The Bible can't logically explain dinosaurs

[Slayrix]

In the Bible on day six ALL living things are created. But how can that be if the fall hasn't happened yet? When it says ALL living animals that means carnivores too, but if it's before the fall then death cannot occur, even to animals. So how could things such as carnivores, things like T-Rexes live for thousands, maybe millions of years while Adam and Eve were in the garden, without a single bit of food? That would have to mean in the beginning carnivores didn't exist and instead EVOLVED after the fall, but then that doesn't work either because evolution completely rips apart a bunch of religious ideas. We know dinosaurs exist, we know T-Rexes exist, yet the Bible cannot possibly explain it logically how they came to exist.

Also according to the Bible's logic since carnivores couldn't have possibly lived before the fall, that means the only way T-Rexes could have ever come to be is if humans co-existed with dinosaurs. But we have not been able to find any evidence that humans live even close to the time period of dinosaurs, so how does that work?

Things just don't add up here.

[Plaid]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Goddess Purple Heart:

Yes because that same thing can be said here: No religion can explain what created their creation god, nothing created the creator, yea okay.

So both are basically faith. Which a religious person admit but Atheist wont.

Yet another leap in logic. A lack of an answer to the origins of the universe doesn't classify something as faith. Not believing in a deity isn't "faith".
I don't see the correlation at all.

[Yo]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Plaid:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

So both are basically faith. Which a religious person admit but Atheist wont.

Yet another leap in logic. A lack of an answer to the origins of the universe doesn't classify something as faith. Not believing in a deity isn't "faith".
I don't see the correlation at all.

It's faith cause you don't know. Big Bang is a theory just Like Creationism is one. You can't explain what was before big bang and how big bang came into existence in the first place....The Famous and most influencial Atheist like Richard Dawkins called it mysterious, I am not sure so he can't rule out the possibility of God because of that

If you come and say I don't believe your story then I must say Your story as is Wild and Un scientific like Any Creation story.

First prove how it's possible 0 = 1 then you say I am believer of logic and facts. If you wanna level 80% of world population's belief as a lie then you have to come up with solid proof to make it look like one.

[ZZZZZ]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Goddess Purple Heart:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

So both are basically faith. Which a religious person admit but Atheist wont.

I'm not sure atheism is a faith, only because on the context that it has........well nothing, its not really a religion, not really...anything to be fair, its just a word for those that dont have a faith/religion.

Then again I guess it could be one because their believing in what they think to be true....damn it Siu your making me think to hard

atheism is officially a religion by definition and also recognized as one, u can see it at the
-theism, u need to make clear statements which turns it into a religion, u have to actively deny the existence of a god or god like beings for example

if u simply say "who knows if god exists, I dont follow it" u arent an atheist but simply a "non-believer"

[Plaid]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Plaid:

Yet another leap in logic. A lack of an answer to the origins of the universe doesn't classify something as faith. Not believing in a deity isn't "faith".
I don't see the correlation at all.

It's faith cause you don't know. Big Bang is a theory just Like Creationism is one. You can't explain what was before big bang and how big bang came into existence in the first place....The Famous and most influencial Atheist like Richard Dawkins called it mysterious, I am not sure so he can't rule out the possibility of God because of that

If you come and say I don't believe your story then I must say Your story as is Wild and Un scientific like Any Creation story.

First proof how it's possible 0 = 1 then you say I am believer of logic and facts.

I haven't given a story. I didn't say anything about the big bang.
What is it with religious people trying to paint people who aren't religious as religious?
I suppose that's the religious lens.

Kind of funny you can accept without evidence the existence of a god, but you can't accept the simple fact that I don't believe in your god.

[Alliesaurus]

I think dinosaurs is the last thing the Bible has to worry about logically explaining. Best selling mini novels of all time

[King Narwhal]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Plaid:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

It's faith cause you don't know. Big Bang is a theory just Like Creationism is one. You can't explain what was before big bang and how big bang came into existence in the first place....The Famous and most influencial Atheist like Richard Dawkins called it mysterious, I am not sure so he can't rule out the possibility of God because of that

If you come and say I don't believe your story then I must say Your story as is Wild and Un scientific like Any Creation story.

First proof how it's possible 0 = 1 then you say I am believer of logic and facts.

I haven't given a story. I didn't say anything about the big bang.
What is it with religious people trying to paint people who aren't religious as religious?
I suppose that's the religious lens.

Kind of funny you can accept without evidence the existence of a god, but you can't accept the simple fact that I don't believe in your god.

They think it's a "gotcha" to try and paint atheism, a single answer to a single question, as being some religion that dictates this and that to its "followers". After all, then they can say atheists are actually the same as them, so then it's unreasonable to ask for evidence instead of just "having faith" since apparently atheists "have faith" as well, and ignoring any and all critiques.

Usually it's accompanied by telling people what they believe instead of asking them, or strawmanning them into oblivion.

For example:

Opprinnelig skrevet av CaptainG:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Goddess Purple Heart:

I'm not sure atheism is a faith, only because on the context that it has........well nothing, its not really a religion, not really...anything to be fair, its just a word for those that dont have a faith/religion.

Then again I guess it could be one because their believing in what they think to be true....damn it Siu your making me think to hard

atheism is officially a religion by definition and also recognized as one, u can see it at the
-theism, u need to make clear statements which turns it into a religion, u have to actively deny the existence of a god or god like beings for example

if u simply say "who knows if god exists, I dont follow it" u arent an atheist but simply a "non-believer"

This fellow makes the mistake of saying "atheism makes clear statements about gods existing and is recognized as a religion by the gov't, therefore it is a religion", when that isn't the case.

Do you believe any god/gods exist? If no, atheist. Anything beyond that proposition is personal and not dependent on atheism, there is no rulebook or pamphlet, no guiding tenants, no worship, nothing. It's one answer to one question. This fellow is stuck on the divide between Gnostic Atheism and Agnostic Atheism, of which I'd argue that Gnostic Atheism is unreasonable as it requires the burden of proof for making the negative claim, while Agnostic Atheism takes the "I don't believe you" position towards every religious claim they've encountered.

As for the gov't thing, that's so that the nonreligious can have the same protections as the religious, meaning the gov't has to respect that some people don't follow a religion and so the gov't can't force it on them.


Thankfully in my experience, blatant bad faith arguments like this seems mostly limited to the internet or the occasional IRL zealot, most theists seem to be alright with good faith conversations. I blame the bad faith takes on all the big-name apologetics for the abrahamic faiths (because all of them do it to varying extents) using it as a way to poison the well, especially when it comes to topics of morality.

[Fajita Jim]

Opprinnelig skrevet av CaptainG:

atheism is officially a religion by definition and also recognized as one, u can see it at the
-theism,"

But the word isn't 'theism', it's 'atheist', which literally means 'NO THEISM'.

The same way atypical means NOT typical.

Also, it's officially a religion in the same way a train isn't a motorized vehicle by law. It's just legalese and imparts no truths to the subject.

[Yo]

Opprinnelig skrevet av King Narwhal:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Plaid:

I haven't given a story. I didn't say anything about the big bang.
What is it with religious people trying to paint people who aren't religious as religious?
I suppose that's the religious lens.

Kind of funny you can accept without evidence the existence of a god, but you can't accept the simple fact that I don't believe in your god.

They think it's a "gotcha" to try and paint atheism, a single answer to a single question, as being some religion that dictates this and that to its "followers". After all, then they can say atheists are actually the same as them, so then it's unreasonable to ask for evidence instead of just "having faith" since apparently atheists "have faith" as well, and ignoring any and all critiques.

Usually it's accompanied by telling people what they believe instead of asking them, or strawmanning them into oblivion.

For example:

Opprinnelig skrevet av CaptainG:

atheism is officially a religion by definition and also recognized as one, u can see it at the
-theism, u need to make clear statements which turns it into a religion, u have to actively deny the existence of a god or god like beings for example

if u simply say "who knows if god exists, I dont follow it" u arent an atheist but simply a "non-believer"

This fellow makes the mistake of saying "atheism makes clear statements about gods existing and is recognized as a religion by the gov't, therefore it is a religion", when that isn't the case.

Do you believe any god/gods exist? If no, atheist. Anything beyond that proposition is personal and not dependent on atheism, there is no rulebook or pamphlet, no guiding tenants, no worship, nothing. It's one answer to one question. This fellow is stuck on the divide between Gnostic Atheism and Agnostic Atheism, of which I'd argue that Gnostic Atheism is unreasonable as it requires the burden of proof for making the negative claim, while Agnostic Atheism takes the "I don't believe you" position towards every religious claim they've encountered.

As for the gov't thing, that's so that the nonreligious can have the same protections as the religious, meaning the gov't has to respect that some people don't follow a religion and so the gov't can't force it on them.


Thankfully in my experience, blatant bad faith arguments like this seems mostly limited to the internet or the occasional IRL zealot, most theists seem to be alright with good faith conversations. I blame the bad faith takes on all the big-name apologetics for the abrahamic faiths (because all of them do it to varying extents) using it as a way to poison the well, especially when it comes to topics of morality.

With all your essay writing you still believe in 0 = 1 which make you as much Miracle believer than a Random Bible Believer

Cut the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and Prove it how 0 = 1 and then come and say I actually rely on science and not faith

[King Narwhal]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

Opprinnelig skrevet av King Narwhal:

They think it's a "gotcha" to try and paint atheism, a single answer to a single question, as being some religion that dictates this and that to its "followers". After all, then they can say atheists are actually the same as them, so then it's unreasonable to ask for evidence instead of just "having faith" since apparently atheists "have faith" as well, and ignoring any and all critiques.

Usually it's accompanied by telling people what they believe instead of asking them, or strawmanning them into oblivion.

For example:


This fellow makes the mistake of saying "atheism makes clear statements about gods existing and is recognized as a religion by the gov't, therefore it is a religion", when that isn't the case.

Do you believe any god/gods exist? If no, atheist. Anything beyond that proposition is personal and not dependent on atheism, there is no rulebook or pamphlet, no guiding tenants, no worship, nothing. It's one answer to one question. This fellow is stuck on the divide between Gnostic Atheism and Agnostic Atheism, of which I'd argue that Gnostic Atheism is unreasonable as it requires the burden of proof for making the negative claim, while Agnostic Atheism takes the "I don't believe you" position towards every religious claim they've encountered.

As for the gov't thing, that's so that the nonreligious can have the same protections as the religious, meaning the gov't has to respect that some people don't follow a religion and so the gov't can't force it on them.


Thankfully in my experience, blatant bad faith arguments like this seems mostly limited to the internet or the occasional IRL zealot, most theists seem to be alright with good faith conversations. I blame the bad faith takes on all the big-name apologetics for the abrahamic faiths (because all of them do it to varying extents) using it as a way to poison the well, especially when it comes to topics of morality.

With all your essay writing you still believe in 0 = 1 which make you as much Miracle believer than a Random Bible Believer

Cut the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and Prove it how 0 = 1 and then come and say I actually rely on science and not faith

Nope, don't believe 0=1, but nice job telling people what they believe.

I'm betting this is the part where you tote some poor argument about "u think teh universe did a real from nothing" to ascribe more beliefs to others that they haven't said themselves, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

[Fajita Jim]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

Cut the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and Prove it how 0 = 1 and then come and say I actually rely on science and not faith

I assume you mean the 'something from nothing' quote? Two things.

1. Where did God come from?

2. Something comes from nothing all the time: it's called Quantum Flux.

[King Narwhal]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Fajita Jim:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

Cut the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and Prove it how 0 = 1 and then come and say I actually rely on science and not faith

I assume you mean the 'something from nothing' quote? Two things.

1. Where did God come from?

2. Something comes from nothing all the time: it's called Quantum Flux.

This is where you'll get the "but god be eternal/timeless", the classic special pleading fallacy.

[Yo]

Opprinnelig skrevet av King Narwhal:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

With all your essay writing you still believe in 0 = 1 which make you as much Miracle believer than a Random Bible Believer

Cut the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and Prove it how 0 = 1 and then come and say I actually rely on science and not faith

Nope, don't believe 0=1, but nice job telling people what they believe.

I'm betting this is the part where you tote some poor argument about "u think teh universe did a real from nothing" to ascribe more beliefs to others that they haven't said themselves.

Again you come up with load of blah blah and has nothing to do with real point that you should be addressing.

Do you believe in God = No

Fine

Are you disbeliever = Yes

Ok you are as much as faithful like us. Cause it's needs to Greatest Miracle believer to believe we all came into existence from nothing and co incidence which has the odds of 1 in a trillion

I don't mind you being Faithful to your Miracle but I get severe cringe when you come up and claim I am science Guy.

Better say I don't care and

[King Narwhal]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

Opprinnelig skrevet av King Narwhal:

Nope, don't believe 0=1, but nice job telling people what they believe.

I'm betting this is the part where you tote some poor argument about "u think teh universe did a real from nothing" to ascribe more beliefs to others that they haven't said themselves.

Again you come up with load of blah blah and has nothing to do with real point that you should be addressing.

Do you believe in God = No

Fine

Are you disbeliever = Yes

Ok you are as much as faithful like us. Cause it's needs to Greatest Miracle believer to believe we all came into existence from nothing and co incidence which has the odds of 1 in a trillion

I don't mind you being Faithful to your Miracle but I get severe cringe when you come up and claim I am science Guy.

Better say I don't care and

Nope.

Not believing in god =/= knowing for certain god doesn't exist.
Called it on the "u think universe came from nothing", which I don't believe and never said.
I have no faith nor miracles, my answer to how universe did a real is the honest "I don't know".

Again, nice job ascribing beliefs to people. Strawman go brrr.

[Yo]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Fajita Jim:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Siuuuuuuuuuuu:

Cut the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and Prove it how 0 = 1 and then come and say I actually rely on science and not faith

I assume you mean the 'something from nothing' quote? Two things.

1. Where did God come from?

2. Something comes from nothing all the time: it's called Quantum Flux.

1- He Always existed ( I never had problem with faith, God required you to have faith )

2- No something doesn't come from nothing. Show me any Materials, Living things that came form nothing...you cant.

0 = 0. Not 1. You are Murdering mathematics and Physics when you claim physical matters comes form poof....Make you a Miracle believer like me. Admit it or not

[Fajita Jim]

Opprinnelig skrevet av King Narwhal:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Fajita Jim:

I assume you mean the 'something from nothing' quote? Two things.

1. Where did God come from?

2. Something comes from nothing all the time: it's called Quantum Flux.

This is where you'll get the "but god be eternal/timeless", the classic special pleading fallacy.

Or people not understand Quantum Fields. Then you gotta either educate them from 0 on QP or just throw your hands up, and some people refuse to be taught so it's usually a waste of time to try.

But when you gots the time, you can at least make them feel this small >.< know what I mean?