After seven years of study I have come to the conclusion God is real

Not sure which one, but I have come to the conclusion that atheism is completely ridiculous

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >I don’t understand a thing therefore god

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous
      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

        moron

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >It's possible bro trust me, just give me more time
          No, sorry, that's not how it works. Give it as many billions of years you want, still will never happen.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You think science can proves why the sun rises and sets? It’s clearly the sun god chasing the moon goddess across the sky in his chariot and an eclipse is when he catches and rapes her.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            cope

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      That's religion in a nutshell. People would really rather not bother learning anything at all and instead go "big number scary i dont know this so its scary and i need daddy here i need a sky daddy". It's pathetic. But I think this is bait anyway.

  2. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    God is real, but this is a stupid argument. Sexual reproduction didn't begin with fully developed reproductive organs. It evolved first in single celled organism and wouldn't be as big of a leap.

  3. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Not sure which one
    Conver to [my religion].

  4. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    i'm agnostic because idk if there is a god but i'm closer to atheism after thinking about the nature of procreation. It's very biological and comes from biological needs. If God really exists then he should had make procreation something way more sacred and more intelectually challenging

  5. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    a quick skim through a Wikipedia page and you’ll see that it’s not as ridiculous as this book is making it. It’s not as if there were once ducks without gender and all of a sudden one of them had a penis and the other had a vegana. Sexual reproduction started in very simple life forms and grew more complex from there.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Obviously it's not how humans or ducks do it now. But you would still need asexual reproducing organisms to develop a way to sexually reproduce (for no reason really, they can't just decide to evolve), and you would need some way for the male's DNA to get to the female, also for the female to lay an egg or something similar.
      Give it as much time as you want, it's never going to happen

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >(for no reason really, they can't just decide to evolve)
        The reason is natural selection.
        asexual reproduction results in less genetic diversity in offspring. mixing your genes with another organism results in greater genetic diversity, which is an advantage.

        There are bacteria that reproduce asexually, but at the same time have behavior that is somewhat similar to sexual reproduction, where they send out copies of their genetic code to their neighbors, which then effects the offspring.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >The reason is natural selection.
          Natural selection selects, it doesn't evolve.
          >which is an advantage.
          But natural selection isn't some intelligent being. An asexual organism doesn't understand what you just said, considering sexual reproduction wouldn't exist yet.
          And again you would have to have many many many generations for sexual reproduction to evolve, and it's useless until then

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Natural selection selects, it doesn't evolve.
            This is the most mind-numbing sentence I've ever read.

            >But natural selection isn't some intelligent being
            Yes? You're arguing with a strawman.
            Random mutations have a random chance of producing a useful, neutral, or poor change in offspring. Over time, offspring that happened to have the useful changes will outnumber and replace most of the neutral/poor mutation offspring.

            This isn't a conscious or directed process.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >This is the most mind-numbing sentence I've ever read.
            That's literally true though. Natural selection doesn't cause any mutation
            Like using the peppered moth experiment as proof of evolution is moronic. it's just a population change/shift

            >producing a useful,
            Not really
            >neutral, or poor change
            This is what happens 99.9% of the time

            >This isn't a conscious or directed process.
            Which is why sexual reproduction will never happen. It would take many generations for sexual reproduction to be beneficial, so there is no reason to pass it on for thousands of generations

  6. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Words are like magic...
    They really form the basis of your reality.
    There are words of rationality that are stitched together by those who believe only in what they can see.
    What happens when they can't believe what they are seeing?

  7. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >let’s say that somehow, by chance, a cell really formed in a primeval ocean
    Let’s say that somehow, by chance, you had a giant kettle full of 1.37 billion km3 of water. And let’s say, by chance, you somehow put this on the stove and set the timer for 3 billion years. Do you really believe that, somehow, by some miracle, any of that water would boil? We just don’t know.

  8. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >I spent seven years reading exclusively young earth creationist writings before coming to the conclusion that god exists
    Are you moronic by any chance?

  9. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Theology is off-topic.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *