Why the Christian/Judeo/Islamic God?

Our purpose is to love God. I guess you could just call me stupid. I been known to be a li'l ignorant sometimes too tho.

 

Oh hell,I'm stupid too.Aren't we all in our own way?

 

Hey, Hey, now who you calling stupid? I like to think of myself as not too bright!

 

Please, don't. You make me feel sad.
I prefer thinking that everyone is wise in his own way. That makes people more interesting...

 

Evidently you've not been exposed to roofers.

 

Have mercy upon me! English is NOT my first language, and the Oxford dictionary says roofers are "men who repair your roof"

 

Yup.Some of the dumbest humans to walk the earth.Oh--did I mention I am a roofer.

 

It's just because of the constant exposure to temperatures in excess of 120°.

 

Roofers! Ha-ha-ha!!
Oh yea, we have similar expression in Russian, which is linked to one's "roof". But that one means rather a crazy person, not dumb.
Thanks for this one! I'm coming to the conclusion, that I need a Miriam Webster in addition to Oxford.
I had a dictionary once, which it was a pleasure just to read. Learned my English greatly from that one. But then I gave it away -- how silly!

 

Painters aint too bright either. Their usually in the bar next to the roofers.

 

Yeah,no shit.There's more "roofing -painting "done in bars than on houses.Aquest,your english is very good.

 

dammit aguest your gonna make me write another long ass post, but i guess its my duty as champion of this thread to defend my title so here goes:

i just wanted to point out how easy it is to debunk your reasoning. u see when you start with a false premis, in this case creationism, you can only have false statements backing them up. for example, in this case your trying to convince me that the earth was completely dark, no sunshine, and yet had vegitation. and i guess these plants would have survived without water too because lack of a sun for a couple of thousand years wold have turned the water on earth to solid ice. oh, and these plants would have survived sub zero temperatures too right aguest??

so now for aguest to keep his current position about the plants he would have to debunk all the points i just made, good luck to ya aguest!

big deal, the aztecs had a pretty advanced knowledge of astronomy, do you believe in their religion too?

ok so your telling me that even though we are 96% similar, there is no chance we could have come from chimpanzees?? come now, if you dont think that theres a possibility there then your just silly.

while it is true that fossilized skeletons are rarely found whole, they do give us other clues which support the premise of evolution.
one of these clues is the pattern that these fossils have. for example, if you look at this graph (a product of a study made by Talk Origins Foundation) you will notice a clear pattern: the older the skull bones are, the smaller their brain volume. in other words, there is a pattern that shows humanoids brains GRADUALLY became the size they are today, completely contrary to creationism.


so although the entire skeleton is not found, what scientist look at is patterns that show evidence of evolution, the entire skeleton, while extremely helpful, is not completely necessary.

 

Ok, first you confusing the description of two different events. In the first verse of Genesis, where it says that God created the Heavens and the Earth, that is your “big bang”, if you will. So the creation of the Universe could of course have happened 50,000 years ago or a bazillion years ago the Bible doesn’t say but I would guess closer to a bazillion. Then the Bible turns its attention to getting the Earth ready for Mankind, the seven days of creation. What it now describes is what this would look like if you were standing on the Earth when it happens.

 

First “Day”​

“‘Let light come to be.’ Then there came to be light. And God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a first day.”—Genesis 1:3, 5.
Of course the sun and moon were in outer space long before this first “day,” but their light did not reach the surface of the earth for an earthly observer to see. Now, light evidently came to be visible on earth on this first “day,” and the rotating earth began to have alternating days and nights.
Apparently, the light came in a gradual process, extending over a long period of time, not instantaneously as when you turn on an electric light bulb. The Genesis rendering by translator J. W. Watts reflects this when it says: “And gradually light came into existence.” (A Distinctive Translation of Genesis) This light was from the sun, but the sun itself could not be seen through the overcast. Hence, the light that reached earth was “light diffused,” as indicated by a comment about verse 3 in Rotherham’s Emphasised Bible.—See footnote b for verse 14.

 

Second “Day”​

“‘Let an expanse come to be in between the waters and let a dividing occur between the waters and the waters.’ Then God proceeded to make the expanse and to make a division between the waters that should be beneath the expanse and the waters that should be above the expanse. And it came to be so. And God began to call the expanse Heaven.”—Genesis 1:6-8.
Some translations use the word “firmament” instead of “expanse.” From this the argument is made that the Genesis account borrowed from creation myths that represent this “firmament” as a metal dome. But even the King James Version Bible, which uses “firmament,” says in the margin, “expansion.” This is because the Hebrew word ra·qi´a‛, translated “expanse,” means to stretch out or spread out or expand.
The Genesis account says that God did it, but it does not say how. In whatever way the described separation occurred, it would look as though the ‘waters above’ had been pushed up from the earth. And birds could later be said to fly in “the expanse of the heavens,” as stated at Genesis 1:20.

 

Third “Day”​

“‘Let the waters under the heavens be brought together into one place and let the dry land appear.’ And it came to be so. And God began calling the dry land Earth, but the bringing together of the waters he called Seas.” (Genesis 1:9, 10) As usual, the account does not describe how this was done. No doubt, tremendous earth movements would have been involved in the formation of land areas. Geologists would explain such major upheavals as catastrophism. But Genesis indicates direction and control by a Creator.
In the Biblical account where God is described as questioning Job about his knowledge of the earth, a variety of developments concerning earth’s history are described: its measurements, its cloud masses, its seas and how their waves were limited by dry land—many things in general about the creation, spanning long periods of time. Among these things, comparing earth to a building, the Bible says that God asked Job: “Into what have its socket pedestals been sunk down, or who laid its cornerstone?”—Job 38:6.
Interestingly, like “socket pedestals,” earth’s crust is much thicker under continents and even more so under mountain ranges, pushing deep into the underlying mantle, like tree roots into soil. “The idea that mountains and continents had roots has been tested over and over again, and shown to be valid,” says Putnam’s Geology.2 Oceanic crust is only about 5 miles thick, but continental roots go down about 20 miles and mountain roots penetrate about twice that far. And all earth’s layers press inward upon earth’s core from all directions, making it like a great “cornerstone” of support.
Whatever means were used to accomplish the raising up of dry land, the important point is: Both the Bible and science recognize it as one of the stages in the forming of the earth.

 

Land Plants on Third “Day”​

The Bible account adds: “‘Let the earth cause grass to shoot forth, vegetation bearing seed, fruit trees yielding fruit according to their kinds, the seed of which is in it, upon the earth.’ And it came to be so.”—Genesis 1:11.
Thus by the close of this third creative period, three broad categories of land plants had been created. The diffused light would have become quite strong by then, ample for the process of photosynthesis so vital to green plants. Incidentally, the account here does not mention every “kind” of plant that came on the scene. Microscopic organisms, water plants and others are not specifically named, but likely were created on this “day.”

 

Fourth “Day”​

“‘Let luminaries come to be in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night; and they must serve as signs and for seasons and for days and years. And they must serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.’ And it came to be so. And God proceeded to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars.”—Genesis 1:14-16; Psalm 136:7-9.
Previously, on the first “day,” the expression “Let light come to be” was used. The Hebrew word there used for “light” is ’ohr, meaning light in a general sense. But on the fourth “day,” the Hebrew word changes to ma·’ohr´, which means the source of the light. Rotherham, in a footnote on “Luminaries” in the Emphasised Bible, says: “In ver. 3, ’ôr [’ohr], light diffused.” Then he goes on to show that the Hebrew word ma·’ohr´ in verse 14 means something “affording light.” On the first “day” diffused light evidently penetrated the swaddling bands, but the sources of that light could not have been seen by an earthly observer because of the cloud layers still enveloping the earth. Now, on this fourth “day,” things apparently changed.
An atmosphere initially rich in carbon dioxide may have caused an earth-wide hot climate. But the lush growth of vegetation during the third and fourth creative periods would absorb some of this heat-retaining blanket of carbon dioxide. The vegetation, in turn, would release oxygen—a requirement for animal life.
Now, had there been an earthly observer, he would be able to discern the sun, moon and stars, which would “serve as signs and for seasons and for days and years.” (Genesis 1:14) The moon would indicate the passing of lunar months, and the sun the passing of solar years. The seasons that now “came to be” on this fourth “day” would no doubt have been much milder than they became later on.—Genesis 1:15; 8:20-22.

 

Well, IMjustfishin, I believe this clears up most of your questions on the seven creative days. I apologize for quoting the Bible but in this case it seemed necessary. I can go on with the rest of the days if you wish.

 

Here you are, IMjustfishin!
You wanted a couple of thought from that book I was talking about?
Here, OlderWaterBrother gave you a couple.

And about the possibility? Here:
What is the chance of even a simple protein molecule forming at random in an organic soup?Evolutionists acknowledge it to be only one in 10^113 (10 followed by 113 zeros). But any even that has one chance in 10^50 is dismissed by mathematicians as never happening. An idea of odds, or probability, involved is seen in the fact that the number of 10^113 is larger than the estimated number of all atoms in our universe!

The above speaks only about one protein, but there are more than 2000 of them that we need!
But these are not even serious problems yet, compared with the odds that a DNA molecule could be ever formed spontaneously, which you can already see for yourself. And you will, I'm afraid, just faint if you try to apply these estimated probabilities to the spontaneous forming of a cell. But then I will need to remind you that forming of a cell was not enough; LIFE needed to somehow be started in that formed cell.

So, this is why I'll never take seriously any reports about the missing link found somewhere by somebody: they just can not find what never existed.