Ancient Aliens

The Religitards just don't get it.

Religitards and Evolutards.

*Atheitards*

UPVOTE!

Everytards.

"Religitards". Cool. Upvote that.

No, we believe a massive amount of hydrogen exploded everything we know into being. Then, when the dust all settled, planets and stars began to form.

Tell me... Where did the hydrogen come from? And seriously, a hydrogen explosion? Good to know. I'm off to blow up some hydrogen and create my own mini-universe....

1) It was all the hydrogen in the universe that was required to make that explosion, so making a mini-universe is impossible. 2) So where did God come from then? Did he suddenly come into being? Neither explanation answers everything, however, there is more evidence to support a big bang than there is to support i gigantic supernatural being.

No, there really isn't.
Saying God exists is just as baseless as saying "well, if you had enough hydrogen, we guess that it could make a universe."

Besides, where did the hydrogen come from? Did it just exist?

You do realize that science is behind all of the developments in technology ever, right? You talk as if scientists are just a bunch or crack pots, sitting around and making stuff up. If it weren't for science there would be no electricity, no automobiles, no indoor plumbing, no computers, no internet, no cell phones, no vaccines, no television, etc. The list goes on and on and on. Of course there have been many theories that haven't panned out, but the nature of science is to be open to ideas, test them, study them, and apply them. I'm not saying that the big bang theory is entirely accurate (although it is pretty widely accepted among the scientific community), but I would guess that if you took the time to research it, you would see that the idea makes a lot of sense (in theory). Again, I'm not telling you to not believe what you believe, but it never hurts to be informed.

I have nothing against science, I love science. What I don't like is how science has devolved (in the case of the theories about stuff we don't understand, the beggining to the universe for instance) into just a bunch of guys sitting around making up theories.

Science is wonderful, and it has explained a lot of things, but it has gone from something having to have been proved to be accepted to just being accepted. For instance, in the case of evolution, it is very widely accepted, but I meet actually very few people who can back up their statements with even half rational explanations. Most of them can't, my personal favorite was this one guy who answered my question of "How did we gain morals, higher reasoning, ect" with the answer, "Scientists said that we found a fish that was dead on the beach that was really high in omega 3 fatty acids."

Scientists don't make up theories. We base them on evidence and what we observe. Some theories remain theories, however, because we do not have the technology to test it. But, as theories are developed and science advances, we are able to test things that were once based on observation.

You are basically punching yourself in the face by asking where the hydrogen come from? Where did God come from then? Anyways, the universe is constantly expanding at a constant rate, almost as if it is being thrown outward BY AN EXPLOSION! There is no evidence to support God other than a few people rewriting and account from someone who may have just misinterpereted by an overexcited version who believed that a bush that was on fire in the desert was god on earth rather than just a bush that got set on fire by natural means or someone just dicking around.

Funny how you dodged the question and got real aggravated all of a sudden. That's just, it, neither of us has proof. Just admit it.

Not sure how we can tell that, but i'll trust you. If it is, why don't we see the hydrogen still exploding? Or did it explode in one spot, create everything in one spot, everything somehow managed to not crash into everything else, and make it to the outskirts of the universe? Or is it still being created by an invisible hydrogen explosion? You've lost me.

My point is, you claim science (which is supposed to be based on facts) when you have no more proof than I do. You're basically me, except instead of believing in God, you believe that nothing from nothing created everything.

Also, are you sure it was just hydrogen? Cause I may not be a chemist, but i'm pretty sure that you can't create every known substance with nothing but hydrogen.

Ok, you can create any element with any other element. The process is known as nuclear fission and nuclear fusion. Also, everything in the universe was not created in that instance. Gravity pulled different elements together over time, slowly forming asteroids, planets, and stars. And no, everything is not still being created by invisible hydrogen explosions. And I am most definitely not you. There is evidence that supports a Big Bang, but where is the evidence to support God? There is none. i never got aggravated. If you happen to be talking about the capital letters, that was for emphasis. You say I dodged the question. Well, let me answer it. We have no idea where the hydrogen came from. But you have dodged my question as well. Where did God come from?

I didn't dodge your question, I answered it. Niether of us know.

And really, what proof is there. I'm sorry, but I don't think, even with nuclear processes, that a giant explosion could create everything. Wouldn't, as it was exploding, destroy everything? And you still didn't answer how it was getting thrown away from an explosion. If it was, it should have been destroyed by the explosion that created it in the process.
If gravity pulled everything together, what was created at the center to do so?

Sorry, i'm not to good at arguing for this because i'm not a physicist. I'll do some research on the subject, thanks for giving me this view.

Thank you! See, if more people actually were willing to research the other's side some, we would actually get somewhere. We need more people willing t learn about the opposite's side. More power to yah.

Actually, this idiot on the meme believes we, as humans, were created by aliens.

While I don't agree with his views of the creation of the human race, is it really any more crazy to believe that we were created by Aliens than to believe that we were created by God? We've never seen either one of them. I have the utmost respect for others' beliefs…that includes, but is not limited to: Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. However, I think one of the biggest issues that the human race faces is intolerance. The notion that "my way is the right way and your way is stupid" is very divisive among mankind and results in a lot of blood being shed. Imagine if we were to react that way to other preferences/ beliefs that we have. Jim says, "Blue is my favorite color. It is the best color of all." Tom says, "Well i think red is the best color of all." Jim kills Tom….or just completely passes him off as being an "idiot". Either way doesn't seem to be very reasonable.

I believe in the God that Jesus Christ was Son of. Jesus preached love and forgiveness to all, and so I strive to be tolerant of everyone else's beliefs. I know that i do not know what God had thought when he created the universe and then created life. Maybe there is life on other planets that might also worship God. I do not know, and as science dictates, I will believe the theory that has the most merit.

I see your point, however I know that God exists and that He most certainly did create the universe. The Bible tells us that "For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son..." which tells me that there is no other intelligent life elsewhere. He died for the human race, not for anything else that we believe to be out there. If there were other intelligent beings in this universe there would have to be either another God or the Bible would be a lie. I don't believe in either.

I will not get into the Bible's many contradictions and inconsistencies, because I am not out to offend you or anyone else. The one thing that I will say is that science suggests several aspects of the Bible to be invalid. I say that, again, not to insult, but offer an alternate perspective. You are absolutely entitled to your belief, but I do not think it is wise to insult those who have a different point of view. It does not accomplish anything. I would also argue that this isn't the forum best-served for these types of discussions. The meme that I created was intended to be humorous and light-hearted…Please accept my apology if I have offended you.

Trust me, you haven't offended me, as I am not a thin-skinned pansy.

Number of contradictions in the Bible: 0

I don't know.

You are free to believe that. I have read the Bible quite extensively and you and I have differing opinions.

No, you and I don't have differing opinions about the amount of contradictions in the Bible. We both know it's 0.

Here's a few:

1.PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.

JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.

2.LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli

MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ

3.JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one

JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

4.ISA 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities

DEU 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

5.PSA 92:12: "The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree.

ISA 57:1: "The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart."

6. MAT 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

7."I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy." (JER 13:14) "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling."

"The Lord is very pitiful and of tender mercy." (JAS 5:11)
"For his mercy endureth forever." (1CH 16:34)
"The Lord is good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works." (PSA 145:9)
"God is love." (1JO 4:16)

8."And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." (GEN 22:1)

"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." (JAS 1:13)

Those are some of the more mild, yet blatant, contradictions

I couldn't have said better than socrates. "be sure and let me know etc." it must be kept in mind that heroes of the OT had free will and some of their actions weren't sanctioned by God. Seriously you say you read the Bible and still don't know that God tempts some persons for their own good/or to test them. Also correct translation and right meaning of the passages matters. Why don't you find and read some excellent commentary I recommend those of Thomas Scott or any other published in the 19th century (that of the Religious tract society. or by the Society for promoting christian knowledge). any of those would answer any questions you've got. Unfortunately archive.org where you can find them is down

I and my Father are one - for goodness' sake that's the doctrine of the Trinity.

Yes, that is the doctrine of the Trinity, but the purpose of sharing that was to show how it conflicts with the next passage that I shared.JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. How can his father be greater if he and his father are one?

Many of the passages that I shared are indeed from the New Testament. You may interpret them as you wish, but they are contradictions…regardless of the context. Again, it is hard for me to discuss this with people who have their mind made up, no matter what. Such is the nature of faith.

Be sure and let me know when you have some real ones.

I find it somewhat ironic that you chose "Socrates" as your name. "The unexamined life is not worth living" -Socrates. I strive to promote thought and intellectual discourse. To quote another greek philosopher, Aristotle, "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." However, It is my own foolishness to expect an enlightening conversation to blossom in the comments section of a meme site. May your days be many and your troubles be few, my friend.

That's a good goal - to promote thought and intellectual discourse. But it doesn't seem to me like you're doing that on this page. Your comments reflect that you're not seriously entertaining the thought that the Bible could actually be true. You're dismissed some of its claims as impossible without giving reasons why. You've also made very basic errors here when claiming what the Bible says, which is not consistent with someone claiming to have studied the Bible firsthand.

You said in another comment that you had studied the Bible, but this list of contradictions doesn't look like it came from studying the Bible - it looks like you just cut and pasted it from a website. That's what I meant by "real" ones - ones that you really believe are actual contradictions.

And there was no reason to have a dig at the username I chose. You don't know my reasons for choosing it, and it has no relevance to whether or not the Bible has contradictions.

;) !

Those are just a few among many, many more. That being said, those contradictions do not necessarily discredit the bible. It does, however, show the error of men….the men who composed the texts, that is. I'm sure you've heard different accounts of the same story before. Whether it be friends, family, coworkers, etc….often the story that makes it to your ears is much different than how the events actually transpired…because of the error of humans. It just happens. I get the feeling that you perceive me to be assaulting your belief system…if you read some of my other comments, you will see that is not the case.

As for the one's about God's mercies and how he will dash people, he will, in defence of his people. Granted, this was a time when man had to sacrafice stuff to be saved. He gave jesus so we didn't have too. If you didn't, all bets are off. His mercies were towards people who sacraficed to him. Now, after Jesus, they are towards EVERYONE.

A lot of this is out of context. Like ISA 57:1.

And as for "I and My father are one", i'm not sure how this is a contradiction... Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit are the same. That's why Jesus could preform miracles, except he was also a man, so he was able to be tempted by Satan.

Why then gravity exists, did it evolve from something too? Or the earth's motion around the Sun, how can such order exist if the universe is self-generated?

How did Noah fit two of every species of animal that could not survive in water on a boat with enough provisions to feed them for 40 days and 40 nights? The answer is: he didn't. I'm not here to get you to question your faith, but secular people draw conclusions from evidence-based practices, logical thinking, the scientific method and facts. Everything that Christians believe can be found in a single book. A book that has many flaws, I might add. According to the Bible, light and darkness were created after water, but before the Sun. Impossible. Also, according to the Bible, slavery is ok, women have no rights and should not wear jewelry, eating shrimp is an abomination, everyone who has cursed his mother or father, committed adultery, or is homosexual should be executed…just to name a few. The ironic thing is…many of the Christians that have the strongest opinions, often know the least about what the Bible actually says. Also, there are several religions that pre-date Christianity that have very, very similar stories about the creation of their God…you know, born of a virgin, etc. Look it up if you're ever curious. I would start with Horus, Buddha, Mithra, Krishna, and Osiris. But... let's say you're right and God created everything. Who created God?

Adam's children spread all over the earth and retold the stories of the creation to their children, which (the stories), there being no writing, were perverted as time passed. Standard of morals etc. is the New Testament. Old T. - God gave all those commandments to the jews, because every one of them had some purpose & was therefore necessary for their wellbeing. Slavery is in no way OK. I may go on and on just read and study the Bible intelligently and with open mind. Adultery - Jesus said "Go and sin no more". but this is not the place for such discussion

I agree whole-heartedly with the last sentence you wrote. I am aware of the differences of the Old and New Testaments, but they are both found within the bindings of the Holy Bible. You say that slavery is not Ok, which I am glad to hear, but it clearly says that it is in the Bible. How does one determine, for instance, to forget about that rule but choose to cling to the idea of homosexuality being a horrible sin? The picking and choosing is something that I do not understand. But, you are right, I'm getting ahead of myself and this is not the forum for this type of discussion.

I guess you're not interested in what i have to say. therefore we better stop this argument what do you thnk

Who created God? Can you answer me. then who created your first monkey-adam? Can you answer that?

Well, that's the thing…Adam is not part of my theology. Only the Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) mention the existence of Adam. He is not my "first monkey" as you so eloquently described it. Also, contrary to what you may think, I am very interested in what you have to say and I value and respect your point of view. I am simply offering an alternate perspective..."devil's advocate", if you will. I consider myself a logical thinker. Therefore, logic and reason are my religion. I suppose you could call me an Agnostic…because I am fully aware of the possibility of God. However, as of now, I have not found sufficient evidence that has swayed my opinion. I imagine you would argue that is where faith becomes a factor. I do want to make it very clear that it is NOT my intention to attack your faith. My intention is quite simple, really…to promote the acceptance of other opinions while maintaining your own. I believe it is imperative for the progression of the human race for people to adopt a "live and let live" sort of attitude. Therefore, I believe these types of discussions are important. Again, this is not the forum for such discourse, but since I have no other way to contact you, I felt it necessary to clarify my intentions.

I'm far from being credulous or anything. A more skeptical man never lived. Yet to me there are no discrepancies, inconsistencies or anything illogical in the Bible. BTW you don't seem like "atheistard" to me I hope you won't create such memes in the future this is simply not good bye

I have found no sufficient evidence of either. The only difference being, Christians listen to a book, and Evolutionists listen to anything any scientist says. (Even bloody Bill Nye the "Science" Guy.)

There's nothing to disprove God, and there's nothing to prove evolution.

Honestly though, I would rather go through life getting pestered by athiests who feel the need to attack me, and not do a few things that really are not that great anyways, in order to have a chance of going to heaven. Think of it this way. If you're right, no biggie, we're both dead. If i'm right, thats when we have problems.
I think athiests attack us in order to solidify their belief that I couldn't possibly be right. Cause if I am, they just made a real big mistake.

The answer is... The boat was massive. If you had read the bible, you would know this. The Bible tells exact measurements the Ark was supposed to be, which actually totalled over 50% too big.
And when "evidence based conclusions" is a scientist saying "I think", you're no better than us. Remember, it is still the Theory of evolution, contrary to popular belief.

And, like nearly every uninformed evolutionist... You're quoting the Old Testament. You do realize, Jesus died so we wouldn't have to do things like that. In reality, you should be screaming at Jews, because Christians are believers in the New Testament, and Jews the Old.
I think someone didn't do their homework.

The boat, according to the Bible, was 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits wide. That translates to roughly 450 ft x 75ft x 45ft. That is a pretty large boat. In fact, so large, that many engineers would argue that a boat that large, solely made of wood, would be incapable of withstanding even mildly turbulent water (because of structural inadequacies). There over 6 million known species of land animals that are in existence. Of course, they vary in size, and in accommodation necessary to house them, but even if the amount of land animals in existence was 1/10th of that, the Ark would be much, much too small. Now, I have also heard it argued that there weren't as many species in existence at the time of the flood…which, could be true…but, if that's the case, it implies evolution. According to the Bible, God created the earth in a week…including man & beast…many theologians maintain that the creatures created at the beginning of time are the only creatures ever created. If that's the case, and God created 6+ million species of land animals at the beginning of time, it would be impossible for Noah to build a vessel large enough to house two of every one of those species.

The differences of the Old Testament and the New Testament are not lost on me, Mr. MightyDragonofAwe. As I mentioned previously, I have read the bible quite extensively. MAT 5:17 Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament.

There's a more detailed argument put out by Dr. Ken Ham, but I don't have a link, sorry.

Yes, and No, to evolution. Yes, as in, there was Micro evolution involved, but no, there was no Macro evolution. For example, did you include every Dog in that number? Or just one member of the species? I mean, Noah only had to load one species of Dog, Horse, ect, because they would adapt to their evironment, not by growing two heads or something, but by changing their hair length, leg length, ect.

It doesn't object to them because they are not wrong. Man brought on himself this punishment, and had a way out, but few chose to use it. But it obviously didn't fully approve, otherwise, why would God send Jesus?

You're right, there is nothing to definitively disprove God. If you had taken the time to read what I wrote, I said, "I am fully aware of the possibility of God." There's nothing to prove evolution in the sense that Darwin suggested, that is, we evolved from monkeys…(although there is a lot of evidence to suggest it. For instance, Humans and Chimpanzees share 98.8% of their DNA.) However, there are countless proofs of evolution on a smaller scale. One simple example is the average height of males today compared to the average height of men 100 years ago. It is a product of our environment, our habits, but mostly…our food. You see, to evolve means simply to change, or rather, adapt. You see, these changes are not miraculous, they are gradual, and due to a number reasons (environment, climate, habits, food, water, breeding, etc.) I do not listen to "anything any scientist says"; I listen to reason, consider the source, and draw conclusions based on what makes sense.

Also, I did not seek out to "pester" you. Secondly, I am not an atheist…I am open to the possibility of God's existence. Lastly, I did not attack you. I expressed my opinions like an adult and tried very hard not to insult yours or anyone else's.

I do have to argue about the "what if I'm right?" thing, though. First of all, if you believe in God for no other reason than you're scared not to…you are a coward. Second of all, there are other religions that exist, you know? Many of which pre-date Christianity. What if you are not wrong about the existence of God, but the God you choose to worship?

Good for you stroudjn. Keep it up. I'm with you on. The one thing you forgot to tell these religious zealots is this. There is not one shred of physical proof Jesus Christ walked the earth. Oh they can say the bible is proof. But once again the bible is made of hand me down stories, written by men. not actual proof. The Romans do not record any man named Jesus of Nazareth was in thier courts. And eits well known the Romans recorded every thing. I give you kudos for speaking your mind. These people are mindless sheep looking to be lead by anybody that thinks the way they do to lead them.

I am not pointing to you in particular, I was gesturing to the entire Athiestic community. They love to pester Christians about everything, which I believe is for the reasons I stated above.

You're getting two rather similar things confused. Micro-evolution is a very real thing that we can see happening all around us, for example, Sherpas, however, the jump from Micro evolution to Macro evolution is a very large leap. Going from simple adaptation to complete overhaul of a species, over a long period of time. So far, we have not seen anything to suggest Macro evolution could happen, as if it could, it would take much too long to observe. As of now, there is no real proof of Macro evolution.

I don't believe in God for no other reason than I have too, I was using that as an argument. If for no other reason (as to most people it just seems stupid, not being able to have sex with anyone anytime or do drugs, drink, ect, just to please some non-existent God and make your life "boring") just so you can get to Heaven which probably doesn't exist, I would at least have that reason. Although, to Christians there are many more reasons than that.
Yes, many religions pre-date Christianity, but you have to remember, (if age is really that important) that it is an offshoot of Judaism, which is very old.
And really, I can't be more sure. I look around and I see religions of Murder, religions of worshipping Cows (or just the environment) and I see no equal to Christianity, where we are (supposed to, but I can't speak for everyone who calls themselves Christian) love everyone, not murder, ect, and how we are (probably) the most Science based (or at least accepting) people. Instead of saying God runs everything, we think that God created stuff to work itself. Dunno if that tells you anything, but it tells me a lot.

So anyone with a different opinion is an idiot?

No, but this guy is. Maybe "fool" would have been better terminology.

Yes, I think fool would be better. It sounds more like an opinion and less like an insult (to me, at least).