You seem to be borrowing from the Fundamentalist Religion theory which is that "such-and-such can't be explained, therefore it was caused by God". This is an explanation I reject as much as your explanation that the Universe comes from a black hole because black holes "do strange things". Could you possibly be more vague, hmmm??? In any case, you are probably referring to the Hawkins theory of black holes, which has since been completely disproven. Black holes have been observed to eject the mass they collect as energy by shooting the energy out their north and south poles. Really not that strange, and even easy to understand. Black holes are very well understood in the past two years. Interesting observations. a) No, you can agregate non-living things to form a more complex, more CAPABLE, thing (chairs, cars, trains, automobiles, etc). b) But no one has been able to PROVE that a different biospehere exists outside of the biosphere that we call the Universe. c) I don't understand your point, can you explain it differently please? d) I agree that we can't breeak the laws of physics. Once more, I believe that the correct concept of God, by definition, includes all the laws of physics, which means that God cannot break the laws of physics (because that contradiction would disprove the existance of God).
I always know I've won the argument when the other person starts throwing insults around hehehe Anyway, I've made a strong case for the historial basis of Jesus. You've admitted that my case is strong because you've ignored it, and you've ignored it because you're afraid of it, aren't you? And, by ignoring my entire case, including the historial accuracy of these documents, as you just throw out your claim that Jesus was "an imaginary person"... Look, what makes your position any different than the person that claims that God exists just because they say so? Absolutely nothing, I say.
You have made no case and that is the reason your argument doesn't worth an answer. You refer to a story book, written by a follower of a cult to prove that their imaginary leader existed. It is a known fact that there is no historical proof of this guy existence and that is the reason every time a con man claims to have found a proof, all the Christians go crazy for it.
Oh you've seen the evidence. You've probably even read the book "Evidence of The Resurrection", by Josh McDowell, among others. In fact I read Josh's book and found that, like me, he started out trying to disprove The Resurrection; but after careful examinations of the facts, documented both in and outside of Scripture, one would have to be deaf, dumb, blind and crazy not to believe The Resurrection to be a Historical fact. Well, let's just up that number a tad, right after we subtract just one (Judas Iscariot); According to 1Corinthians 15, prior to HIS Ascension back into Heaven, "HE was seen by over five hundred brethren (men, not counting women and children) at once". And Paul even added the parenthetical statement, "of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep (Physically died)." The implication of that parenthetical statement, is for the unbelievers of Paul's time, was just another way of saying, "Look them up, and ask them!" But see, I know your implication; I dusted your behind on every hand, so now, as you struggle to pick your face up from the floor, you want to imply JESUS CHRIST was involved, homosexually, with HIS Disciples; but look at your implication, as well, about "San Francisco".
Now you're just throwing out unsupported statements. I don't see any single shred of argument in anything you wrote - just a hopeful demand that that your opinions be taken as fact. It's an assumption you would never grant to others, and it's hypocritical that you would demand the same from others. "doesn't worth an answer" - (if I ignore your sad grammar), isn't what you wrote the same as you are "unable to answer"? Because if you could deny what I wrote, you'd take great pleasure in debating it, wouldn't you? You can't, can you? "it's a known fact"? Isn't that other way of shoving your opinion in our faces and hoping to hurt someone with a nosebleed? You're simply promoting religious bigotry, disguised as your own ignorance. The proof is your lack of respect for the subject. Shame on you.
I have not seen/read anyone promoting "religious bigotry", you'll need to be a christian/muslim to do that. They are just stating the real facts and contradictions to your beliefs which they find it to be inaccurate, but you/them keep insisting that is true with no facts other than what someone(s) wrote in a bible scrolls that was stitch together and changes over and over and over until it sounded right to everyone. With: Science you can, see, feel, touch, smell. Religion? pretend, wish, hope for, dream.
Saying something is "inaccurate" isn't much of an argument. Would you believe me if I told you that what you wrote above is inaccurate? And name-calling isn't much better. So far, nobody has even the slimmest amount of courage to debate the historical accuracy of the four Gospels (vis-a-vis the Roman Empire). The argument - which I repeat - is that the first few books of the New Testament have been proven to be historially accurate. These books mention Jesus, therefore he is an historical figure. And just because someone took these historical documents and decided to also use them as religious documents doesn't make them any less historially accurate. So there.
I would first like to thank you for not being nehemiah. Even though you are a theist (or, as he would say, for what reason nobody knows, a 'th'), you can't possibly agree with him, right? Are you referring to the no hair theorem? And first, it is true that black holes do funny things. But I wholly agree that this was far too vague. I apologize. However, if a black hole has no properties but mass, charge, and angular momentum, entropy would disappear within. This was the 'strange thing' that I referred to. I hope I have been more clear this time. But chairs etc. have no information processing capacity. Only things that can process information become more powerful/complex etc. as they get larger. One trillion rocks are no more powerful or hard to understand than one rock, just bigger. yet 1 trillion computers are definitely more powerful, when connected, then they are alone. I meant biosphere in the strict sense, as in all of the life on earth. We as a species, or as a domain of life, do not really interact with too many places that aren't on earth. I'm saying that this god, enclosed within the aforementioned biosphere, wouldn't really be all that much more powerful than humanity as a species. But then isn't this god inherently limited, and thus not all powerful?
To know yet to think that one does not know is best; Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty. - Lao Tzu
I laughed at the OP of this thread. I'm not even atheist, but your arguments are insanely childish and petty. how old are you? No-one knows where the universe "came from", nor does anyone know where god "came from". Go do something else... damn kids.
When you voluntarily state, "I'm not even atheist", are you bragging or complaining? I mean, you could have told me that you believed my "arguments are insanely childish and petty", without proclaiming, for all the world to see, that you're "not even atheist", huh? But I know, although you really didn't have anything substantive to say, you just had to say something, right?
He's stating what everyone in this thread has been telling you. Not even theists agree with you. Your arguments are illogical and borderline crazy.
Yet you've been following them for sometime now, huh? Doesn't exactly make your opinions look non-delusional, now does it "troll"?
religious people dont have answer for anything they just say god did this god did that, atheist question things and science examines things to find out why things are the way they are instead of just saying oh because god wants it like that so you believe in god? here are some so called question any child could answer did woman really come from a mans ribs? why did the bible never say the earth is round why is there more proof of the big bang universe theory and is the earth really the center of the universe like most religions say? and if there is just 1 god why were they so many religions created and they kill each other in the name of the same god? so answer those or you just gonna say its gods will again?
he admit's it! Nehemiah is a troll there is nothing wrong with atheism. That's why there are a higher number and percentage of atheists every year.
I stated that I am not Atheist just to show that it's not because you're pious as to why you're a complete moron. I find it painfully ironic that you like to, rather flamboyantly, complain that everyone's posts which, in content, don't agree with your views, are empty or aren't "substantive". Take a look at your own posts mate, they resemble an autistic attempt at proclaiming something new, when in fact we've seen all these lame arguments before. Don't you have anything else better to do?