Plan B? - Question for non-theists

If there is a God and you have to stand before Him (Her) there is nothing you can say that will change anything. Your actions and words while you were alive have already spoken for you.

So a more important question I think you are trying to get to is an avowed atheist treated the same as an avowed member of a religion? Again, you actions and words while you were alive will have spoken to what kind of person you really are.

That is correct. God already knows what kind of person we all are. The real question is not whether the atheist or religious person are treated the same, for I believe God is fair and just and will render every man according to his deeds. (and there are religions that don’t even believe in a God), But rather, how does He decide who gets into heaven with Him? If it’s based on how good of a person we are, how good do we have to be to get in?

Like the other replies here, I do not believe in the concept of Heaven. But I still mostly treat others well not in case it does, but because I want the world to be a better place and if I want better I need to be better.

That is a great attitude to have. Life is precious, we only have one. And we reap what we sow. Jesus said to love your neighbors as yourself. But being a good person won’t get us to heaven, and not believing in it doesn’t make it not true. If there’s a spiritual realm, and an afterlife in it once our body perishes, wouldn’t we owe it to ourselves to find out the truth before that happens?

Owe it to ourselves to find out an unanswerable question? No, I don't think that. I live in the now and only worry about those things I can control. If there is an afterlife I will face it then, but for now I can't control if there is or not, so I done worry about it.

Well, it’s your life, to each his own. But our life is but a vapor, and then it’s gone. And then it will be too late. We never know which day will be our last. I pray you give it some more thought. Seek and you shall find, my friend. Jesus is the answer. 😉👍

There is no backup plan if you are an atheist. There is no alternate way into heaven.

Well, not a good one at least. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life! 😃👍

Explainiton : a guy in the sky does not seem believable

Back up plan : stay away far away as possible

That is not a good explanation, because what you believe will not matter when you are standing before an all powerful God.

Bad pan: There will be nowhere to stay away...

Werewolves probably won’t attack you, but do you have a stockpile of silver weapons just in case they do?

I’ve got some Coors silver bullet in my fridge. He can drink one with me, and we’ll be cool. 😆. I think werewolves and vampires have been proven not to exist. But even if they did, the issue here is not what will keep you from dying, but what will happen after you die. Dying is guaranteed. So if eternity exists, where you will spend it is a pretty big deal. No one can physically see or scientifically detect God (if we could, He wouldn’t be God), or the afterlife. God can never be disproven. But He can prove Himself personally to you...

If you believe vampires and werewolves are mythical beings it is easy to convince yourself you do not need to be worried about them. If you believe God is a mythical being it is likewise easy to convince yourself you do not need to be worried about God.

If you are wrong and Allah is the true God and you have been committing heresy worshiping the Christian God do you have a plan B for that?

You are right when you say you don’t need to worry yourself over things you have convinced yourself to be mythical beings. But whether you convince yourself of something or not, does not make it true. If I said I didn’t believe in traffic but I stepped out into it, I’d still get hit.

And you’re right, if Allah is the true God and I am wrong, my plan B would be to ask Him some important questions. Like why he never provided me a way to be free from my sins. Or why he never said that he loved me. Or why The founder of his religion told me to spread his message by killing people if they weren’t convert...

But if I’m wrong, then I’m wrong. I really had nothing to lose anyway. But if I’m right, I have everything to gain. Pascals Wager.

Is not the creator responsible for his creation?

How is it flawed? Nothing ventured nothing gained. You’re no worse off picking the wrong god than no god. So much more to gain if you’re right. We only see three dimensions here. Science says there are at least ten. Why not expect something greater to attain to? To be able to see and experience another dimension? And God gives us this promise. Sounds like a win, win to me.

If I pick the wrong god, or don’t believe in any god, I suffer the same fate. If I’m right, (or the Muslim is right), no suffering. That’s why it’s better to believe in God than not. At least you have a shot at eternal life, and it should keep you morally on track to lead a moral, loving, and fruitful life. (I realize it doesn’t always, that’s why I say “should“. Though if one is following Jesus, he better be.)

Why assume other dimensions like an afterlife? Why not? If God is God, He can create something better for us then this world. One without pain and suffering. Why not be hopeful he will? Is it better to live in despair, knowing our only hope is a hole in the ground?

No, the Bible states that no one can see God and live. The closest anyone came was Moses, and he only saw his backside as he was passing by. (And his face shone for several days afterward). If you can find another instance, please do.

Magic pixies? How about ghosts? We don’t know what we don’t know, but some fiction is fun to imagine. And Allah, you can do your own research on him. He never said he loves me in his word. Or says to be nice to people with a differing opinion...

And lastly, you’re right. People can be deceived, wrong, or even deluded. Only the person experiencing it will know. But people Who have had their lives touched by Jesus and his word are never the same. They have peace, joy, and are even willing to put their lives on the line for their belief. No one will do that for a lie. It’s good to converse with you again, Octavia! I knew you’d chime in on this one. 😊

That's quite a list of quotes from a book you don't believe in to prove a point about a topic you don't believe in. ;)

Easy to prove something is life changing if it makes you behave in a radically different way than before.

Would you put your life on the line for your belief that there is no God?

Well we know who will be jumping at the opportunity when the firing squad start lining up the atheists ;)

So about that upvote. I know no one will believe me since I believe it's a conspiracy Thparky has plotted to bring about my meming demise. So far he Sydney and their upvote investigators have already placed me on felony status for neglecting to upvote. But I actually posted in the imgflip stream about this. No matter how many times I hit that upvote button it's all in vain. It dissappears. Behold the evidence before your eyes I speak the truth, so help me God. ;)

Your technology isn't Octavia's problem, he just wants his upvote...y u no give it to him? Lol

Oh, don't mind OM, last week I mentioned I had a meme heading up tha chartz. Just 2 shy from the le Fronte Paige!
So he went, and upvoted. Not the meme, not all the comments - just one comment by one individual who never uppvotes anyone anymore.

k, my meme poked some fun at St Greta, but it wasn't harsh in tone.

When I logged on the next day it had sunk to the 3rd page. UV's from OM or maybe both of them would have gotten me on the 1st at least long enough for me to see it and have muh moment as I rarely submit memes.

THE END

It was 19 before the memer you upvoted commented, and still 19 immediately before you saw it and still 19 after you replied about it on ANOTHER meme.
The comments also had 2 or 1 UV's, except that memer, which had 0.

Thanks for chiming in, Kate. I was wondering the same things...

I stand corrected. I guess I was wrong. You could also say those who saw Jesus have seen God also. This does still not prove his non-existence, or His Word to be false. I t sounds like you were once a believer. May I ask why you left?

Quran 60:8 says -“Allah loves those who act justly.”

Romans 5:8 says- “But God commended his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”

It’s easy to prove how people’s lives are changed by Jesus and his word- just google the many conversion and transformation stories of people who have been saved. Especially the ones who have left Islam under threat of death and are preaching the gospel throughout the world.

Thank you also for pointing out those scripture verses! It challenges me to do a study on those who “saw” God. I think the key difference is that no one can look upon the Father, but the Son lets us see Him face to face. The examples you cited in the OT (Joshua, Job, etc..) I believe are Christophonies, or pre-incarnate appearances of Christ. It just further illustrates how the trinity weaves itself through scripture. More proof of it being supernaturally inspired!

I’m sorry you left, man. I feel the Bible perfectly lines up with what we know about the world around us. What in particular was it that you thought disagreed? The flood? Age of the earth? Certainly not archaeology? All these things can still be rationally explained and brought in harmony with the Bible. It really depends on how you view the evidence and who you’re listening to.

You’re right. Though their lives have been changed, it doesn’t prove Christianity or the Bible true, but it does show that their Ives improved greatly because of their faith in it.

There are many proofs of the Bible being supernaturally inspired. It would take me too long to list the ones I know of. (I can give you some later when I have more time). I just think you haven’t earnestly studied the Bible long enough...

God isn't just "a guy in the sky". He is an all-powerful being who has created you for your unique purpose. You don't go to hell because God wants you to go there. You go to hell because you sealed your fate by not believing in him.

People who have never heard about Jesus have chosen not to hear about Jesus. There are missionaries all over the world trying to get the Word to everyone. If you haven't ever heard about Him, you have chosen not to hear about Him.

Load of crap.
You ever even look at the Bible?

A master of fates likes atheists.. as plants, animals, and life on earth period was an atheist for the first 3.5 billion years or so of life on earth. Religions have only been around for 40 or 50 thousand years. If you meet a deity in an afterlife.. you say.. I have a star ship for you. You've just got to have faith that it is there. lol

First you have to believe in life evolving over billions of years. Which the law of entropy alone refutes. And human beings haven’t even been around for more than 6 1/2 thousand years. I hope my starship is gassed up and ready! 😉

No belief necessary with evolution. It can be proven by millions of facts which all point to the same conclusion. Entropy does not refute it. I have rocks in my front yard older than 6.5k. Forgive and you shall be forgiven in good judgment. Deities require no narc praise. They are not insecure or needy.

Someone gets it.

The irony is what the 'faithfull' are in essentially saying is that without permission to be real, divinity in effect will not be.

You’re inferring that we give God “permission” to exist. Thus making ourselves to be God. The first temptation in the garden. So old...🙄

CACHING, HIS EYES OPEN!

Created in 'his' image indeed.

READ the Eden story as is, not as mutated by the pagans who killed Jesus and stole the religion of the Jews to corrupt it for political needs.

And where could I get a copy of this un-mutated Eden story? 🤔

The Torah (OT)?
But of course, earlier cultures had earlier versions.

Never was an Adam and Eve.. the story can only be symbolic. No instant poof ppl. Our organ systems illustrate evolution as does our DNA. Biting the apple is not a sin. It's the only way a flawed being could grow into a virtuous one. Moses tells tall tales, misinterpreted a dream, or it's lost in translation some how between a possible divine inspiration and what is written.

How do you know there was never an Adam and Eve?

How do our organ systems illustrate evolution? Our individual cells require irreducible complexity, and mutations result in losses, not gains.

For a species to grow there must be an adequate gene pool.. not just two. There is not the DNA evidence showing that we evolved from two in the last 6500 years. We are mammals with definite ancestors and skeletal remains which prove it and only slightly different DNA. Also in our embryonic state we have tails and gills. The earliest life forms were single celled and life with more complex organ systems came later. Irreducible complexity is not a thing. It is a flawed argument which was debunked at Dover v Pennsylvania.

Those are not gills we have in the womb. That was debunked also. They go on to form the bones of our ears and jaw. If irreducible complexity isn’t a thing, explain how an eye could have evolved. Or a heart without a complete circulatory system. I’m not a scientist, but there of plenty of creationist scientists who can explain it better. You say the earliest life forms were single celled, but you can’t explain how the cell evolved in the first place. The argument goes both ways, and always will. Nothing is absolutely proven either way. That’s the beauty of it all. It keeps pushing us forward for more answers. Until it is, I’m siding with the Creator over His creation on this one.

Are you a literal creationist? The idea of saying if any part of a massive amount of factual evidence which leads to the conclusion of the Theory of Evolution is missing, I revert back to story in a religious book corroborated by nothing? Doesn't sound sort of willful position to you? Like a refusal of knowing kind of thing? I am a very atheistically minded theist by hope myself.. which may sound contradictory but is not. It's just a very long story on each and every aspect of the argument as to where I stand. I have considered both sides with intellectual honesty and an open mind. I do make the first life argument from time to time which is the only place you can suggest intelligent design or irreducible complexity btw.. but the reality remains of what the evidence shows and that is, that the whole thing may very well have been one big cosmic accident. I'd say that makes us extremely lucky or the luckiest matter in the known universe to us. We're the favorite. lol

I lean more to the literal, I guess. I believe God spoke the universe into existence. The spoken word is powerful, and much of life operates on frequency and vibration. I believe the days in creation were literal days, (though I know it can be interpreted as being much longer periods of time.) so I lean more towards a young earth. As far as a literal snake in the garden though, I believe Lucifer appeared to Eve as a beautiful angel when he deceived her. And I don’t believe it was a literal piece of fruit that was the temptation. 😉. But I believe the Bible is God’s word and most of it is to be taken literally.
And it really isn’t “corroborated by nothing”. There are actual historical places and names mentioned that can be corroborated by archaeology. There are also eyewitness accounts in the gospels.
And yes, the first life argument screams ID, especially with the modern breakthroughs in science. Only people nowadays would rather go with an alien ID than God.🙄.
I don’t believe it could be a cosmic accident, because accidents and explosions always create chaos and disorder, not order. Interestingly, the Hebrew words for evening and morning in the first days of Genesis could also be translated as disorder, and order! So when it says, “and there was evening, and there was morning, the first day”, it could be translated, “ and there was disorder, and there was order, the first day”.
(I got this from an amazing study on the book of Genesis by Chuck Missler. It’s on YouTube if you’re interested. He used to be an astrophysicist for the govt. before he became a Christian. Some of the stuff he goes into will blow your mind!). Anyway, I could go on about how the Bible is divinely inspired, or how the Holy Spirit can guide you in all understanding if you truly seek Him, but it’s late and I’m wayyy past my bedtime. Gotta get up early. Thanks for asking! TTYL...

Here’s the link:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLlTRGidk4A1CqXzCn0-cmdwvHTsmm2luX&feature=share

Okay, so the magic word in that article is “natural selection”. “ Mutation alone will not cause adaptive evolution...but...Natural selection is the process by which information about the environment is transferred to an organism's genome and thus to the organism.” And this “ is observed to increase information and complexity in simulations”. Of course they don’t explain how natural selection transfers information into the organism’s genome. And none of those simulations change a species into another species. Not even hundreds, or thousands, of these slight variations will do that. That’s why macro -evolution needs the magical “millions of years” to happen. Otherwise the theory doesn’t hold water. Still not buying it. I don’t have enough faith for that.

"Memedave

So even the experts don’t know what they’re talking about. Sounds about right."

So NOW you're agreeing with scientiests, albiet from a century and half ago?
Your appeal to debunked authority is duly noted.

btw, still waiting for your awesome rebuttal to the transitioning comment.

No, I’m agreeing that they don’t know what they’re talking about.

What comment was that again? There’s been quite a lot on here...

That's not what natural selection is, AND YOU KNOW IT.

That whole first part in quotations was just copied from the link that Octavia sent me. That’s what they said it is. They’re supposedly the experts. I still don’t know what natural selection is. Maybe you could explain it to me.

Well that's Lamarckism, not Natural Selection.
Someone got something wrong.

So even the experts don’t know what they’re talking about. Sounds about right.

Accumulated mutations are what evolution IS.
Some may lead to defects with ill effects on health, but others may confer an advantage and may be passed on and expressed more species wide due to selective pressures.

“My be passed on”. Can you give an example of a mutation which changed a species?

Did I ever mention I have a certain disdain for redundant redundancies told redundantly?
Let's stop wasting my time on your bs, shall we? God don't like it.

So I’ll take that as a no. Because it’s never happened.

"Accumulated mutations are what evolution IS."

You already said that. That isn’t an example of a mutation changing species.

Yes, I’m sure those rocks are older than 6K. And yes, very much belief is required with macro evolution. Huge assumptions must be made when theorizing what happened before recorded history. Conditions of the earth could have been drastically different. Radiometric dating isn’t reliable. Those rocks in your backyard could get different dates at different labs. So anything in the distant past beyond what is recorded must be believed. We even have to believe what those people recorded was true. Yes, we can observe micro evolution in labs, but we cannot observe a jump from species to species. Science can only take you so far. Where science leaves off, belief begins.

And sure, a deity does not require or need our praise. But unlike creating us like robots, they gave us the free will to be able to choose to do so. Only with that choice can you love.

You speak of “good judgment”. Where does this good judgment come from? If we are just molecules in motion, how can one group molecules say whether another group is “good” or “bad”? Without an intelligence with an absolute moral standard behind them, we’re all just vibrating atoms...

Cherry picking specific bits of the Theory of Evolution to say, this negates the whole thing, Creationism is still viable.. is laughable. When I say millions of facts all lead to the same conclusion.. I mean the hundreds of thousands of actual fossils which can then be tested a thousand ways to prove them with certain absolute knowable realities.. like this is an extinct specie, it's very old, it's DNA is primitive, carbon dating says this age, and thirty other methods suggest a correlation around this time frame of earth's development. it's found under certain layers of earth, all in the same groups with other fossils, all dated around the same time, under or above the black ring from the dinosaur extinction 65 million years ago.. etc. etc. If you looked at the Encyclopedia Britanica and said.. woa, this collection of knowledge is no good because I can find certain bits the writers didn't go into, which I have to know about, guess, speculate upon, or have faith in.. you'd make the same argument. There still are volumes, and volumes, and volumes of undeniable evidence, facts, objective reality.. not open to the confusions of the mind refusing to grasp it or accept it. When or if you play the mega critical antagonist of other ppl's ideas grasping at straws for small holes to say negates the all, but don't subject your own thought processes around emotionally held religious beliefs to that same scrutiny.. your intellectual claim of self is a fraud.

Hundreds of thousands of transitional fossils? Show me one.

https://www.google.com/search?q=picture+of+tiktaalik&sxsrf=ACYBGNQlrdvljC4PxPvZvPoq6FE_SdzYQA:1571539411713&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiuporD6KnlAhVDlKwKHQBRA2gQ_AUIEigB&biw=1280&bih=871#imgrc=9jl4WzlBS4H9oM

My google search couldn’t find your link. Could you post a pic? Or a screenshot? And it better not be The Archaeopteryx bird fossil! 😆

Google "tiktaalik" It is a transitional fossil.

Coelacanth is a fish. Wow, still here after four million yrs. It goes on to say In the overview that it left the sea to walk on land. (As if it was a fact). It must’ve decided it liked it better in the sea!😆. But, of course, like macro-evolution, that was never observed so it must be BELIEVED. I’ve got to hand it to you though, you’ve at least shown me more examples of what are believed to be transitional fossils than most. Kudos.

Mudskippers don't have legs. No lungs either, not even swim bladders, unlike lobe-finned fishes like coelacanths.

Coelacanths left the sea? Then went back? FOUR million years? Sloppy, sloppy.

Oh, you're looking for transitional species? All of them are, including you. Even coelacanths and tuataras, which have hardly changed in HUNDREDS of millions of years are, as wintnessed by at least 2 identified surviving species of each.

But since you jumbled coelacanths so badly, go look up cetaceans, you know, artiodactyla that returned to the sea. That's right, whales are not fish, but cousins of cows (the latter being the most highly evolved mammals, btw. Perhaps the Hindus are on to something).

Then if you want some more fun, look up its cousin that left the land, went to the water, yet ended up sticking to the land, partially anyways, to feed - hippos. The closest relatives of hippos had formally been thought to be pigs, but DNA indicates otherwise.

Oh, and while we're at it, you know who else did the water > land > water > land dance, but a step farther than hippos?
HINT: You can find the answer to that in the mirror.

How's being an aquatic ape that went terrestrial sound for transitional?

Ok, so that’s a fish with legs. We still have them today. Like the mudskipper. What else have you got? If evolution is true you should have thousands to choose from...

Coelacanthe.. if I spelled it correctly.

Good judgment starts with a knowledge of self, to know your own human error, then account for it, so as to be honest. Honesty is the light that creates order in the mind from which to know good and evil.

How do you know if your “error” is truly an error? Maybe it’s not an error for someone else. It’s your opinion against another. How can you know what is good or evil if there is no absolute standard from which to discern? Any human reasoning is circular reasoning, if not drawn from a source of absolute truth outside of one’s self.

Reason and critical thinking can determine priority, pecking order, and what is the greater cry for a pathos based start.. which can then evolve into ethos and logos based argument of what is good and evil.

What is reason if we are just chemically reacting, electrically firing molecules in a 3 pound glob of meat? How do you know your reason is correct? There are still indigenous peoples today who believe it’s morally right (good) to kill and eat people. How come their reasoning didn’t evolve enough to know that it is wrong (evil)? Even Hitler thought he was doing the right thing. It’s just one group of humanity’s opinion against another, unless there’s a moral standard from outside humanity to set the rules. One chemical reaction cannot say another chemical reaction is wrong unless we are more than just that, and there is a set moral standard to go by. Do you see my point here?

LOL.. Reason is the tool you are trying to use with me to defeat reason as a tool. lol As for objective moral constants vs subjective moraliity.. The need for each depends on where you are at in personal growth. As an emotional testy critter, you need more rigid seemingly constant rules from a law giver, like a parent or deity. As a thinking being.. morality is subjective.

Morality is subjective. Then why do we need laws? I’m sorry, your honor, but my morality is subjective. I don’t believe I was wrong in breaking that law...lol

Laws and morality are not necessarily connected. Some times what is legal is immoral. For instance one time in America slavery was legal. Society does require a constant written code of right and wrong.. but it is interpreted on a case by case basis.. just in case there is a new branch on the legal code to write. We must have accountability and personal responsibility as the starting place to law.. but there are always some sort of circumstance which changes the game to alleviate guilty actions. And there is an all bets are off sort of law in some states which says this in effect sort of granting a subjective legal code in special circumstance.

God is truth. And his law is truth. The Ten Commandments are His law. It all comes back to them. Jesus actually condensed them into two commandments: “love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself.” Doing those two things to the letter will fulfill all Ten Commandments. Unfortunately, none of us sinful, selfish humans can do that. That’s why we need a savior that did them for us and paid the price for us

. If we are just molecules in motion, one group of molecules can’t say to another what is truly right or wrong. It’s just a circular argument that devolves into one opinion against another. Unless there is an absolute moral standard to measure it by. We wouldn’t know what a crooked line was unless we had a straight one to compare it to. Like a tape measure would be just useless figures on a stick unless we had a math system to be able to read it. And this absolute moral compass must come from outside our human intellect, or else it’s just our circular reasoning inside our limited, finite minds...

Show me one example where speciation has occurred and observed in nature or in a lab. A jump, or excuse me, transition, from one species into another.

Just saying “strawman fallacy”. Doesn’t refute my point. Please explain.

I already told you what the absolute moral standard is. Hint: there’s ten of them. Or two, if you want to condense it.

Entropy says that degeneration increases within cells over time. Why we age. Mutations within cells produce disorder, not order. If the earth is not breaking down, why worry about climate change? And archeology beyond recorded history relies on unreliable dating methods. If humans have been around for tens of thousands of years, the earth would have been overpopulated long before now. Unless a major catastrophe like a global flood occurred...😉

I did a little digging on the overpopulation thing. Found these numbers.

After 150 years a population of 2 people will increase to 4? And HOW did Cain reproduce by himself? Male parthenogenesis?

Who came up with that nonsense, not to mention a 100% offspring survival rate, their immortality, and the total absence of the limiting factors of their ecology's carrying capacity?

The Bible never said Adam and Eve had 2 children, it just mentioned 2. They supposedly live 100's of years. You think they only 2 offspring?

It never said those were their only children. It can't list every detail.

The serpent (Lucifer) was in Genesis. It's where it forecasts that Jesus would crush the serpent's head.

The Bible has been screwed with. Some medieval translators substituted unfermented juice as wine, cuz they wanted to drink.

After Cain was sent out, he wandered the wilderness. The Bible didn’t say how long. Could’ve been a few decades or more. They lived longer back then. Plenty of time for more siblings to produce offspring.

100% offspring rate? Immortality? What are you talking about?

Lived longer? Don't matter if he lived an eternity, no females = no females.

Your 'math'

So how could Eve not have given birth to females? If he was out wandering for twenty years, there could have been a few sisters of age to choose from. You’re also not considering other theories. That there were other people outside of the garden that God created after Adam and Eve, or that God gave Cain a wife in the same way he gave Adam Eve. Hey, he’s God, why not? And you guys say us Christians are narrow-minded!...

Eve gave birth to what? Cite the Scripture & Verse.

Ahh, so Cain did it with his sisters? Genesis states this?
And after 8000 years of inbreeding, not only are humans still around, you don't exactly look exactly like your siblings (which is in effect everybody on Planet Earth, genetically speaking), do you?

See, now you're asking me to speculate and theorize for you some nonsense that is NOT in ye olde Good Book. How mighty fundamentalist of you.

Who is "you guys"?
Christian? You? You celebrate Passover?

If entropy is not a gradual decline into disorder, then why do we die? Where does the energy of our “unclosed” system go?

The climate change alarmists believe that we are destroying our atmosphere. And doesn’t science say that our sun will eventually burn out?

Not all dating methods are accurate. Radiometric dating is not. There are always preconceived assumptions. Scientists use them because they believe they are as accurate as they can get, provided variables such as decay rates have stayed constant. Even more so if it fits their worldview.

I disagree on the population thing, though I’ll give you that considering wars, plagues and natural catastrophes.

And ummm, the Grand Canyon?

“start with the preconceived conclusion in mind and work backwards to try and make the evidence fit.”

Isn’t that what evolutionists do?

There’s no way The Grand Canyon could have been created by a single river over time. Like I said before, it’s all how you view the evidence.

How do you explain the Cambrian explosion?

Micro evolution is a hoot. Faced with multiple examples of evolution not only occuring, but at faster rates than initially thought possible, Creationists had to admit to the validity of it, but then claimed it only happened in micro bursts.

Even that ridiculous way of attempting to dismiss the reality of observed evolution is nonsense in terms of Creationist parameters, since all micro evolution would have occurred long ago and thusly expired any future evolution options.

Of course their explanation for that is that the ability gets recharged or some crap every so often. In which case, when are Scandinavians going to micro evolve into Inuits or South African Boers going to evolve into Africans or whales evolve gills or flying lemurs evolve into bats?

It's like that "kinda pregnant" quip.

Perhaps math is not a thing either, because even increments of .01 inches will add up to 10 miles over time.

Well, I’m definitely not going to change your mind on the evolution thing. Especially if you can’t admit there is actual belief involved. This post wasn’t about evolution anyway. The original intention was to see people’s differing opinions on what they would say to God.

Yes, but some of them were a little above my pay grade to understand. I could send you links from creation scientists who view the same evidence differently, but would it change your mind?

Do tell of rock formation - in layers, no less - having been observed.

Still waiting for your response to the trasnitional species comment I posted after you kept asking various here for it. I got some more to stir into Adam & Eve's 800yr lifespans where they had sex with Cain and begat us all and gave stripes to zebras with sticks and how Adam named all the animals despite there being a ton in your backyard that somehow got ommitted from the Genesis final edition.

That's because it's not my question, it's yours.

Orangs can't swim.

The Grand Canyon was created when God took a really big stick and scratched into the rock he layered up during creation...

In response to your transitional species comment, I can’t recall what you’re actual question was. You started going off on saying we are transitional species and something about aquatic apes...

Were you there to observe the evolution of animals to humans? No. So you have to believe it happened the way scientists say it did. And micro evolution is not macro evolution. We could continue to go around and around with this, but I doubt if either one of us is going to change our minds about it. Either way, the argument does not disprove God.

Alright, how about if I say, I could send you links from actual Christian scientists who don’t believe in evolution? They are actual scientists with degrees who say that evolution is just as bogus as you say creation science is...🤔