i am a evangelical christian

[Adonai88]

hi all

my name is Angelo. I am swiss, and live over ten years in Brazil. I am a born again evangelical christian. I am open to talk with everyone, that would like to know better my faith. I think, there exist many pre - judgements, that might be clarified.
I am not disposed and interested to convert anybody here. This is a personal decision. I am just here to testify my faith to anyone, that would like to know more and understand it better. i do not want to disrespect your faith, philosophy and convictions, and expect the same from you. So who has pre judgements , and has no interest, to change it, i am asking at least to respect my faith.

So now to my first question : why are you a atheist, and don't believe, God exists, despite all the unquestional evidence, first of all the universe ? - since it had a beginning, it had also a beginner - God. From nothing, nothing derives

Angelo

[ctr]

Hi Angelo and welcome.

First off an apology.

We don't respect faith,you we'll respect but the dogma...No No.

Second another apology as I must ask a question to answer you point..

So now to my first question : why are you a atheist, and don't believe, God exists, despite all the unquestional evidence, first of all the universe ? - since it had a beginning, it had also a beginner - God. From nothing, nothing derives

From nothing, nothing derives Who or how was god derived? and who derived that and then that and so on back?

[Neil]

Hi Angelo. Welcome to the forum.

Let's get right down to it. Your argument that there is evidence for god is simply false. The fact that the universe exists is evidence only of the fact that the universe exists. Even if you accept that everything must have a cause, it is a huge jump from that to belief in a creator. As ctr said, what created the creator? And what created that which created the creator, and so on? God is the ultimate non-explanation. It is simply a word used to define the things we don't yet understand.

I much prefer to embrace my doubt, and admit that I can't possibly claim to know how the universe got here. That's what makes scientific endeavour worthwhile. Uncertainty is what leads you to look for answers. If we already know that "God did it", then there's no reason to look for further information. And it is only in spite of that attitude that humanity has progressed, and is still progressing.

[Adonai88]

Hi Angelo and welcome.

First off an apology.

We don't respect faith,you we'll respect but the dogma...No No.

Second another apology as I must ask a question to answer you point..

So now to my first question : why are you a atheist, and don't believe, God exists, despite all the unquestional evidence, first of all the universe ? - since it had a beginning, it had also a beginner - God. From nothing, nothing derives

From nothing, nothing derives Who or how was god derived? and who derived that and then that and so on back?

hi

this is a standard question, which i prefere to take the answer direct from :

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... d_god.html

How does God acting before time began get around the problem of God's creation? God exists outside of time. Since we live in a universe of cause and effect, we naturally assume that this is the only way in which any kind of existence can function. However, the premise is false. Without the dimension of time, there is no cause and effect, and all things that could exist in such a realm would have no need of being caused, but would have always existed. Therefore, God has no need of being created, but, in fact, created the time dimension of our universe specifically for a reason - so that cause and effect would exist for us. However, since God created time, cause and effect would never apply to His existence.

[Adonai88]

Hi Angelo. Welcome to the forum.

Let's get right down to it. Your argument that there is evidence for god is simply false. The fact that the universe exists is evidence only of the fact that the universe exists. Even if you accept that everything must have a cause, it is a huge jump from that to belief in a creator.

indeed, but we have to possibilities here. I hope we agree, that the Universe had a beginning.
This as premise, we have two possibilities :

1. " Nothing ", or a " undefined singularity " , was the origin of all created.

2. God was the origin.

Can everything be created from nothing ? Does it make sense to you ?

http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/90-208.htm

A well-known scientist, a very decorated scientist named Herbert Spencer died in 1903. In his scientific career he had become noted for one great discovery, it was a categorical contribution that he made. He discovered that all reality, all reality, all that exists in the universe can be contained in five categories...time, force, action, space and matter. Herbert Spencer said everything that exists, exists in one of those categories...time, force, action, space and matter. Nothing exists outside of those categories. That was a very astute discovery and didn't come until the nineteenth century.

Now think about that. Spencer even listed them in that order...time, force, action, space and matter. That is a logical sequence. And then with that in your mind, listen to Genesis 1:1. "In the beginning," that's time..."God," that's force, "created," that's action, "the heavens," that's space, "and the earth," that's matter. In the first verse of the Bible God said plainly what man didn't catalog until the nineteenth century. Everything that could be said about everything that exists is said in that first verse.

Now either you believe that or you don't. You either believe that that verse is accurate and God is the force or you believe that God is not the force that created everything. And then you're left with chance or randomness or coincidence.

[Neil]

You either believe that that verse is accurate and God is the force or you believe that God is not the force that created everything. And then you're left with chance or randomness or coincidence.

That's a god of the gaps argument. If it can't be explained by contemporary science (which is inevitably limited by the simple fact that it's contemporary) then it must have been god.

I believe that god is not the force. I don't necessarily believe that it's chance or randomness either (though I actually consider that more plausible than god). What I think is that we don't yet know how the universe got here, and that's good enough for me.

[Adonai88]

You either believe that that verse is accurate and God is the force or you believe that God is not the force that created everything. And then you're left with chance or randomness or coincidence.

That's a god of the gaps argument. If it can't be explained by contemporary science (which is inevitably limited by the simple fact that it's contemporary) then it must have been god.

I believe that god is not the force. I don't necessarily believe that it's chance or randomness either (though I actually consider that more plausible than god). What I think is that we don't yet know how the universe got here, and that's good enough for me.

Sorry to point out again to the homepage, i cited before. But it explains the standpoint that i agree with, in this regard, much better, than i could do with my own words.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... _gaps.html

Many atheists also use the gaps argument to argue against the existence of God.

Many skeptics believe that all arguments for the existence of God fall into the God of the gaps variety. According to this premise, one would expect these arguments to become fewer in number as scientists make more discoveries and learn more about our world. In reality, evidence continues to accumulate suggesting that the universe was designed by an intelligent agent.

Ten years ago, it was thought that neo-Darwinian evolution had eliminated all suggestion that living organisms were designed by an intelligent agent. However, recent studies in molecular biology and genetics have eliminated much of the supposed evidence that life exhibits numerous examples of poor design, including the presence of "junk DNA" (which does not exist) and pseudogenes. New genetic evidence suggests that mammalian DNA is optimally coded to reduce DNA size through overlapping transcripts. This encoding presents special problems to current Darwinian evolutionary models, since these mechanisms would be unable to produce these kinds of sequences through mutation and natural selection.

[Hemingway]

You either believe that that verse is accurate and God is the force or you believe that God is not the force that created everything. And then you're left with chance or randomness or coincidence.

That's a god of the gaps argument. If it can't be explained by contemporary science (which is inevitably limited by the simple fact that it's contemporary) then it must have been god.

I believe that god is not the force. I don't necessarily believe that it's chance or randomness either (though I actually consider that more plausible than god). What I think is that we don't yet know how the universe got here, and that's good enough for me.

Sorry to point out again to the homepage, i cited before. But it explains the standpoint that i agree with, in this regard, much better, than i could do with my own words.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... _gaps.html

Many atheists also use the gaps argument to argue against the existence of God.

Many skeptics believe that all arguments for the existence of God fall into the God of the gaps variety. According to this premise, one would expect these arguments to become fewer in number as scientists make more discoveries and learn more about our world. In reality, evidence continues to accumulate suggesting that the universe was designed by an intelligent agent.

Ten years ago, it was thought that neo-Darwinian evolution had eliminated all suggestion that living organisms were designed by an intelligent agent. However, recent studies in molecular biology and genetics have eliminated much of the supposed evidence that life exhibits numerous examples of poor design, including the presence of "junk DNA" (which does not exist) and pseudogenes. New genetic evidence suggests that mammalian DNA is optimally coded to reduce DNA size through overlapping transcripts. This encoding presents special problems to current Darwinian evolutionary models, since these mechanisms would be unable to produce these kinds of sequences through mutation and natural selection.

Hi Angelo.

It would appear you have been watching some creationist science videos/dvds..... BEWARE!

These people have an agenda and attempt to use snippets of science to back up their claims about the existence of god. I would recommend you watch some of AronRa0s videos on YouTube.

http://www.youtube.com/user/AronRa

He examines some of the "scientific" claims made by creationists and exposes them for what they are. These people have an agenda. Scientists are more often than not in pursuit of the truth no matter where the evidence leads them. This is not the case with creationist "scientists". They are attempting to use science to prove the existence of a supernatural being.

True science doesn’t comment on the supernatural as it is un-testable by its very nature.

Please also note that statements such as "In reality, evidence continues to accumulate suggesting that the universe was designed by an intelligent agent...." will be very hotly disputed on this site.

You MUST make reference to why you think this is the case (scientific peer reviewed papers, articles in scientific journal etc). I would contest your argument with great vigor as I am of the opinion that to think the universe was designed is almost unbelievable.

I cannot fathom how people actually think this, knowing what we now know through scientific research and discoveries made over the last 100 years or so.

Yet people still claim the universe was designed..... Why?

What in our human make up makes us want to ignore the pursuit of truth in favour of supernatural explanations?

Well.... let the debate begin sir.

Welcome to the site, now lets hear your case for the designer.

References to any scientific studies backing up your case will help your credibility.

[Hobbesian World View]

I am open to talk with everyone, that would like to know better my faith.

I dont think anyone here wants to know better your faith. We already know quite a lot. Most people in Ireland started out as baptised christians, and it was after learning more about it, they decided to dump it. The more one understands christianity, the more incredible it becomes.

i do not want to disrespect your faith, philosophy and convictions, and expect the same from you.

Unfortunately, most christians label any criticicism of their religion as "disrespect". Thats how christianity survived for so many centuries. By violently silencing any criticism and questioning, and labelling it "disrespectful" or "blasphemous". Well, that time is over and its time for you to hear the truth, even if you perceive it to be disrespectful.

[Hobbesian World View]

my name is Angelo. I am swiss, and live over ten years in Brazil. I am a born again evangelical christian.

Im sorry for you, that youve been tricked into working for ten years without little or no payment. Did the leaders of your church make money over those ten years? Ill bet they did. Most evangelical churches are using the most modern business and sales techniques to make a lot of money for the leaders. Most evangelical churches are just businesses.

I would suggest you have a read about Pastor Ted Haggard. His day job was leading one of the biggest churches in America, heading up the National Association of Evangelicals. But by night he lead a life of gay sex with male prostitutes and feeding his addiction to illegal drugs. He obviously didnt believe a word he said in his day job. He was lying all the time.