing blind men with his spittle, and setting it up so His believers got eternal life in Heaven contemplating the unutterable, indescribable glory of God, and off to Hades—er, I mean Hell—for the bad folks...HOW COMES THAT'S NOT A MYTH???
Continued... and other Scientist quotes.
If the Universe had a Beginning then it must have had a Beginner.
Atheist Veiw: No one created something out of nothing
Theistic View: Someone created something out of nothing
Question for you Knickfan4realz, If there is no God, why is there something rather than nothing at all?
Einstein's Theory of Relativity proves that there must have been a Beginning.
Quotes from SCIENTIST that ARENT CHRISTIAN
Atheist Anthony Kenny: "Atheist must believe the matter of the Universe came from Nothing, by Nothing."
Agnostic Astronomer Robert Jastrow from his book: "At this moment it seems as though science will never be able to raise the curtain on the mystery of creation. For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greated by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."
Robert Geisure: Every effect has a cause and every Beginning has a Beginner.
- God and the Astronomers (New York: W. W. Norton, 1992), p. 107. (p. 116 in the '78 edition)
Therefore the Universe must have a cause for it's Beginner.
Explanation of The Law of Causality (cause and effect) quotes from Robert Jastrow:
The Universe exists and is real. Atheist and agnostics not only acknowledge its existence, but admit that it is a grand effect (e.g., see Jastrow, 1977, pp. 19-21). If an entity cannot account for its own being (I.e., it is not sufficient to have caused itself), then it is said to be “contingent” because it is dependent upon something outside of itself to explain its existence. The Universe is a contingent entity, since it is inadequate to cause, or explain, its own existence. Sproul has noted: “Logic requires that if something exists contingently, it must have a cause. That is merely to say, if it is an effect it must have an antecedent cause” (1994, p. 172). Thus, since the Universe is a contingent effect, the obvious question becomes, “What caused the Universe?”
It is here that the law of cause and effect (also known as the law of causality) is strongly tied to the cosmological argument. Simply put, the law of causality states that every material effect must have an adequate antecedent cause. Just as the law of the excluded middle is analytically true, so the law of cause and effect is analytically true as well.
Ref. [Only registered and activated users can see images. Click Here To Register...]