Ask a Christian Theologian

[GothmogII]

I post on here because i enjoy it, because i find beliefs in non-proven things amusing, and because i am bitter towards christianity becuase it tricked me for 12 years.

God decides? WHAT? Says who? I didn't elect him that's for sure.
Ppl in bad circumstances look to god because they have nothing else. THey are desperate. They are doing stupid things. God isn't gonna help you.

Well God isn't a president, and this isn't a democracy. You may not choose to have to breathe air in order to live, but that's the way it is. You may not choose that God is God, but that's the way it is.

I think it's interesting that someone like yourself claims that belief in 'non-proven things' (You might try saying 'unproven things' instead) is amusing. From previous posts, you have shown yourself to be a Darwinist and 'devout' evolutionist.

Now, before you and other readers crack your fingers in anticipation of my about to say 'evolution isn't proven'...I'm not going to to say that, so put your venom away.

What I will say, however, is that the origin of life is unproven. The theory of evolution doesn't address this directly, of course, as anyone who knows much of it will tell you. So you'll have to look to the theories of 'Abiogenesis', which is completely unproven with little to no empirical evidence to back it up. In fact, NO evidence to back it up.

Now I'm not going to debate on whether Abiogenesis its true or not, at least not on this thread. That's not the point of my bringing it up. My point is that you more then likely believe it to be true (That we came from what is called the 'primordial ooze'), but with it being completely unproven! Amusing, indeed!

Also, in light of your 'God isn't going to help you' remark, I know firsthand how wrong that is. I've seen, and know people who have seen, that God is indeed at work in our lives. Miraculous things that you may either call fluke or coincidence, but that I've seen far too often to be either of those things.

Finally, how did Christianity trick you?

Primordial ooze? Isn't that a bit simplistic? I won't claim to be an expert...but as I understood it, everything began as micro-organisms, bacterium, these changed, gained attributes, lost attributes, and became ever more complex, eventually into the multicellular organisms we have today. In fact, that's what we as multicellular organisms still technically are, that is, a whole made of many many cells.

 

[Baby Tea]

Primordial ooze? Isn't that a bit simplistic? I won't claim to be an expert...but as I understood it, everything began as micro-organisms, bacterium, these changed, gained attributes, lost attributes, and became ever more complex, eventually into the multicellular organisms we have today. In fact, that's what we as multicellular organisms still technically are, that is, a whole made of many many cells.

Yes, but it was the forming of those cells. The creation of living cells (Micro-organisms) from non-living chemicals and substances. That is what is considered the 'primordial ooze', not the cells themselves. That you are stating is the theory of macro-evolution. That we all evolved from cells. What I am stating is the theory of Abiogenesis, which is the creation of those cells in the first place.

 

[TheDean]

I post on here because i enjoy it, because i find beliefs in non-proven things amusing, and because i am bitter towards christianity becuase it tricked me for 12 years.

God decides? WHAT? Says who? I didn't elect him that's for sure.
Ppl in bad circumstances look to god because they have nothing else. THey are desperate. They are doing stupid things. God isn't gonna help you.

Well God isn't a president, and this isn't a democracy. You may not choose to have to breathe air in order to live, but that's the way it is. You may not choose that God is God, but that's the way it is.

I think it's interesting that someone like yourself claims that belief in 'non-proven things' (You might try saying 'unproven things' instead) is amusing. From previous posts, you have shown yourself to be a Darwinist and 'devout' evolutionist.

Now, before you and other readers crack your fingers in anticipation of my about to say 'evolution isn't proven'...I'm not going to to say that, so put your venom away.

What I will say, however, is that the origin of life is unproven. The theory of evolution doesn't address this directly, of course, as anyone who knows much of it will tell you. So you'll have to look to the theories of 'Abiogenesis', which is completely unproven with little to no empirical evidence to back it up. In fact, NO evidence to back it up.

Now I'm not going to debate on whether Abiogenesis its true or not, at least not on this thread. That's not the point of my bringing it up. My point is that you more then likely believe it to be true (That we came from what is called the 'primordial ooze'), but with it being completely unproven! Amusing, indeed!

Also, in light of your 'God isn't going to help you' remark, I know firsthand how wrong that is. I've seen, and know people who have seen, that God is indeed at work in our lives. Miraculous things that you may either call fluke or coincidence, but that I've seen far too often to be either of those things.

Finally, how did Christianity trick you?

I know god isn't a president. But just because he created us doesn't mean he can tell us what to do.
Moving on, I prefer non-proven to unproven. Dunno why.
Hmm, so maybe i'm a darwinist. I don't label myself that however, because i have absolutely no loyalty to Darwin whatsoever. In fact, evolutionists have no loyalty to any particular scientist.

Also, Christianity tricked me because it had me believing a fantasy story for 12 years. And for that i will never forgive it.

I don't know much about Abiogenesis or primordial ooze, but nevertheless, what i shall say is this: sometimes, when there is no proven theory, you have to believe in that which seems most probable; and god with his super-powers and resurecting son just doens't cut it i'm afraid.

 

[Baby Tea]

I know god isn't a president. But just because he created us doesn't mean he can tell us what to do.
Moving on, I prefer non-proven to unproven. Dunno why.
Hmm, so maybe i'm a darwinist. I don't label myself that however, because i have absolutely no loyalty to Darwin whatsoever. In fact, evolutionists have no loyalty to any perticular scientist.

Yeah it does. He's God. It's like a parent and a young child. Parents tell their child what to do, because they know better. Likewise, with God.

Secondly, though rather offhandedly, I suggested using 'unproven' rather then 'non-proven' because it's grammatically correct. That isn't a slam, just friendly advice.

Finally, fine. Don't call it Darwinism, or yourself a Darwinist. Say you're an evolutionist, which simply means that you believe in the theory of evolution.

That doesn't change my point.

My point is that you believe in the unproven theory of Abiogenesis, that life was created from non-living chemicals and substances, and yet you find it 'amusing' that Christians believe in the 'unproven' idea of God. As previously stated: Amusing indeed.

And you didn't answer my other question: How did Christianity trick you?

EDIT: You posted now, so I'll go ahead and respond to that one.

Also, Christianity tricked me because it had me believing a fantasy story for 12 years. And for that i will never forgive it.

So they didn't actually hurt you, they just had you believing in a God who loves you, that one should 'love your neighbor', that you should forgive those who wrong you, that the greatest of gifts is love...and you'll never forgive them for it.

C'mon Dean, that's pretty weak. You got this bitter over that? You're not a dumb kid, Dean, so why not pick up and move on?

I don't know much about Abiogenesis or primordial ooze, but nevertheless, what i shall say is this: sometimes, when there is no proven theory, you have to believe in that which seems most probable; and god with his super-powers and resurecting son just doens't cut it i'm afraid.

Probable?
Life forming from nothing: That's not probable. It's impossible. Some scientists have even theorized about aliens 'seeding' earth in order for life to be here.
From an non-theistic point of view: That's not science, that's science fiction.

 

[anNIALLator]

- Do you take the Noah's Ark story literally?

- Where did the story of Job come from? Did God write it and zap a book down to earth or was he talking to Moses or some other chap from the bible, and say something like, "Heh, funny story, this one time me and the devil were having our monthly game of tennis/golf/poker/laugh at the puny mortals, and he was all like, 'Job only worships you cos he has it good' so i was like, 'Oh yeah? wanna bet?' and he was like 'Yeah you're on!' so I killed Job's children, knocked down his house and gave him smallpox, and he didn't tell me to piss off, so i said 'Ha ha satan! you owe me a fiver!' and the angels were like, 'Oh no he di'nt!'"

- I've heard two phrases that I think are both in the Bible, "turn the other cheek" and "An eye for an eye", what's the dealie, yo?

- Why do you insist that God's personality never changes even though he usually resolves things in the old testament by getting medieval on people's asses, but in the new testament he'd say something about peace and love and everyone would live happily ever after?

- One last one, has God already got everything planned out? has he sent his final draft to the publishers? Has he made the dough, and put it in the oven? Has he typed in the commands to his cosmic computer the hit Enter? Has he set up his dominoes, and is watching in delight as they tumble over? Or was it more like releasing a game, then realeasing patches and updates in the form of floods and his son? I can't think of any more analogies. Sorry if this sounded a bit irritating, but i've asked this question before and only got a vague answer.

 

[anNIALLator]

In response to Baby Tea and The Dean's discussion above, about Abiogenesis, yes, it may sound improbable but it is much less amusing than the SHAZAM! religious ideas and all the drama that followed it. And if life forming from nothing is impossible, how is a big invisible man with magical powers appearing out of nothing not?

 

[Lukeje]

Probable?
Life forming from nothing: That's not probable. It's impossible. Some scientists have even theorized about aliens 'seeding' earth in order for life to be here.
From an non-theistic point of view: That's not science, that's science fiction.

I don't know of any science that claims that life came from 'nothing'. Life came from the decrease in entropy afforded by that big giant source of energy in the sky.

 

[Baby Tea]

First, I love how your name has 'NIAL' in caps to that people aren't confused by your name. Hilarious.

Second: I know I'm not the OP, but I like to put my hand in everyone's theological cookie jar. It's a passion of mine. So you can take my answers or leave 'em and wait for Max to answer (He's a smart dude). I'll leave that to you.

Now, onto the questions:

- Do you take the Noah's Ark story literally?

- where did the story of Job come from? Did God write it and zap a book down to earth or was he talking to Moses or some other chap from the bible, and say something like, "Heh, funny story, this one time me and the devil were having our monthly game of tennis/golf/poker/laugh at the puny mortals, and he was all like, 'Job only worships you cos he has it good' so i was like, 'Oh yeah? wanna bet?' and he was like 'Yeah you're on!' so I killed Job's children, knocked down his house and gave him smallpox, and he didn't tell me to piss off, so i said 'Ha ha satan! you owe me a fiver!' and the angels were like, 'Oh no he di'nt!'"

I'm going to answer both of these questions at once: I find a lot of times when people as questions like this, they do it not to actually learn anything about the story or worldview, but to gauge how 'crazy' the person they are talking to is, since they've already made up their minds that it's impossible and silly. Now, I'm not accusing you of that, I'm merely pointing out what I've found in my experience with talking to people about my faith.

They then usually counter with 'Really?' or 'How can you believe that?' or 'Don't you think it's silly?' or whatever. To which, I usually counter with: I believe it, some don't. But, whatever they believe, it isn't soteriological. Meaning: if you don't believe that Noah really did sail in a big boat with two of every animal, you aren't damned for it.

Christ said the greatest commandment was to love the Lord with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind. And the second greatest was to love your neighbor as yourself. It wasn't that you believe Noah built a big boat or that Job really did go through those trials. Now don't get me wrong, there are staples of the Christian faith that all Christians (Should) believe. But there are many things that people get 'hung up on' that have no bearing on salvation what so ever, so why get so hot and bothered over it?

- I've heard two phrases that I think are both in the Bible, "turn the other cheek" and "An eye for an eye", what's the dealie, yo?

The 'eye for an eye' quote comes from the Old Testament. The 'turn the other cheek' quote comes from the NEW Testament.

This is where a lot of non-Christians, atheists, and anti-theists seem to have a lot of problems with the Bible. They see these two verses as contradicting when they are not. The Old Testament is in the Bible as a history of God's people, and to show the Messianic prophecies that Jesus fulfilled. The New Testament is based on the teachings of Christ and the early church. Christians live according to the NEW testament, not the old testament. That's why I don't have a moat around my house, why I don't throw my wife out of the house when she's on her period, and why Christian's don't live by 'eye for an eye', but rather 'turn the other cheek'.

- Why do you insist that God's personality never changes even though he usually resolves things in the old testament by getting medieval on people's asses, but in the new testament he'd say something about peace and love and everyone would live happily ever after?

No, God's personality doesn't change. In the Old Testament, God punished people who broke His laws. Christ took the brunt of God's wrath when He died on the cross as a perfect sacrifice for mankind. God still will punish those who break His laws (Unchanged from the Old Testament), although now you could almost say we're in a 'window of opportunity' where Christ is allowing for anyone who is willing to come to him for forgiveness of sins, and be saved, therefore, from God's judgment.

- One last one, has God already got everything planned out? has he sent his final draft to the publishers? Has he made the dough, and put it in the oven? Has he typed in the commands to his cosmic computer the hit Enter? Has he set up his dominoes, and is watching in delight as they tumble over? Or was it more like releasing a game, then realeasing patches and updates in the form of floods and his son?

----
Welcome to theological debate 101!
In this corner we have the Armenians, who claim that God does NOT have everything planned out and it's up to man to find Him for salvation!

And in this corner we have the Calvinists, who say God has EVERYTHING planned out, including those who will, and will not, be saved! And that man does not choose salvation, but that God chooses the man!
----

This is a debate that goes on all over within Christian circles. I personally, am somewhere in the middle. I certainly believe God has a plan, though I don't think it's as 'micro-managing' as some people would believe (We aren't puppets). God has given us free will, and we are free to make the choices before us...He just knows what we will choose. Again: it's our choice, He just knows the outcome.

I hope this helped a bit with some of your questions!

 

[TheDean]

I know god isn't a president. But just because he created us doesn't mean he can tell us what to do.
Moving on, I prefer non-proven to unproven. Dunno why.
Hmm, so maybe i'm a darwinist. I don't label myself that however, because i have absolutely no loyalty to Darwin whatsoever. In fact, evolutionists have no loyalty to any perticular scientist.

Yeah it does. He's God. It's like a parent and a young child. Parents tell their child what to do, because they know better. Likewise, with God.

Secondly, though rather offhandedly, I suggested using 'unproven' rather then 'non-proven' because it's grammatically correct. That isn't a slam, just friendly advice.

Finally, fine. Don't call it Darwinism, or yourself a Darwinist. Say you're an evolutionist, which simply means that you believe in the theory of evolution.

That doesn't change my point.

My point is that you believe in the unproven theory of Abiogenesis, that life was created from non-living chemicals and substances, and yet you find it 'amusing' that Christians believe in the 'unproven' idea of God. As previously stated: Amusing indeed.

And you didn't answer my other question: How did Christianity trick you?

EDIT: You posted now, so I'll go ahead and respond to that one.

Also, Christianity tricked me because it had me believing a fantasy story for 12 years. And for that i will never forgive it.

So they didn't actually hurt you, they just had you believing in a God who loves you, that one should 'love your neighbor', that you should forgive those who wrong you, that the greatest of gifts is love...and you'll never forgive them for it.

C'mon Dean, that's pretty weak. You got this bitter over that? You're not a dumb kid, Dean, so why not pick up and move on?

I don't know much about Abiogenesis or primordial ooze, but nevertheless, what i shall say is this: sometimes, when there is no proven theory, you have to believe in that which seems most probable; and god with his super-powers and resurecting son just doens't cut it i'm afraid.

Probable?
Life forming from nothing: That's not probable. It's impossible. Some scientists have even theorized about aliens 'seeding' earth in order for life to be here.
From an non-theistic point of view: That's not science, that's science fiction.

Ok wait. Life forming from nothing? Isn't that exactly what god supposedly did?
And life formed from chemicals, that came together by a fluke over millions of years. I think this is more likely than some guy floating up in the clouds making life in a mere 7 days.
And those things you said: i didn't need fantasy-based lies to know that. Morals and religion are different things. People only need religion because 1) they fear death, and/or 2) they need a purpose. Well, neither of those apply to me. so i'm fine.
Religion sucked me in->that's why i hate it. wouldn't you hate someone if they tricked you into believing that spiderman was real and that he wentaround saving ppl from bad guys for 12 years of your life?

Unproven instead of non-proven? OK. fine.

 

[Baby Tea]

In response to Baby Tea and The Dean's discussion above, about Abiogenesis, yes, it may sound improbable but it is much less amusing than the SHAZAM! religious ideas and all the drama that followed it. And if life forming from nothing is impossible, how is a big invisible man with magical powers appearing out of nothing not?

Well you're placing God within the confines of physical life, where He doesn't belong. God isn't made up of cells and micro organisms. How and when was God created? I don't know.

But again, Abiogenesis isn't improbable. It's impossible, scientifically.

I don't know of any science that claims that life came from 'nothing'. Life came from the decrease in entropy afforded by that big giant source of energy in the sky.

They claim that the right chemicals came together at the right time and was struck my lighting in order to create life. Of course, the more they look at cells and the more they learn about how INCREDIBLY complex they are, the more and more impossible Abiogenesis becomes.

Seeing how crazy complex cells are, how enormously impossible it would be for physical life to be created from nothing, and seeing amazing the balance of the earth and it's ecosystems, it's seems far more probable to me that it was designed by God.

 

[Baby Tea]

Ok wait. Life forming from nothing? Isn't that exactly what god supposedly did?
And life formed from chemicals, that came together by a fluke over millions of years. I think this is more likely than some guy floating up in the clouds making life in a mere 7 days.

Life formed by a fluke? Not only does that require just as much faith as me believing in God, but it's also scientifically unproven and impossible. Even under CONTROLLED environments, with 'all the right chemicals' they can't do it. You know why? Because it's impossible.

And those things you said: i didn't need fantasy-based lies to know that. Morals and religion are different things. People only need religion because 1) they fear death, and/or 2) they need a purpose. Well, neither of those apply to me. so i'm fine.
Religion sucked me in->that's why i hate it. wouldn't you hate someone if they tricked you into believing that spiderman was real and that he wentaround saving ppl from bad guys for 12 years of your life?

In a non-theistic world, Dean, there is no basis for morality. HOLD ON! I can hear the 'quote and reply' button being mashed already. Read what I wrote carefully: There is no BASIS for morality. Ask your good friend Richard Dawkins: We're all just dancing to our DNA. There is no good or evil. Even Kai Nielson, a quite famous Canadian atheist, said that within a naturalist worldview, there is no basis for morality.

I'm not saying people who aren't religious can't be 'moral'. You're right in that Morality and Religion are two different things. But where I have a reason, a purpose, a cause to be moral and seek morality, the naturalist does not. After all, what is morality anyways when good and evil are so skewed and subjective that the words don't even have a grand meaning anymore? What's evil to you could be good to someone else and who are you to tell them any different?

You said you didn't need 'fantasy' to know that, but where is the room for forgiveness in the worldview of a naturalist? Why forgive? Why help your neighbor?

"Once you remove the idea of God from men, you immediately implant the desires of the devil."

That might seem harsh, but even the idea of 'there is no God' would be a 'desire of the devil'.

 

[Xhumed]

What is your opinion on the bits taken out of the Bible by the Council of Nicaea? Along similar lines, your opinion on The Gospel of Judas.
Just out of curiosity, where did you get your degree?

 

[TheDean]

Ok wait. Life forming from nothing? Isn't that exactly what god supposedly did?
And life formed from chemicals, that came together by a fluke over millions of years. I think this is more likely than some guy floating up in the clouds making life in a mere 7 days.

Life formed by a fluke? Not only does that require just as much faith as me believing in God, but it's also scientifically unproven and impossible. Even under CONTROLLED environments, with 'all the right chemicals' they can't do it. You know why? Because it's impossible.

And those things you said: i didn't need fantasy-based lies to know that. Morals and religion are different things. People only need religion because 1) they fear death, and/or 2) they need a purpose. Well, neither of those apply to me. so i'm fine.
Religion sucked me in->that's why i hate it. wouldn't you hate someone if they tricked you into believing that spiderman was real and that he wentaround saving ppl from bad guys for 12 years of your life?

In a non-theistic world, Dean, there is no basis for morality. HOLD ON! I can hear the 'quote and reply' button being mashed already. Read what I wrote carefully: There is no BASIS for morality. Ask your good friend Richard Dawkins: We're all just dancing to our DNA. There is no good or evil. Even Kai Nielson, a quite famous Canadian atheist, said that within a naturalist worldview, there is no basis for morality.

I'm not saying people who aren't religious can't be 'moral'. You're right in that Morality and Religion are two different things. But where I have a reason, a purpose, a cause to be moral and seek morality, the naturalist does not. After all, what is morality anyways when good and evil are so skewed and subjective that the words don't even have a grand meaning anymore? What's evil to you could be good to someone else and who are you to tell them any different?

You said you didn't need 'fantasy' to know that, but where is the room for forgiveness in the worldview of a naturalist? Why forgive? Why help your neighbor?

"Once you remove the idea of God from men, you immediately implant the desires of the devil."

That might seem harsh, but even the idea of 'there is no God' would be a 'desire of the devil'.

I'm sorry, but m,ost of that is simply not true.
I have no belief in god, and i have no desire for Satan either--since in order to believe in the christian devil i would have to put some value in the bible in the first place.
why have morlas? It's easy. Yes, you are right that good and evil are subjective. In fact, they don't exist at all. We each decide what is good/bad. However, religion does not factor in at all. Why help tohers? Because it is something we feel good about, and because we want to help our feinds. There is no basis for morality. Well, we make our own morals. It's stems from not wanting to see the people we care about get hurt .

 

[Lukeje]

I don't know of any science that claims that life came from 'nothing'. Life came from the decrease in entropy afforded by that big giant source of energy in the sky.

They claim that the right chemicals came together at the right time and was struck my lighting in order to create life. Of course, the more they look at cells and the more they learn about how INCREDIBLY complex they are, the more and more impossible Abiogenesis becomes.

Seeing how crazy complex cells are, how enormously impossible it would be for physical life to be created from nothing, and seeing amazing the balance of the earth and it's ecosystems, it's seems far more probable to me that it was designed by God.

You suggest that the idea of chemicals being struck by lightning leading to life is impossible. However, putting an electrical current through the chemicals that were suggested to have been present on Earth at the time leads to complex molecules (i.e. proteins) like those found in life. However, you are correct, current scientific research has debunked these theories. It now appears much more likely that life began near geothermal vents underneath the sea.

And I would suggest that anyone who thinks that life could not have appeared by chance should try and visualise just how long scientists theorise it has been since the beginning of life. It is such a long time that it is actually impossible to visualise in terms of our limited life-spans. Add in the fact that the creation of life is not entirely random and you have a perfectly plausible theory.

 

[Baby Tea]

I'm sorry, but m,ost of that is simply not true.
I have no belief in god, and i have no desire for Satan either--since in order to believe in the christian devil i would have to put some value in the bible in the first place. why have morlas? It's easy. Yes, you are right that good and evil are subjective. In fact, they don't exist at all. We each decide what is good/bad. However, religion does not factor in at all. Why help others? Because it is something we feel good about, and because we want to help our feinds. There is no basis for morality. Well, we make our own morals. It's stems from not wanting to see the people we care about get hurt .

What about those we DON'T care about? Take some random company, we'll call them 'Fake Co.' Fake Co. is run by a guy who has outsourced all of his labor to a 3rd world country where he is underpaying all his workers who work in terrible conditions. On top of that, because he outsourced, many people in his home country lost their job with his company and now can't support their families.

Is that immoral? Why? There is no right or wrong. He just got himself and the stock holders a ton more money!

What about the man who lost his job because the CEO of Fake co. outsourced it to some poor country? What if he started stealing cars or electronics or whatever in order to survive. Is that ok? What if he stole YOUR car or computer? It it ok then too? Remember, there is no right or wrong, so you really have no authority to tell him otherwise.

What I meant, when I said "Once you remove the idea of God from men, you immediately implant the desires of the devil", isn't that you believe or fall under the 'spell' (If you will) of the devil, but rather: The man will encapsulate what the 'devil' signifies.

 

[SecretTacoNinja]

I have a question:

Why do you (or if not you, a big majority of religious people) think that this God person loves you? And why do you love Him or Her? (I am from the school that thinks if there is a God it is most likely a woman, since men don't have a certain organ called a uterus).

I recently met a guy on The Ocarina Network forums, who was very religious and had a 'relationship' with his God like a child has with it's mother, it bemused me to no end and disturbed me a little bit, I can't understand this at all.

 

[James Raynor]

I don't know much about Abiogenesis or primordial ooze, but nevertheless, what i shall say is this: sometimes, when there is no proven theory, you have to believe in that which seems most probable; and god with his super-powers and resurecting son just doens't cut it i'm afraid.

Humans would prefer a conspiracy theory to no theory at all, that is human nature.

 

[Baby Tea]

And I would suggest that anyone who thinks that life could not have appeared by chance should try and visualise just how long scientists theorise it has been since the beginning of life. It is such a long time that it is actually impossible to visualise in terms of our limited life-spans. Add in the fact that the creation of life is not entirely random and you have a perfectly plausible theory.

Oh please. They've been adding time and adding time to this theory over and over because they more they learn, the more they know that there is no way it could happen in 'this about of time'.
'How about THIS amount of time?'
'Wait, this is way more complex then we thought'
'Oh, ok how about THIS about of time?'
'Nope, still to short.'
'Ok...we'll keep adding'

That was an OBVIOUS summation of what I'm sure is decades of research, but the point remains: They just keep adding time, switching up the chemicals, place where it happened, etc.

And how was the creation of life not random? That doesn't sound like any atheist or naturalist I know.

 

[Lukeje]

I have a question:

Why do you (or if not you, a big majority of religious people) think that this God person loves you? And why do you love Him or Her? (I am from the school that thinks if there is a God it is most likely a woman, since men don't have a certain organ called a uterus).

Nor did Adam. And God created him in His own image. Unless... unless the Bible is really a big conspiracy against women... and Eve was the first human... and, and maybe it was Adam that ate of the apple and then tempted Eve! [/sarcasm]

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

And I would suggest that anyone who thinks that life could not have appeared by chance should try and visualise just how long scientists theorise it has been since the beginning of life. It is such a long time that it is actually impossible to visualise in terms of our limited life-spans. Add in the fact that the creation of life is not entirely random and you have a perfectly plausible theory.

Oh please. They've been adding time and adding time to this theory over and over because they more they learn, the more they know that there is no way it could happen in 'this about of time'.
'How about THIS amount of time?'
'Wait, this is way more complex then we thought'
'Oh, ok how about THIS about of time?'
'Nope, still to short.'
'Ok...we'll keep adding'

That was an OBVIOUS summation of what I'm sure is decades of research, but the point remains: They just keep adding time, switching up the chemicals, place where it happened, etc.

And how was the creation of life not random? That doesn't sound like any atheist or naturalist I know.

Well they have stopped adding time... and there never really was specific place where it was claimed life started. and I can't tell which side you're arguing for,