Is There Any Reason to Believe the Biblical Story of Creation?

You're still peddling bullshit. The "singular fate" about which you are prevaricating, or attempting to, is the fall of Babylon. Tediously, i will point out again that Babylon did not "fall," it faded away. How is that a singular fate? What about the cities of the plain? What about Jericho?

What is really at the heart of this line of bullshit is an attempt on your part to claim that the allegedly valid prophecies of the old testament constitute evidence for your god and the fairy stories of the bible. Not a single aspect of what the prophecies alleged would occur actually occurred. Your latest foray into snide rejoinders is just the sour grapes of having your bullsh*t exposed.

The trees, the grass, and the water were created by means of evolution by natural selection. This process causes successful self-replicating systems to spread and unsuccessful ones to die out. However the universe had turned out, any beings who were created under that set of conditions would remark on how it seemed designed for them. If you want to postulate a magical being, you'd better come up with some evidence more than "what else could it be?"

To have anyone accept a certain theory of the creation of the universe, you need some evidence and you have none.

I think it was written to answer your question. What sense does it make to tell me that you have another story that you trust that tells you the truth about Creation (how do you know ?) before you read this one.


People like you puzzle me. You always argue Sola Scriptura but then say you don't accept Sola Scriptura. You are too confused to have a discussion with.

Read it and come to your own conclusion.

The Bible never says that. In fact it says the opposite. Nobody had their own copy of Genesis or interpreted it outside Judaism for at least almost 1000 years.

Are you really picturing somebody going into a bookstore and buying Genesis as if there were no Faith already there ? Unbelievable

Why, Brandon. They are often converts and they used to be like you, just like you, so they know what you are going to say before you say it.

Are you really not old enough to come to your own conclusions. Will you ask this question for another 10 years ?

Well hundreds of millions have and you can't be smarter than ALL of them.So do the scientific thing ; Put down the computer and read it and then see what is part of a Creed (since the rest is by definition personal opinion) and see what you get.

Either a Maker- or it's all by recurring accidents.
Lie winning the lotto a billion times!

Ohhh I thought you meant the Adam and Eve dividing a rib thing. I would have said no to that. Same with the idea of seven real days.

Yeah, and it's simple. I have here in this theoretical basin complete nothingness. The atheist says that from random natural events, the universe can instantly spring into an ordered universe. Even a disordered one. But no matter how many times you roll the dice a random number generator with only zero will ALWAYS roll zero. For something to exist, there must be Being, not just nonbeing.

That's it.

Evolution is not like winning the lotto a billion times. You merely misunderstand it.

What exactly is your physics expertise which enables you to overrule the world scientific community? And, I shouldn't have to add this, but I perceive that I might, answer the question asked about your credentials. Don't post some evasion.

There is always good reasons to believe nonsense.
If people believe in something it surely is the case that they need to believe it somehow. One of the most pragmatic cause for believing is SIMPLIFICATION.
Shortcuts in story telling that make sense of the world are a very real very tangible reason for such myths to continue to emerge and persist in the cultural ecosystems all around the world.

"Science."

So, like there's a simple law of science known as cause and effect. If I strike a match, it will have the effect of sparking a flame. If it's wet, this has an effect of no flame until dry. If the match broke, you might be able to spark it in a pinch but it's much harder. But there are some things that when missing completely halt the effect of fire. Now, there are laws of thermodynamics, but we'll stay simple. Air, when there is no oxygen the flame will not burn. Fuel, although the match will burn a little on its own, it needs tinder and such to keep going. Materials, the match itself must be there (or an equivalent like a lighter or bandsaw, or magnesium striker, or...) or there is no reaction. Physical laws, now I don't pretend to know all the laws offhand involved in starting a fire, but if the laws of physics stopped working there would be no fire. Likewise if chemical reactions broke down and chemistry failed.
Lastly, there is cause. But we thought that was the removal of the match? No, that's the removal of whoever and whatever activates the match. Either me or you, or some kind of chemical reaction that creates "spontaneous" combustion when the match is exposed to certain compound or whatever. This is the cause, without which the effect or chain of effects fails.

So these brilliant physicists, they have this theory of everything, right? And it all looks good on paper. But like a computer that has never been shut on, no matter how many years you wait, it won't activate itself. The match with nothing to strike it will not set up itself. Likewise, if this were truly a theory of everything, they should be able to follow procedure and get a pocket universe of their own. They can't, so all these credentials, all their alleged brainpower is worth nothing. It's just a bunch of crackpot theories unless it can be done. And it can't be done without someone to cause it. Read that last sentence again.

But you're not going to listen to this. You have "itching ears" as the Bible mentions. You will instead care about credentials , which let's be honest I don't have because I'm not a physicist. I took science up to college, where I studied mostly horticulture.

A group of Mensa members devise a challenge for themselves while sitting at a cafe. How to transfer the contents of a salt shaker (which has the wrong top) to a pepper shaker (same), without losing any. They argue among each other for a good half hour. One wants to use a straw another will use napkins, a third has I dunno set up an elaborate pulley system. The waitress comes by, and seeing them talk about the pepper and the salt, unscrews the jars and switches them.
https://startsat60.com/media/lifestyle/jokes/mensa-and-the-salt-and-pepper-shakers
Sometimes you get hung up on your own "genius" and your own "credentials" and you forget to think directly to the point.

Btw, credentials are mostly paper and reputation. They are not worth as much as you think. I learned that from my first job, where someone without a college degree was able to run their entire business, yet when I tried later to run my own job, my degree didn't make me automatically know how to advertise.

Yes, simplication.

Lao Tzu talked about the simple, and he observed that the people using the biggest words and talking the fastest were typically lying. Maybe they were even lying abour really knowing the words they knew, as some people use the wrong word. Or sometimes they are trying to confuse you to get you to buy stuff. But let's not assume that simple means stupid.

It's tempting to think of small town people are quaint and uneducated rubes. Bur lacking other people telling them things, they have learned to use their own minds. And like the waitress in the parable above, they think clearly and to the point.

No, evolution is not like winning the lotto a billion times. But described as natural chance rather than the effect of a much large cause, you have very long odds against it happening on its own.

If everything has ALWAYS existed...there is no such thing as "very long odds against" anything.

You religious nuts are absolutely positive that EVERYTHING has got to be "created"...but have no trouble whatsoever supposing a "creator" that was not created. And you cannot see the absurdity of that "logic."

There is a fundamental misunderstanding of statistical mathematics and the significance of exponential numbers in Frank's mind, but he has plenty of company.

The number of atoms in the entire Earth = < 10^50

The number of atoms in the known universe = < 10^100

Do you see the power in that?

For once, I agree with you completely. People need answers and some people aren't willing to accept the fact that many of the important answers are complicated and/or unsatisfying. There is also wishful thinking. Religion tells people that they won't really die, most of their enemies will be punished, etc.

That's an evasion. I asked you very clearly what your qualification is to take on the world scientific community. Answer.

I doubt that you could even give me a correct definition of the theory of evolution.