LTMD.CORE says:..."It doesn't answer ANYTHING, it just gives you something to say that even you don't understand. It's not an answer, its a fake reason for you not to give an answer.
***** Where do you come up with this stuff?? Which is it commando-17? Either I "do not UNDERSTAND the answer", or "I never GAVE any answer"? You accused me of BOTH in the very SAME sentence. You must be confused then. I guess that's part of being 17. Hormones can do that. But make up your mind, it can't be BOTH ways here.
I meen exactly what I said: You don't even understand your ad hoc reason for not giving an answer. I never said you gave an answer.
A reason for not giving an answer doesn't count as an answer.
****** I counted FOUR spelling mistakes in this one reply from you. But because "I am so ignorant", as you say, I am probably wrong then. So forget I said that.
You still keep misspelling the word "argument". Just though you'd like to know that, but I already told you before.
So what? If you can understand what I say then we're fine. Who cares if I added another E to argument? Besides, there were only three mistakes in what you quoted.
But since this is the second (and third) time you've used my spelling as a counter arguement, I'm highlighting all your mistakes in what I quote. Besides, coming from somebody who repeatedly spelled my name: LTMD.CORE this is pretty funny.
If the entire UNIVERSE with precision and power and order and amazingly functional, purposeful, intricate etc. can just *HAPPEN* to fall into place, all on its own, without ANY Intelligent Designer needed;
All over the universe stars, planets and entire galaxies slam into each other, implode, collapse into black holes and other such orderly things, doesn't sound too precise or intelligent. Functional/purposeful... what's the purpose of the universe? You are trying your best to make it sound less likely than it is. But I l already explained that stars, do in fact, form on their own, without divine intervention. Planets form in much the same way. All the galaxies are moving away from a central point, this is just further evidence that the universe is not designed, and that the big bang is very likely.
The reason why no religious leader can "create new life forms" as you say, is the VERY SAME REASON why science cannot do that. And by now, you should have those reasons permanently ETCHED in your mind our little young atheistic lad.
Of course I know why they can't: Lack of funding, and because they've only had a few years to work on it.... but neither of those apply to religion.
But that aint to well though out my friend.
You need an apostrophe in your "ain't", you did that twice.
You know, I keep waiting for one of those many explosions on the earth nowadays to result in a new New York City skyline, complete with electricty plumbing, door knobs, elevators, streets, signs, lights and plenty of yellow cabs. But for some reason, it has not quite happened yet. What you think LTMDLORE? Pretty soon perhaps? I'd like to go see this place and maybe even live there for the summer and take pics for my mom and aunty Mildred. When will an explosion result in a new city for us?
This shows how little you know about the big bang theory. The big bang resulted in nothing but a great big cloud of matter flying out from a central point. I could stop right there and nullify this argument, but I'll continue: Gravity caused the denser regions of this matter to come towards each other, forming... not cars, not buildings, not hollowed out cubes with doors. But instead: balls of matter, some balls are stars, some planets and some asteriods. Trust me, if gravity had the tendency to form hollowed out cubes or other such formations, then the universe would be a very different place. But that's not how gravity works.
Interesting fact though: All of those many explosions on the earth prove my point... what do these explosions do? They make coulds of debris, and what does the debris do? It doesn't stay in a disorganised could form. It is pulled by gravity towards the largest object nearby, namely the earth. So these explosions don't form cities, instead they do EXACTLY what the big bang theory says they should.
The many PROPHECIES written that had exact fulfillments adds even more weight to possibility of the bible being more than just some good book. The bible's statement that the earth is "ROUND", and that it "HANGS UPON NOTHING", though men at that time believed the earth was FLAT, again adds value to the claim that it is from a higher source than MERE MEN. Are all of these just mere COINCIDENCES?
What prophecies had exact fulfillments? Name one.
It would be very easy to determine that the earth is circular, even for them. Just look at the shadow on the moon. It doesn't take a rocket scientist. Plus they were really into astrology back then, that's one of the ways that Aristotle proved the earth was round, because the constellations were very different when you travel, indicating that your angle changed, not just your posistion, otherwise the constellations would be the same. Another way to know that the earth was round was this: 
Because the earth is curved, the bottom of a ship past the horizon is not visible. It could have been a no brainer to the educated people of the time: Pythagoras for example made that determination around 550 BC.
That's one of the earliest recorded examples, but it's irrelevant in my opinion, because the bible says CIRCLE not sphere, so it's wide open to interpretation. And of course it's always interpreted by theists as a scientific revelation, even though it's the same book that can't get the length of a day right, the smallest seed correct, or even the value of pi.
AND the bible says that the earth has corners and is held up by pillars, but obviously theists interpret THOSE as symbolic.
[the bible] is from a much higher source than humans, who cannot predict the future with any kind of certainty.
Coming from the same guy who used the idea that we can predict where the solar system will be 1000 years from now as an argument for the bible. You now use the idea that we can't predict the future with any certainty as an argument for the bible.
The calendar we use today is based on the very year he was born. Just a coincidence?
SO? The days of the week are named after pagan gods like Saturn for Saturday and Mani for Monday... but that doesn't meen they existed. Besides the Gregorian calender that we use, wasn't even created until 1582 by a pope... hardly an eyewitness.
The scriptures contain numerous accounts of MIRACLES where people were brought back to life, sick and dying were healed, people were miraculously fed whether from food falling out of the sky or a few fishes feeding thousands, olive oil and bread jars that never ran out and other examples. Sea's were parted, were walked on and calmed down upon commands. You do not hear stories like this today, with hundreds of eye-witnesses to collaborate.
... the only thing historical evidence that Jesus ever existed IS the gospels, if he really did all that stuff then wouldn't more than four people have written about it? Besides, the gospels are conflicting, and were probably not written by eyewitnesses either.
Give me some NON-BIBLICAL proof that those miracles uccured.
If the sun stood still for a day, (Or more accurately the earth stopped spinning), then shouldn't there be records of that ALL OVER THE WORLD?
Take the ten plagues for example: All of the egyptian animals died (and then were killed again later in at least two other plagues. Not sure how that happened.) all of their crops died, all of their fish died, all of their firstborns died, and they were left with no food, less children, no slaves, no army and no leader. Yet there is no record of any of that outside of the bible.... THE EGYPTIANS SHOULD HAVE FADED INTO NOTHING. But according to history, nothing happened, they came out unscathed.
information contained is also very practical for those that wish to believe it and apply it. The Golden Rule for example.
Like an eye-for-eye, or the correct way to treat your slaves. The best way to handle rapists... namely: If she was married, he should die. But if she was single, then she has to marry him.
Acctually the Golden Rule was not original to Jesus... There were a LOT of versions before the one Jesus said. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity#History And IMO Jesus' version is one of the worst.
Jesus sermon on the mount in Matthew chapters 5-7 is still considered by many to be the greatest speech ever given. Priceless gems for many.
You may find this interesting. http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Sermon_on_the_Mount
"Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? "
First of all, birds eat bugs. Plus god doesn't feed them, they work their butts off all day scavanging for food.
"Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: "
Brilliant, let's all act like a life form that doesn't even think... plus they're not clothed by god, they're naked. They normally freeze to death during the winter, unless it snows on them.
So since god didn't equip us with photosynthesis, and since our internal body temperatures have to remain above 72 degrees F we better not 'consider the lilies'.
I'm not at all impressed by the sermon on the mount. It's full of dangerous, stupid, and bad advice.
So you now want to try to compare these "stalagmites", which are simply formed by dripping water uniting with stalacite, over time, to the formation of the UNIVERSE ITSELF, to the formation of the EARTH, MOON AND SUN, and to the formation of things like the HUMAN BRAIN? Where do you get this stuff? Why am I even dealing with this at all?
I didn't... I never said that they were anywhere near as complex as the sun or anything. I didn't complare them to the formation of the universe either. I simply said that complexity doesn't require a designer. But I did explain the formation of the Sun when I expained how stars form. (The sun is just a normal star you know... just checking.)
But since you just said that the sun is complex: I'm sure you'll get the point that science has a perfectly acceptable natural explaination for it's formation that's simple, proven and doesn't require a fairy guy either.
But read my lips here: THEY HAVE NO FUNCTION AND NO PURPOSE WHATSOEVER. They do look nice though.
I never said they had a funtion or a purpose. In fact I never even vaugely implied it.
The stalagmite is the result, just as the snowflake, ice-cycles, crystals are the result, of an "Intelligent Designer", that created the earth with FEATURES that allow these things to be formed. He also created the weather systems, water cycles, photo synthesis on and on we could go.
Uh huh... I gotta agree with AA on this one, the fact that the earth has features that allow tsunamis, earthquakes and volcanoes argues for everything BUT intelligent design.
LtCmd.Lore
![[Two views of abiogenesis]](http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/views.gif)
Because the earth is curved, the bottom of a ship past the horizon is not visible. It could have been a no brainer to the educated people of the time: Pythagoras for example made that determination around 550 BC. 