If the universe requires a creator then the creator should require a creator = religion is made-up

https://mashimo.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/bertrand-russells-inductivist-turkey/

Just because something has happened every single time in the past the same way does not mean it will happen the same way in the future. Thinking so is dangerous and signifies closing your mind off to the full range of possibilities.

I don't personally believe in God or supernatural phenomona such as ghosts but to completely deny the possibility blindly would be foolish. That would make me just as narrowminded as a fundamentalist Christian who can't fathom the non-existance of God. Do not close your mind to the full range of scientific possibility if you want to call yourself logical.

True and so could unicorns, flying spaghetti monsters, celestial tea cups, etc. etc.   The possibilities are endless, so why stop with god. It could have been Zeus, Mithra, Dionysus, Horus, Medusa, etc. etc.

Why ONLY believe its due to god?   Why not believe all the other possibilities that you have no evidence of?

If you need no evidence to form your beliefs, then there is no reason to stop believing once you reach a god.  You should believe al the other things you don't have evidence of

You still won't accept the fact that Christians are not less capable of basic understanding than other people. I think I'll just let it go at this stage because you aren't willing to discard your prejudices against Christians.

That's hilarious because that's not what Im claiming.  So you are refuting something that I didn't claim.............in order to make yourself seem right.

Again, who is being narrowminded here? I wonder why you are avoiding the FACTS that show its you?  LMAO!

Try reading my answers again because I already explained this and you didn't understand.

Is that because you dont WANT to understand or simply CANT?

You see, maybe you could understand, but just dont WANT to...........or maybe you are not able to understand due to lack of intelligence.

You see..........not being able to understand could go either way, but you are making it seem like Im saying it could go only 1 way.

 

Again, who is being narrowminded here?  Im wondering why you are avoiding the FACT that show its you? LMAO!

Censored said......This thread is loaded with insipid nonsense and children who think that denouncing religion makes them intelligent and all-knowing."

Nope, not even close!  If what you said were true.........then you must think that denouncing Bigfoot makes you intelligent and all-knowing.

I completely agree with you. I'm finished trying to make any more points in this thread.

Still ballsless I see, gonna be a long wait.

This is typical.........once you are shown where you are wrong and that its actually you who is narrowminded, you tuck your tail and run away.

This way you don't have to admit you were wrong and narrowminded. This way you don't have to learn anything new.

So just run away! LMAO!

Try to hold on to your ass there drpsholder, the thread is about the creator, not who is right or wrong about unrelated topics, such as evolution etc. I must have a look at where the wrongness is.

Ok I had a look, you are accusing the person of an error you are constantly making yourself and laughing your ass off while doing so. That's quite a neat trick to play on yourself.

And you failed to provide evidence of what you are referring to!  Do you guys base ANY of your beliefs on evidence?  WOW!

  .

(#1636) I completely agree with you. I'm finished trying to make any more points in this thread.

TY for your input SB103....it was enlightening to read your posts. Hopefully, for my sake, you'll keep commenting. And don't get dis<3'nd by the few. There's a good probability we're talking w/ drunkards.

[drpsholder] "So even the things we cant explain........don't have a supernatural cause. They have a natural cause."

(#1612) What's your proof for that?

He doesn't have any. He's just babbling. Hilarious !....he talks like he's wallowing in drunkedness.

....and drpsholder ?....maybe you should go sleep off your overindulgence hon.

As much as I believe in a Creator and think evolution is absolute baloney I'll still respect the human being that believes it. Although I may not share the same beliefs it should never stop me still loving that person. Just a thought I thought I'd throw in. 

(Intelligent Design) A. Intelligent design does not require the designer to be the God of the Bible, and is supported by scientific evidence. Intelligent design may be held by persons of various non-biblical faiths, or even no faith. Q. Isn’t Intelligent Design untestable, and therefore not scientific? A. Intelligent Design is no less testable than Darwinian Evolution since neither may be observed or analyzed in a laboratory experiment. However evidence of ID can be observed. If Darwinian Evolution must be considered science, so must Intelligent Design. See ID and the Scientific Method. Q. Isn’t Intelligent Design the same as Creationism? A. No. Creationism is the belief that the Genesis account in the Bible explains the creation of the Universe by God whereas ID does not attempt to identify whether the designer is a personal being or not. Q. No real scientists support Intelligent Design, right? A. That is wrong; highly credible scientists support intelligent design. Examples include Michael Behe, William A. Dembski, Stephen C. Meyer, Dean Kenyon, Douglas Axe, Guillermo Gonzalez, Jonathan Wells, and many others. Q. Hasn’t Science proved Darwinism? A. No. There is much scientific evidence that challenges neo-Darwinian evolution, ranging from irreducible complexity to the fossil record to DNA. Q. Science has proved Natural Selection. Therefore isn’t Intelligent Design false? A. No. While Natural Selection may occur, Natural Selection alone does not produce new species. Intelligent Design does not argue against Natural Selection. Q. Since Intelligent Design does not limit itself to methodological naturalism, doesn’t that mean it isn’t scientific? A. Methodological naturalism is a modern, superficially imposed limitation on observed phenomena, a limitation that inhibits scientists from exploring explanations that may be the best fit for the data. Intelligent Design is not hindered by this limitation. Thus, intelligent design is actually within the historical tradition of scientific research.

That ought to keep this place hopping in red faced fury for a few tangentially temperamental hours. Don't attack. Ad hominem is a no-no. Be calm.

I would have to disagree with you bgjettguitar. There is substantial scientific evidence that the God of the Bible is the one true God. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ke_C1xpo2g

True Biblical faith requires no proof...if proof is needed in order to believe then it is no longer faith...Jesus told Thomas " because you have seen you believe, blessed are they that have not seen and yet believe."...that being said, atomic rift is correct in that evidence abounds for God and the accuracy and legitimacy of the Bible