Why is it the aspect of a God is the only thing that makes sense?

Question

look at the earth and universe.
Now just look at the earth how did everything start?
Now look at whats on the earth how is it we have everything we need to live on this world, how is it that the atmosphere used to be perfect until pollution created by man screwed it up. nonbeliever, the world and universe seems way to good to be just created with randomness with randomness their is flaws, their are no flaws in the earth only man made flaws

if you read the bible it states their were a hell of alot more animals those days then now, their is no way toknow for sure that we evolved from apes because why are their still apes? how do we know what we see as our prehistoric ancesters are sum intelligent type of ape, but yet again the bible makes it sound like after adam and eve man started all over stupid like they was cave men. now dinosaurs the bible states that their used to be animals as so big to swallow the sea its over exhaurated of course

also the evoultionist darwininlater years apolgized and said he found his theory to be dead wrong
also albert einstein ssaid himself the way the universe is their is something intelligent out their that put it together

and you talk of ways and stuff who or what created whatever so youd have those ways?

about dinosaurs of how old they were is undetermined the numbers change every year,

Answer 1

oh boy.

sorry dude. we already know how the worlds started and how lots of things came to be. i strongly reccomend you read up on it. especially considering youve got the mentality of a medieval peasant.

you strongly need an education.

cee christians, this is why homeschooling is WRONG.

Answer 2

There are many scientific misconceptions in your statements. Humans evolved from a common ancestor not from monkeys. Dinosaurs and humans did not exist at the same time. Dinosaurs went extinct millions of years before humans came to be. I could go on. There are naturalistic explanation for the wonderful things we have in nature that do not require a supernatural cause. The natural explanations also account for the great problems better than theology; like disease, natural disasters, animals killing in painful and horrible ways, cataclysmic changes in climate, etc.. The theist has to say it is sin or Satan. To me the natural explanations make more sense. It is fine with me that you choose a faith based outlook but understand those that don't have very rational reason for not doing so.

The idea that Darwin recanted his beliefs is likely a hoax. I'll post a link. It really wouldn't matter though since the work by scientists since then has developed and built on his theories extensively. Even if he had some sort of fear based conversion it would not tend to necessarily falsify his observations. Facts and evidence continue to strengthen the facts of evolution and build on the theory. Albert Einstein did not believe in a personal God like you are talking about. You have a lot of misinformation.

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly."
-Albert Einstein

Answer 3

"God" doesn't make any more sense than the thousands of other gods that humans have invented and worshiped throughout history. The existence of the universe ONLY shows that IT exists, NOT how it got here. We have everything we need because we are resourceful and make do with what we have - or invent other means and ways.

FYI, Evolution does NOT state that humans evolved from apes. You should take a science course at a public school so you won't make such ignorant statements - not to mention, a spelling course.

Answer 4

Oh, for the love of pants.

WHERE does the Bible say there were more animals than now?? Seriously, where do you get these notions? Everything you just said is simply a roundabout way of saying, "It's all too complicated for me to understand and I don't want to bother educating myself, therefore Goddidit." When are people going to outgrow these childish notions of a big sky daddy making everything happen? THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT SUCH A NOTION.

There are no flaws in the Earth?? Oh, really? Then what do you call earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, droughts, mudslides, ice ages, El Niño, volcanic explosions, and meteorite strikes? What do you call birth defects, injuries, gangrenous wounds, premature babies, animals killing each other for food, bacterial and viral infections, broken bones, miscarriages, congenital diseases, and a whole host of other imperfections that I could name? Life IS very random. It is purely random that one particular sperm out of millions fertilized one particular ovum out of hundreds to form the person that is you. It is purely random that you just happened to be born in a mostly Christian culture; had you been born and raised in India, you would not believe in BibleGod, but in Vishnu, Krishna, and Shiva, the Hindu holy trinity. And of course, your post is nothing but randomness.

Answer 5

It is easy to assume that the world was created for man. It takes more critical and careful thinking to seriously entertain the possibility--well-supported by science--that man, rather, adapted specifically to suit the world.

Consider, for example, our atmosphere. In fact, the Earth's atmosphere was not originally, as you say, "good" for humans. Indeed, if humans had been created on the Earth as its atmosphere originally was, we'd have perished immediately. This is because the original atmosphere for the Earth lacked much oxygen; oxygen was first produced in significant quantities by the photosynthetic processes of cyanobacteria, beginning in the Proterozoic period (when the quantity of oxygen in the atmosphere rose from 1% to 10%, as testified to by oxidized iron ore from the period). Aerobic life forms like humans could never have lived in the Earth as it was first "created"; rather than life as it currently exists being created in order to suit the exactly specific pre-existing attributes of the Earth, early life changed the environment in many dramatic ways, which made it possible for later life to exist at all. So some of the aspects of the modern world that make human life possible were not originally there, but rather were produced by the influence of early life; and those aspects of the modern world that were originally there were adapted to by that early life; there is no evidence that they were specially created specifically for the sake of that life.

There is no such thing as a "perfect" atmosphere. There are just different atmospheres, suited to different types of life. The atmosphere has changed dramatically over the course of the Earth's history, and if humans are currently changing that atmosphere again (much like cyanobacteria did billions of years ago), it doesn't mean that it's becoming "less perfect", merely that it's changing in a way that makes current lifeforms less well-suited to the survival of many current species (including humans). If current trends continue, we can probably expect a second revolutionary mass extinction of current life, akin to the mass extinction of many aerobic life forms due to oxygen poisoning when photosynthesis first brought a significant amount of oxygen to the atmosphere. Unless the change is truly unprecedented, however, I doubt that life will be unable to adapt to these ; it just won't be the life that exists today. Our motivation for protecting the atmosphere (which, obviously, is not currently strong enough) is an interest in preventing such a mass extinction, including our own extinction; it is not a desire to make the atmosphere "perfect", which is as absurd as making a rock "perfect".

Some other misconceptions:

* "their is no way toknow for sure that we evolved from apes because why are their still apes" - Most evolution is cladogenetic, not anagenetic. Cladogenesis is the splitting of a population into two different evolutionary "paths": one population, for example, might become chimpanzees, while the other becomes humans. This means that humans and chimpanzees have a common ancestor; however, it doesn't mean that humans evolved from chimpanzees, and it doesn't mean that chimpanzees need to be extinct for humans to be around (and it wouldn't mean that even if humans had evolved from chimpanzees, rather than just being closely-related to them). Your error is in assuming that anagenesis (an entire population evolving down only one "path") is the only way evolution works; it's not. There is no reason to expect that an ancestral species must be extinct just because an offshoot descendent species has developed from a portion of the ancestral species' population.

"also the evoultionist darwininlater years apolgized and said he found his theory to be dead wrong" - This is both irrelevant and false. Even if Darwin had recanted, it wouldn't make evolution wrong; science is not based on appeals to authorities, but rather on evidence. And regardless, it is a historical fact that Darwin never recanted; the idea that he did is a debunked myth called the "Lady Hope story".

"also albert einstein ssaid himself the way the universe is their is something intelligent out their that put it together" - Again, evolution is not based on appeals to authority, so this is irrelevant. And again, this is false: Einstein never supported intelligent design. Einstein, indeed, said on several occasions that he did not believe in any conventional notion of a God. The quotation you seem to be reaching for is the one where he said that "God does not play dice", but this was meant to be a metaphor ("God" was used by him to mean "nature"), and was a response to quantum physics, not to evolutionary biology. Evolution is not a chance process (because it operates under natural selection, a nonrandom filtering process), and Einstein never doubted or disputed it. And, again, it wouldn't matter if he had; science isn't based on appeals to authority, and Einstein wasn't even a biologist.

"about dinosaurs of how old they were is undetermined the numbers change every year," - This is not correct at all. Dinosaurs lived for about 160 million years, from 230 mya to 65 mya. This has been known for many decades. And even if it wasn't, it's indisputable that humans weren't around back then, because humans (and almost all other mammals) have never been found in fossil spans remotely close to dinosaur ones.

Answer 6

You should change your name to "Lone Loony"

I just read some of the answers you got here. You are in the presence of some very intelligent people. You should be proud of what your question generated. Well done. But I still think you're a loony.

Answer 7

Just because you have no knowledge or understanding of something (or knowledge of sentence structure or spelling for that matter) doesn't mean your religion is the only logical answer. Your arguments are specious based on a misapprehension of astrophysics and nature itself.

Answer 8

How nice for you to live in fantasy land. There are libraries full of books that you seem to be completely ignorant of, but hey, why start getting an education now when you seem to have just done fine without one so far.

Answer 9

God is just an excuse for adults to have an invisible friend and not be admitted to the loony bin.

Answer 10

Mmm, but how do you know it's Yahweh? What if Poseidon is churning them seas, huh?