Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Why is atheistic evolution absurd? [Spirituality & Religion]

“It is absurd for the Evolutionist to complain that it is unthinkable for an admittedly unthinkable God to make everything out of nothing, and then pretend that it is more thinkable that nothing should turn itself into everything.”
― G.K. Chesterton
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Entwistle · 56-60, M
I don't know anyone who says nothing became something/everything.
Truth is that nothing is fixed or unchanging. Therefore nothing was created. There is no fixed thing that could have been created.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Entwistle I say nothing can come from something but I also say nothing is a misnomer for the fact that there's actually always something because of forces like gravity and other forces. Forces have always been there so surely it's not necessarily nothing. I'm not sure if the word nothing as what we mean it to be even exists.
Speedyman · 70-79, M
Your problem is as I say that both of you think that because you know the mechanism you can dispense with the agency. You are actually saying that nothing made something which is totally illogical but then atheism is totally illogical@Entwistle @SatanBurger
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Speedyman I never said there was not a god, you lot are just like the Islamic brotherhood so there's no use in arguing with you. Have a good day sweets.
Speedyman · 70-79, M
Not at all we are just trying to get some sense in here and your name-calling is not helpful. In fact people resort to name-calling when they have no logical argument@SatanBurger
Entwistle · 56-60, M
@SatanBurger I agree with you.
Entwistle · 56-60, M
@Speedyman I never said I knew the mechanism.
Speedyman · 70-79, M
So something came from nothing? @Entwistle
Entwistle · 56-60, M
@Speedyman No.I never said something came from nothing. You level that at atheists all the time.
Something comes from the previous moment. And that something goes on to be something else the following moment. Change is eternal.
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
@Entwistle So you believe in an eternal universe. How does that sit with evidence that the universe had a beginning? It doesn't. Science and buddhism don't get along very well. Buddhism is dead end.
@Entwistle
I don't know anyone who says nothing became something/everything.

That's a Christian creationist's view. I've heard several of them make that claim.
Speedyman · 70-79, M
How wrong you are @NortiusMaximus
@Speedyman
How wrong you are
That's not what the evidence shows. Anyone looking at that can see I'm right.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Speedyman You've always name called and went on the defense, it is true what they say, the entire universe is run on projection.
Speedyman · 70-79, M
So just why are you right? You are talking nonsense as usual @NortiusMaximus
Speedyman · 70-79, M
@SatanBurger no that is the atheist’s prerogative
Entwistle · 56-60, M
@hippyjoe1955 The big bang theory sits well with Buddhism. There was a state..even if we label it nothingness..that's just a label..before the big bang there was a previous moment..even if you judge time as being the observable change of states. Also maybe this universe came from the collapse of another universe.
Entwistle · 56-60, M
@hippyjoe1955 Buddhism is willing and always has been willing to change to accomodate science. Buddhism itself..like all things is constantly changing.
Speedyman · 70-79, M
God does not change to accommodate science because he is the creator of science@Entwistle
Entwistle · 56-60, M
@Speedyman Does God ever change his opinions?
Entwistle · 56-60, M
@Speedyman Science wasn't created.
Speedyman · 70-79, M
The laws of science was created by God. We are observing in science what God did in making things work the way they do. Science is not something which makes things work is our observations about how God makes things work@Entwistle
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
@Entwistle the Bible says God does change His mind.
Entwistle · 56-60, M
@hippyjoe1955 So he is fallible after all?
Entwistle · 56-60, M
@Speedyman What if the way some aspects of science work changes as we observe them?
Speedyman · 70-79, M
Such as?@Entwistle