User talk:SouthWriter/sandbox/An atheist's objections/@comment-1777104-20100705204322

McG: You need to demonstrate, at least in principle, why the millions of variations, recombined via billions of matings, would not produce the world which we have today within human history as we know it (app. 5000 years)

Destroyanator: God gave me the faith to believe Him at his word. He didn't HAVE to do this, but He did. That is why I believe Him (not just "in" Him).

Fedelede: You say that the "entertaining story" ends well. Let's see, God created mankind, chose a people out from among a generally wicked race only to be rejected over and over. The leaders of this nation that arose from this "chosen" people trumped up charges against one of their own religious teachers in order to silence him, having him killed as a "rebel." The capital city of this people "the Jews" is destroyed by the "tolerant" Romans would they finally "go to far." Before that, though, some other teachers from among the Jews carry a message of love and truth -- and an incredible story of a man who arose from the dead -- only to be persecuted by this same "tolerant" Roman government. The last one of these Jews to write proclaimed that this same God would come back to destroy the world in order to rebuild it the way HE wants it to be (preserving his people via giving dead spirits bodies!) Yep, a "good message" at the end -- IF you are among His people. Here is how the story ends:

Rev. 22: 14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. 15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers [adulterers], and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loves and makes a lie.

"Dogs" is a term of disdain for sinners of the general type - unworthy of notice for "minor crimes." Sorcerers are those who manipulate people with"science." And "how dare he" include liars among the despicable sinners who make their own "gods" out of ordinary things!

Fegaxeyl: You state that the science of the deluge was "internally consistent," but deny its truth based on your own understanding a "modern understanding" of related science. I think I understand your point that the article attempted to explain the flood based on observed processes today. If so, that article itself may have been flawed in that it "explained away" the unknown past (and God's intervention in causing the flood).

The simplest explanation is indeed that "God did it." That is erksome to unbelievers, but look at the alternative. How can it be "simpler"?

God said he made everything complete, with living things creating other living things "after their kind." That is simple enough, and exactly what we see in the world today. The "complete" creation has built-in instructions on how to continue to exist.

Atheists say that everything apparently came from an explosion, which threw matter and energy in all directions - directions that today are said to have no edge. And somehow, these highly differentiated particles slowed down long enough to get together and build themselves into suns, then planets, then self-replicating single-celled entities (not animal nor plant, just a cell wall with some goo inside). And these cells got together and built communities that became organisms that became plants and animals. Ah yes, so simple!

Besides, God did NOT create the world and all that is in it in "such a way that it could be explained" apart from Him. The "explaining" that is being done is by those who stubbornly holding that God doesn't exist. These 'theories" have far more holes in them than anything postulated by believing scientists before the "enlightenment."