My basic view of the world is as follows...

I believe there is a God. I Believe that he created everything.

I believe atheists believe that the universe created itself.

I also believe that agnostics are to lazy and/or mentally unequipped to believe in anything no matter what. I therefore have no interest in dealing with agnostics.

Quantum mechanics allow for a universe to spontaneously create itself. It also requires that that everything can be measured. However, the universe is still referred to as infinite. Why? Because we just haven't figured out how.
If the universe was created by an explosion of some object, and everything was created by that object, then that object would be everywhere and still exist.
One of the first things people from religious families learn as children is "God is everywhere".
If god created the universe, and god is everywhere... And Something exploded and created the universe, and its everywhere... Whats the difference?
God cannot be measured, just as the universe cannot be measured... And for the same reason.

On to creationism. I am NOT a creationist. A creationist by definition does not believe in evolution. Only an idiot would not believe in something so logical and probable... almost proven even.
On the other hand, I also am not an evolutionist. An evolutionist by definition does not beleive in creation.

I believe in both. Here's why...
The story of creation says that god created the world in 7 days. That has been proven wrong.
It has also been all but proven that the stages of the creation of universe happened in the same order as they did in the story of creation.
So scrap the word "day" and change it for "stage". Guess what... Its accurate according to science.

On Adam and Eve... Been proven wrong, right? No.... It hasn't. Hasn't even been proven as improbable.
In the story of creation, God created man and woman on the sixth day. "Man and Women he created THEM" it says.
Then he rested on the seventh.
Then... Chapter two... He creates Adam and eve.
Notice, other than the gospels, which are 4 peoples separate accounts of one mans life, the bible does not repeat itself. It does not tell the same stories twice, it does not restate the laws more than once, ect. So why does it repeat itself here? The only logical conclusion is that these are two separate incidents.
Next piece of biblical evidence... After Adam and Eve were banished, they and their sons went to a place called Nod... Where Cain took a wife. Did he marry his sister? No... He married one of the woman or decedents of the first creation of man and woman. That section of the bible is not real clear on specific timelines....

Now... How exactly did it happen that before modern science, anyone was able to accurately portray the order of events in the creation of the universe? Either they were damn good at guessing, or someone told them.
God? I believe so...
Aliens? Maybe...
Was there a completely modern and civilized society somewhere else that then moved to Earth and created this wonderful story for control? Maybe...
I really don't know... I wasn't there... I believe its god...

Why Do I believe its god?
Think about the life of an agnostic. Never really believing in anything. "Could be one thing... Could be another... and until there is proof... I'm gonna ride the fence" They live in this piss-hole of a world and believe that it is everything there is. Who the hell wants THIS to be it?

Now the Atheists. They have thought about it. They have picked a side. they believe something without tangible evidence... Just like Religious people. However, they also believe this is it... Same goes... Honestly... This is all you hope for?

Then there is religious people.... Most of us have thought about it. The ones who haven't count in my mind as much as agnostics. We have decided that there is a God of some sort or anther. We believe that there is an afterlife. We believe that if we behave, believe, and show our faith by our acts, we will be eternally rewarded with never ending happiness. If we don’t... well... The opposite.

To close... I could be wrong. There could be no after life. this crap-hole could be it. I could be wasting me time. The Atheists could be right.... And y'all know what? You can be pleased for eternity while the worms eat your face.

I could also very well be right. At which point.... Sucks to be you bru...

There is also another possibility... I could be right, but have chosen the wrong religion... At which point, guess I'll see you in hell.

The point to all of this is simple. No mans belief's are anymore open for ridicule and being called myth and fantasy until SOMEONE proves beyond ALL (not reasonable, But all) doubt that they are right and everyone else is wrong. Excepting of course people that still follow religions that science has already proved beyond all doubt that they are wrong... I cant think of any.

Can anyone actually commune the the dead so that we know?

Views: 884

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Agnostics are not mental equipped, or to lazy, to believe or not in god?


Seriously, of all the things I disagree with in what you posted, this is the only one that actually frustrates me. I understand all the others. But, Agnostics do not deny the existance of a god, but they also don't say it exists. If your going to believe that, I believe your mentally unequipped to understand a Agnostic's stand point.



You just proved my point... they dont want to pick a side... They just want to ride the fence.


If they are incapable of NOT riding the fence, then they are not capable of believing something. Ergo... Not mentally equipped.

He did not prove your point at all. There is no fence at all. Either one believes there is an external source for the origin of life, or you believe there is NO external source to the origin of life. Agnosticism is simply the position that asserts the uncertainty in the knowledge proclaimed. Hence, its not a matter of "riding the fence," as this term implies gullibility and susceptibility to incorrect information. The agnostic platform would simply assert, we dont have sufficient data to make a complete and definite statement that would accept or deny the existence of a deity as an origin of the universe. This would also mean that the agnostic is amicable to accept any idea regarding the origin of the universe, so long as theory agrees with the experiments results. This does not mean we are just waiting for someone to tell us how and what to think, we can make decisions on our own accord.



As for agnostics. You can search this site for much debate on the subject


However your statement..


I also believe that agnostics are to lazy and/or mentally unequipped to believe in anything no matter what. I therefore have no interest in dealing with agnostics.


Shows a belief that agnostic is a middle ground between theism and atheism when in fact they dont relate that way.


Atheism and theism deal with level of belief. Agnostic and gnostic deal with level of certainty. Certainty and belief intersect to form viewpoint. 

Now on to the rest... Most of the answers you will see here may be the evidence that helps support my atheism but keep in mind what i already said that it is not what makes me an atheist. 


God cannot be measured, just as the universe cannot be measured... And for the same reason


the universe is indeed measurable. It contains observable limitations and we even know how it moves, the rate at which it moves, and the relative size of its expanse.

The current comoving distance to the particles which emitted the CMBR, representing the radius of the visible universe, is calculated to be about 14.0 billion parsecs (about 45.7 billion light years), while the current comoving distance to the edge of the observable universe is calculated to be 14.3 billion parsecs (about 46.6 billion light years),[1] about 2% larger.


Keep in mind this is the observable universe it maybe that there are objects further that have not had sufficient time to project light the distance that we can observe it but the point here is to show you it is measurable while there isnt the slightest hope of measuring god.

The story of creation says that god created the world in 7 days. That has been proven wrong.
It has also been all but proven that the stages of the creation of universe happened in the same order as they did in the story of creation.
So scrap the word "day" and change it for "stage". Guess what... Its accurate according to science.


No basis in fact. Below is the biblical order of creation.

Day One

  1. Watery, formless planet Earth suspended in the darkness and void of space (no stars, no sun, no moon, no planets - except for Earth).
  2. Light.
  3. Separation of light from the darkness - and the first indication that the planet is rotating (day and night cycle produced).

Day Two

  1. Formation of Earth's atmosphere, separating the water into two parts:
          (a) oceanic and subterranean water
          (b) atmospheric water.

Day Three

  1. Dry land and oceans.
  2. System to water the entire land surface using subterranean waters (involving springs or mist, or both).
  3. Vegetation, seed-bearing plants, trees that bear fruit.

Day Four

  1. Sun
  2. Moon - complete with established orbit so as to mark passage of time (months, seasons, and years).
  3. Stars and other planets.

Day Five

  1. Water creatures of all kinds. (All that had “the breath of life” were vegetarian.)
  2. Birds (all vegetarian).

Day Six

  1. Land animals (all vegetarian): (a) creatures that move close to the ground (small animals), (b) large animals, and (c) animals of use to man as livestock.
  2. Man.
  3. Woman

The genesis story fails on day one. It comes from the perspective that the earth was created first. We know this is incorrect since we can measure the age of the earth vs the age of the sun we rotate around with radiation.

Not to mention the subterranean water mentioned is based on the flat earth theory of the time of writing that said that there was a large mass of water under the land. Its the reason the oceans are formed on a separate day in the myths.

Also we know there is no light without the sun which doesnt come until after light.


The light thing always gets me laughing, the most powerful being ever conceived by man.. getting his own creation story incorrect... genius! Also, the cure for leprosy in the bible is mad genius!

I also like that photosynthetic plants are created before the sun - though apparently light was created before the sun...somehow. At least animals didn't have stumble around in darkness for a day

How bout reading it.... I explained that... Or do you just like telling people they are wrong with out looking?

Here's what the good book has to say:


How should parents treat a stubborn and rebellious son? Kill Them

"If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them; Then shall his father and mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of the city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear." (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)

 What does the bible say about witches?

  1. Witches should be killed. --Tragically, tens of thousands, if not millions, of innocent women in Europe and the American colonies were cruelly accused, tortured and executed because of one single bible verse:

"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." (Exodus 22:18)
"A man or a woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:27)

God sanctifies monogamy and birth out of wedlock (Gideon had 33 sons?? No daughters were even mentioned) - Judges 8:30-31


What price did David pay King Saul for his first wife?

  • The foreskins of 200 Philistines. --David is supposed to be a biblical role model; but how does massacre and mutilation show moral leadership? What would Saul want with 200 foreskins? Possibly proof that his new son-in-law was a truly macho man for his daughter. (More likely, this reflects the pagan practice of offering foreskins as a rain/fertility ritual.)


"Wherefore David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the Philistines two hundred men; and David brought their foreskins, and they gave them in full tale to the king, that he might be the king's son in law. And Saul gave him Michal his daughter to wife." (I Samuel 18:27) 

The biblical god often requested and accepted human sacrifice:

"And he [God] said [to Abraham], Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of." (Genesis 22:2) "For thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors; the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me." (Exodus 22:29) "But the king [David] took the two sons of Rizpah . . . and the five sons of Michal . . . and he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the Lord: and they fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest . . . And after that God was intreated for the land." (II Samuel 21:8-14) "We are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ . . . But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God." (Hebrews 10:10-12)


Which Genentic Eve? Last I checked, there were 6... All At different times.

Are we referring to lucy and ardi?

depends on what author you read.One says 140,000,etc.When you compare how long this or that took one will say 12,000,000 years another scientist will say 23,00,000.They shuffle years around like cards.Science?


© 2022   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service