- Joined
- Oct 16, 2024
- Messages
- 1,354
- Reaction score
- 491
Only film I've been to the cinema to watch twiceI can kinda take Quentin Tarantino or leave him ~ ~ But certainly parts of Pulp Fiction are Very Good !
Only film I've been to the cinema to watch twiceI can kinda take Quentin Tarantino or leave him ~ ~ But certainly parts of Pulp Fiction are Very Good !
God might be a Dog ~ ~ Some people might be in for a Surprise !@feudalist
Animals probably have souls as well, but they have a different kind of soul, probably.
Is there an animal heaven?
We're just atoms contemplating atomsGod might be a Dog ~ ~ Some people might be in for a Surprise !
@feudalist
Animals probably have souls as well, but they have a different kind of soul, probably.
Is there an animal heaven?
R u talking about Doggy?Humans have animal along with vegetable souls. We also though have a rational soul but it is a human spirit that makes us truly human.
Is it a seperate heaven? Why would God have us live amongst the other animals on Earth but segregate us in heaven? #speciestThere may well be.
I never dodge a genuine question but you're scarcely known to ask oneNow, how about you try answering a few questions for a change.
Since you're so confident in your own insight, perhaps you can enlighten me: What is your explanation for the origin of the universe?
Where, in your view, did the cosmos—everything from the stars to the laws of physics—come from?
The Big Bang theory is NOT a theory of how the universe came into existence, so of course it doesn’t answer your question. It is a theory of how the universe has evolved from the earliest point that our best physical theories make sense (which is pretty darn early, to be fair). It is similar to how the theory of evolution is not a theory of how life came into existence, but rather a theory of how life has evolved since it came into existence.And, building on that, where did the first living cell arise from?
Given your certainty, surely you have an answer that doesn't rely on faith in undemonstrated, purely natural processes. Please, do share your insights.
lol What a spastic Nobody knowsIn response to James’ post explaining that he has no answer to the origins of the universe or how the first living cell could have arisen….
You simply fill the gap with your God for origin of the universe (not to be confused with Big Bang cosmology) and deny evolution (not be confused with abiogenesis) wrapped in pseudoscientific ID nonsenseYour reply is as revealing as it is evasive. Nobody asked for a lecture on what the Big Bang is or the definition of evolution. These deflections are a hallmark of those unwilling to confront the real issue: the first cause. Evolutionists, much like you, are always eager to quickly sidestep the foundational questions—what brought the universe into existence, and how did life arise from non-life?
Instead, you lean on ignorance as if it were a virtue, suggesting that having no answer is somehow superior to considering the possibility of an intelligent Creator. But let’s be clear: the universe’s fine-tuning and life’s intricate complexity demand an explanation. If naturalistic frameworks fail to provide one—and by your own admission, they do — then what is left, but to acknowledge the reasonable conclusion of design? Your refusal to address the first cause only underscores the intellectual weakness of your position.
The underlying argument is clear: chance alone cannot account for the emergence of life’s building blocks. This points toward the necessity of a guiding intelligence or mechanism far beyond what naturalistic explanations can provide. It’s an elegant and strikingly powerful critique of the idea that life could emerge randomly from non-life.
Impossible because you say so, with your scary numbersWhile James tries to brush these kinds of impossible events off
Still peddling that lie I seeas 50/50 in terms of chance ("They either happened or didn't happen") reality offers a very different outlook.
The Big Bang theory does not explain how the Universe came into existence, evolution does not explain abiogenesis, there is no "severing", other than in your pinheadSecond, your attempt to sever Big Bang cosmology, abiogenesis, and evolution into unrelated silos betrays either a profound misunderstanding or deliberate obfuscation. These topics are inextricably linked in any coherent narrative of origins. If the universe began, then why? If life arose, then how? To say ‘we don’t know’ and then scoff at anyone who challenges the dogma of materialism is not skepticism—it’s cowardice.
Ha! The Universe is a pretty complicated thing (evolution is a piece of cake in comparison)If time does Not exist ~ ~ How long ago, was 4.6 billion years ago ? !
It's a pretty common thought / concept among physicists ( some physicists anyway ) i.e. That time does Not exist ? !Ha! The Universe is a pretty complicated thing (evolution is a piece of cake in comparison)
You'd have to tell me what you mean by time not existing though?
Well there does seem to be a past, present and future, with time travelling only in that direction, respectively. As per the second law of thermodynamicsIt's a pretty common thought / concept among physicists ( some physicists anyway ) i.e. That time does Not exist ? !
Does time exist in a book ~ In an old fashioned Film CD ? !
Can you prove that Time Exists ? !
If you can prove that time exists ~ ~ There is some physicists that would like to see that proof and how you came to that proof ? !