Re: 101 reasons why Atheists are WRONG !!!
The extreme double standard of the atheist. Unusual claims, such as that the universe initiated its own genesis for no reason, require unusual evidence. The evidence offered is not actual skeletons, dna-samples, apes or monkeys but words about skeletons, dna-samples, apes, monkeys and so on. I know that if pressed the atheist poster will refer us to books or papers published in self referential journals and sure, in those books we'll find detailed records of research with peer reviewed results: that's how science works. Voiceofman might even post me a book to read but is very unlikely to post me an actual gorilla.
And here's the double standard. When I refer to The Bible in support of what Voiceofman probably regards as the unusual claim that things do not spontaneously generate themselves, the collection of books in which evidence from numerous cultures and societies is recorded is inadmissible.
Which recent trials at CERN? What greater understanding? Who at CERN says their work will lead us to an answer to how the big bang came to be?
Here again we see the double standard of the atheist agenda. Disregarding all facts at variance with their bizarre notion, even well established historical facts, the evolutionist claims that all "evidence" supports Darwin's book and that no evidence HOWEVER WELL DOCUMENTED will ever affirm the Power of God in actual lives of men and women who accept His Promises and testify to His Greatness each day He sends.
Sorry atheist - it's not me you're disagreeing with. It's God. Having excluded all documentary evidence (except your own material and books done by "authorities" who happen to agree with you) there's no way of your knowing what He actually says of course, so here's an example:
II Timothy 3:16 and God goes on to explain why that is so II Timothy 3:17. When you disagree with that you are not disagreeing with me, you're disagreeing with God.
How do we know that? Because history records His testimony Psalm 19:7 and it accords with the witness of others. All these sources agree although they were written down over many centuries. If you don't want to accept these sources how can you claim to have examined all the evidence?
II Peter 1:21 explains how we know these testimonies are valid. Despite your attack on our beliefs and the broader attack by satan over 6016 years God is still current, His Inerrant Word so totally up to date, our future assured and your everlasting torment guaranteed. Yes, I think I can see why you'd reject facts like that. But to substitute quicksand..? That can only be the vapid fruit of denial.
Originally posted by Voiceofman
View Post
Originally posted by Brother_Percy
View Post
The extreme double standard of the atheist. Unusual claims, such as that the universe initiated its own genesis for no reason, require unusual evidence. The evidence offered is not actual skeletons, dna-samples, apes or monkeys but words about skeletons, dna-samples, apes, monkeys and so on. I know that if pressed the atheist poster will refer us to books or papers published in self referential journals and sure, in those books we'll find detailed records of research with peer reviewed results: that's how science works. Voiceofman might even post me a book to read but is very unlikely to post me an actual gorilla.
And here's the double standard. When I refer to The Bible in support of what Voiceofman probably regards as the unusual claim that things do not spontaneously generate themselves, the collection of books in which evidence from numerous cultures and societies is recorded is inadmissible.
3) Of course most atheists wouldn't be able to answer that question as it is not possible with the current knowledge of the universe, but recent trials in CERN gave us the Higgs particle, which hopefully will lead us to a greater understanding of the universe and an answer to how the big bang came to be.
Reason No. 3 - The 'Big Bang'
Atheists believe there was a 'Big Bang'
Atheists believe there was a 'Big Bang'
Which recent trials at CERN? What greater understanding? Who at CERN says their work will lead us to an answer to how the big bang came to be?
4) [has already been answered]
5) I wouldn't say that I would have to lie to make my point. Just because a man is religious, does not mean it is ok to be ignorant of certain facts.
5) I wouldn't say that I would have to lie to make my point. Just because a man is religious, does not mean it is ok to be ignorant of certain facts.
Here again we see the double standard of the atheist agenda. Disregarding all facts at variance with their bizarre notion, even well established historical facts, the evolutionist claims that all "evidence" supports Darwin's book and that no evidence HOWEVER WELL DOCUMENTED will ever affirm the Power of God in actual lives of men and women who accept His Promises and testify to His Greatness each day He sends.
6) So because they don't believe in the same thing as you, they are unquestionably wrong? etc.
Sorry atheist - it's not me you're disagreeing with. It's God. Having excluded all documentary evidence (except your own material and books done by "authorities" who happen to agree with you) there's no way of your knowing what He actually says of course, so here's an example:
II Timothy 3:16 and God goes on to explain why that is so II Timothy 3:17. When you disagree with that you are not disagreeing with me, you're disagreeing with God.
How do we know that? Because history records His testimony Psalm 19:7 and it accords with the witness of others. All these sources agree although they were written down over many centuries. If you don't want to accept these sources how can you claim to have examined all the evidence?
II Peter 1:21 explains how we know these testimonies are valid. Despite your attack on our beliefs and the broader attack by satan over 6016 years God is still current, His Inerrant Word so totally up to date, our future assured and your everlasting torment guaranteed. Yes, I think I can see why you'd reject facts like that. But to substitute quicksand..? That can only be the vapid fruit of denial.
Comment