How's he going to answer to Odin when hes walking all over his arse

There is a perception that evolution produces specific results, such as humanity. This is clearly not that case. As you suggest, life will, and has, evolved to produce all kinds of species – this is a given. What is not clear is the product of any one species, just as there is no guarantee of any one individual resulting from the mating of their parents. In one respect we all defy the odds by being here, and in another we are the inevitable result of natural processes.

Just as predicting a specific result of a lottery draw are almost impossible for any one individual, on the whole it's almost certain somebody will win.

It's a common misunderstanding.

You see 64% of people ticked the Christian box in the last census (continuing a steady decline from the previous two at least) however the National Church Life Survey (NCLS) found less than 9% of Australians actually, you know, go to church (not including Christmas and Easter where ingrained childhood guilt gets the better of many people).

So I posit that approximately 55% of Australia is 'culturally Christian'. By this I mean, yeah they might have been raised Christian but these individual don't take part in anything explicitly Christian and are basically irreligious (as opposed to the 20% of Australians who explicitly ticked the box for non-religious in the same census).

Now your logic that God existed because of the probability of evolution? I don't know where to begin here…

I'm assuming you mean the probability that humans alone would have specifically evolved (as opposed to any other variety of highly developed life form). Then so what? It is incredibly unlikely person X would win the 1st division lottery but it isn't exactly unlikely that someone would win division 1 with enough people playing, shit it happens almost every week!

There are five or six other ways I can envisage you essentially getting things ass backwards from your statement but I can't be bothered going any further. If you feel up to it post your logic for god existing.

You and John might claim "it gradually dawned on him as he learned more about the Bible that slavery was wrong" which is common. However what this really means is "we decided to focus on these passages in the bible which pay lip service to treating others with more respect and not those passages which support slavery".

Why? By what authority? This the crux of the matter, moderate Christians, just like the abolitionists of Newton's time, are drawing from external non-biblical sources to inform their moral positions but pretending as if they aren't and pointing to a collection of books from 1500 to 2000 years ago as their source, where they disregard large chunks of it.

Why aren't more Christians advocating the execution of adulters, homosexuals, disobedient children, etc? Because their morality and ethical frameworks have built upon centuries of experience of these attitudes (and the advancement of knowledge through science and philosophy) and have taken the refinement of social norms as their own and credit the bible for what is explicitly contrary to the preachings of the bible.

Almost enough to make you think Christians don't read the bible!

http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/a_dump_on_ai…

I am going to go with all three for you sir.

Let me point it out for you to read over and HOPEFULLY read and take in. ATHEISM is NOT a FAITH and does NOT require the BELIEF in something. It is the position of those that do NOT accept the claims of the FAITHFUL and therefore REJECT FAITH and all its claims as NON-VERYFIABLE or lacking in EVIDENCE.

If you can't even remotely grasp the basic meaning of the words themselves, how do you expect anyone at all to take you seriously.

And as for name calling? Well if you didn't come across as a complete fucking tool with seems to be awefully clueless about every word that you utter, then perhaps you wouldn't be such an easy target. On the upside, if you stick around and read some of the articles as well as do a little research yourself, you might actually learn something and then, and here is the big THEN, you might become something more than just a pile of atoms that were unlucky enough to get stuck with each other to live out your current existence.

Then again, maybe this is the best you can do in life?

Fuck off troll. hmmmm explains a lot.

What does the origins of the universe have to do with the existence of gods? Seriously? Theists makes the claims that a magical sky wizard conjured the universe into being from nothing at all – to spite not seeing this happen, and lacking any evidence for this idea whatsoever. That is faith – belief without evidence.

Sceptics will say "I do not believe your claims unless you can provide evidence supporting them". Those that reject theistic claims are atheists. They demand evidence – the complete opposite of faith!

"You have no evidence that all the universe either came into being naturally or has always existed."

No I don't, but that does not mean I automatically accept any lunatic idea that comes along which seems to answer the question. EVERYTHING must be open to scrutiny.

Either of the options I have presented would not be accepted on faith, but demonstrated through rigorous experimentation and observation. They would have evidence to support them – NOT faith.

If the universe has a natural cause, then there is no room for a supernatural one (unless you push the supernatural to the cause of the cause, etc). If it actually turns out that something from nothing is actually natural (to spite going against all our intuitions), then where does god hide then?

I chanced upon this post purely by accident after trolling the creation.com. I like to occasionally visit their site to see what those monkies are up to.

Regarding Tas' response, I've actually had an online/email debate of sorts with him over the last month. It started after a tongue-in-cheek response to a CMI "article" on the South Australian Board of Education's decision not to allow creationism/Intelligent Design in classrooms.

Anyways, apparently a Bachelor of Science majoring in Earth Sciences is enough to call yourself a "scientist" in email signature blocks.

Anyways, great post, and now that I know about you guys I'll be visiting again soon!!

Take care,

James

Where'd they hold it? A fucking phone box?

cranks.

1.Ofcourse early geologists interpretted their observations under the presupposition they were witnessing evidence of biblical stories, they were not intellectually free to do otherwise until the evidence was too strong to the contrary. Nevermind the continued advancement of geological dating techniques…

2. Resisting God was futile, the force is weak with this one. More on this later…

3. I guess Creation Ministries only has 4 staff since everyone is an atheist from birth, until they're are told to think otherwise unless ofcourse Tas is referring to 4 individuals who have accepted poor evidence for the existence of a deity. However, that is fine, each individual is entitled to set their own burden of proof threshold. I suspect the motivation for being an atheist may be inextricably linked to the reason they became theists, not too many 'former atheists' have been able to turn around and flop out sound logic and rational for their new found beliefs. Furthermore, the whole 'former atheist' approach is really just a technique to borrow credibility in order to suggest you're not as credulous as an atheist is likely to assume.

4. I'd put the probability of God existence as entirely irrelevant. I take out insurance because I know events happen where my property is damaged (like Monday's storm in Perth which reshaped three quarters of the panels on my car in to something resembling the surface of a golf ball, meanwhile the car with the little fish sticker next to mine was even more damaged). I don't however speculate on the probability unicorns exist, I could but it is inconsequential, so is god. Unless ofcourse god is defined in such a way that his existence is consequential (like offering a spot in heaven) except this will only make his existence less likely because a greater degree of evidence will be required (evidence for heaven in addition to god himself) to accept the claim as true.

5. Oh, we atheists are just resisting God because we just want to have fun… I can hear Wierd Al Yankovic doing a cover of Cindy Lauper's "Girls just want to have fun" except it is about the hethen atheists. Oh, but alas! God didn't spoil your fun he made life wonderful. I think life can be pretty wonderful without God, what exactly is your God offering? An additional knife set for the low low price of $19.95 for any caller in the next 15 minutes? A knife set I could believe (almost) but heaven?

6. Seriously, John Newton? Even if I accept your assertion he was an atheist (unlikely given the scarcity of atheists in the 1700's but certainly a 'sinner' by his own admission), yes, he did experience a conversion which involved an transition towards evangelical christianity and later a preacher himself. The slave trader title seems to indicate an atheist has questionable morals by their very lack of faith. Now, being an atheist does not automatically make you a good person neither does being a theist. To illustrate this with John Newton himself. He was a slave ship captain prior to his conversion but he continued to be one afterwards as well. He only stopped captaining slave ships because of a stroke and continued to invest in the slave trade afterwards. Only until much later on did he renounce the trade and nevermind the overwhelming majority of people involved with the trade at all levels being Christian theists themselves.

However, Newton himself was familiar with these criticisms and decided that during his early years as a Christian and participating in the slavetrade he must not have been a "true Christian". I suggest Tas google's "No True Scotsman Fallacy" because last I checked the bible supports the existence of a slave trade, provides rules for managing your slaves (including punishment) and Jesus has no issue with slavery and no intention of changing the rules from the OT (although he broke some himself) he was just there to update them and close a few loopholes (which at no point included the issue of slavery). In reality, to view slavery as non-christian requires an incredibly selective approach to the bible and an equally arrogant attitude to your own morals because you are taking a position contrary to God's. None of which is relevant if you read the whole bible as a series of metaphors except why would you have an issue with science which contradicts the bible then?

We have seen it all before Tas, you said so yourself in the beginning "that is the way the early geologists looked at the earth", you're using outdated thinking and science in order to prop up outdated myths and social conventions.

Wow, if you can't use reason, use fear.

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for the link. Looks like it was posted by you, Askegg. I’m glad you found our article stimulating.

It was a good attendance at the Countering Atheism conference and the presentations were very well received. Last weekend I visited Melbourne and we did a number of presentations to different groups showing how the scientific evidence supported creation and the Bible. I also conducted a geology excursion to Phillip Island where we examined the evidence for geological catastrophe and showed how the rocks can be interpreted through a biblical perspective. Of course, that is the way the early geologists looked at the earth.

I can’t understand why someone like yourself would be so passionate about fighting God. I mean, if God doesn’t exist why not do what the atheist bus ads say: “Get on and enjoy your life.” “Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.”

I resisted the Lord until my early teens but when I came to know his grace, power and love I have been passionate about Him ever since. He has given me purpose for living and power to overcome my sinful nature, problems and difficulties. He has given me a deep peace within because of the hope that Jesus Christ gives, the fact that he is the Son of God who has saved me from my sin and promised an eternity in a wonderful place (John 14). No worries.

Here at Creation Ministries we have at least four former atheists who now speak and write for us. I will be praying for you Andrew that you will one day join that band, and I hope soon. Drive carefully in the meantime. I suspect that you have had a church upbringing because it seems that kids raised in churches are sometimes the most dedicated atheists.

What would you put as the probability that there is no God? Richard Dawkins said he could not be certain but he was pretty confident. He would not go as low as 49% but he would not go as high as 100%. Have you thought about how you will answer the Lord in the event that you find yourself standing before him? In real life we take out insurance policies to cover us against large losses, even when the probability is very small.

When I was young and before I came to know the love of God and commit myself to him I didn’t want God to spoil my fun. But I was worried about my eternal destiny in case anything happened to me, because I realized that youth was no guarantee of old age. I decided that I would plead that I was too young to know that I needed to repent of my sin and live for the Lord. That was what I thought would be my excuse. I was interested that Richard Dawkins has said he would plead ignorance too.

Such resistance to God is such a pity because God did not spoil my fun. Since I came to the Lord life has been wonderful.

That’s enough from me. Thanks for the link. May the Lord be gracious to you. As John Newton, the atheist slave trader said, “It was grace that taught me how to fear and grace my fears relieved.” My that become your experience, and soon.

All the best,

Tas Walker
Scientist, Editor, Speaker
Creation Ministries International (Australia)
Creation.com