People Who Believe in God Less Likely to Believe in Extraterrestrials


Recommended Posts

trieste

No. I do not think Abel was Cain's wife. I know they were brothers.

My question is: How did the genealogy proceed from there?

 

In other words, who is Enoch's mother?

I believe another poster quoted from Jubilees of the Apocrypha that Cain's wife was named Awan.

 

To put it another way, Enoch's mother is also Enoch's aunt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
trieste

Actually, I'm not required to prove anything because I'm not making a positive claim.  I'm disputing the claims of people such as you who claim god DOES exist, yet have never provided any verifiable evidence if its existence.

 

You have no proof, therefore I can quite happily state that your god does not exist.

I have proof: the OT and NT canons of the Bible. The other assorted proofs are in the hands of historians, and excerpts of these proofs can be found by Google.

 

The issue here is that you discount my proofs entirely. Interestingly, I don't see you calling out others to prove their beliefs that extraterrestrial life surely must exist, even in the absence of evidence. Why the double standard?

Link to post
Share on other sites
compl3x

 

 

Incest as a sin was non-existent before Moses. It was necessary for survival for sibling-couples to procreate. What an irony, that evolutionists would exalt eugenics and justify all sorts of horrendous behaviour in the name of survival, but give special and opposite treatment to this one.

 

 

idk why you folk think evolution/natural selection = eugenics. Eugenics is essentially the opposite of natural selection & there are plenty of scientific and ethical objections to eugenics. Accepting evolution doesn't automatically make someone an advocate of eugenics. That's just foolish nonsense.

 

But when you get all of your scientific info from Answers in Genesis or some loony religious blog it isn't surprising a word like evolutionist (don't you mean evilutionist!) becomes nothing more than an ignorant pejorative.

 

No. I do not think Abel was Cain's wife. I know they were brothers.

My question is: How did the genealogy proceed from there?

 

In other words, who is Enoch's mother?

 

Edit: Sorry, didn't read the previous post by Compl3x before posting.

 

It's irrelevant to him. It wouldn't matter if Cain raped his mother and Enoch was the offspring. In this time period anything goes, apparently.

 

It is also worthwhile to note that Awan isn't accepted by all Christians as Enoch's mother. Most don't even bother to try and answer who Enoch's mother was. Boring-as-batshit topic.

 

 

Actually, I'm not required to prove anything because I'm not making a positive claim.  I'm disputing the claims of people such as you who claim god DOES exist, yet have never provided any verifiable evidence if its existence.

 

You have no proof, therefore I can quite happily state that your god does not exist.

 

 

Burden of proof. Burden of proof. Burden of proof. -- A concept many theists simply cannot grasp & usually try to entirely dodge by using the old "but it is about faith" or "you must believe!" or some other trite statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites
FloatingFatMan

I have proof: the OT and NT canons of the Bible. The other assorted proofs are in the hands of historians, and excerpts of these proofs can be found by Google.

 

Sorry, but you cannot use a the bible to prove the bible, that's circular reasoning and not valid.

 

The issue here is that you discount my proofs entirely. Interestingly, I don't see you calling out others to prove their beliefs that extraterrestrial life surely must exist, even in the absence of evidence. Why the double standard?

 

I question anyone making positive claims without evidence. I don't believe in UFO's, alien kidnappings or any of that nonsense.  I do believe that there's a very good statistical probability that life exists elsewhere in the universe, but I only have the evidence of life occurring on THIS planet as evidence towards it's probable existence elsewhere.  I absolutely do not claim it as a certainty because that would be impossible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mudslag

It takes a huge suspension of belief in reality and history to claim a lack of evidence for God... not just any God, but the one crucified by the Romans for claiming to the Jews that he is.

 

 

 

Please by all means provide said evidence of a god, at no point in human history has there EVER been actual evidence for god. And no the bible is not evidence of god, period, that is a FACT. As for Jesus, I believe the person who is said to be the man existed, but he was still a man and nothing more. Ill look over any evidence you may have that that person was a god as long as it's actual evidence and not some bible scripture which doesn't count as evidence. Until then, the only suspension of reality is claiming evidence exists without actually having any. 

 

 

 

 

No unicorns, leprechauns, Smurfs, Harry Potters, Mr. Hankeys the Christmas Poo or Godzillas ever claimed to be God and demonstrated so with fulfillment of prophecies and documented miracles.

 

 

 

The fact that you missed the point on this goes to show your complete lack of basic understanding. Claiming god exists because of some book is the equivalent of saying all those other creatures exists because they too were in books. The bible does not document miracles, as you can no verify those miracles ever happened, that is a FACT. Facts are something you clearly have a hard time understanding. 

 

 

 

The faith I speak of is that built on a strong tripod - personal experience, verifiable and accurate historical accounts, and present reality. Personal experience is indeed subjective, although it is impossible for people to hallucinate the same thing simultaneously. That is why, in the historical accounting of the Bible, multiple eyewitnesses were present at the same time.

 

 

 

Again provide these so called verifiable facts that don't just come off the pages of the bible and then we can talk, til then you have nothing other then faith, that's it. Claiming stories of supernatural events happened because someone else claims to have witnessed them is about as factual as stating Peter Pan exists because some kids stated they went flying with him. Eyewitnesses to accounts that happened 2000 yrs ago, are pretty poor witnesses, you can't even prove those stories were even told by those who claimed to witnesses them. Til you can, you don't even have eye witnesses, just stories told down from someone over and over til they were eventually written down.

 

 

 

Historicity comes from the uninterrupted timeline of Christiandom -- from the apostles, to their disciples, to the first bishops of churches which survived the persecution of the Roman Empire, to the official state religion under the Byzantine Empire, to the Catholic Church as well as cloistered scribes and monks of the Middle Ages, and finally to the Reformers in the era right before the Renaissance. So it flabbergasts me to encounter anyone who claims to have a serious intellectual mind to say so effortlessly that there is no evidence.

 

Documented miracles -- presented as they are in the accurate and verifiable historical documents. Miracles can co-exist with science; in fact, given that us mortal humans are limited to the experiences of everyday physics, miracles provide incontrovertible proof of a higher dimension which has mechanisms that are utterly different from 4D spacetime and effortlessly superior to it.

 

Present reality - the continued survival of Israel despite multiple attempts to destroy its bloodlines and despite its own stupidity in political matters (the latter is referring to the State of Israel, not Israel as a tribe). The Jews survived economic discrimination in pre-WWI Europe, a genocide in WWII. What seemed like a curse became a blessing: their diaspora from Europe assures their continuity by leaving distinct cultural remnants in every nation. Second point - the continued presence of Christianity in this world despite persecution and torture of various degrees in all the nations.

 

That is what faith is about, when properly defined. In contrast, your faith in alien life lacks this tripod, and even contravenes basic chemistry. Cytosine hydrolysis, oxygen/ozone paradox, chirality of amino acids (L) and sugars (D) are just 3 of many hiccups in an attempted naturalistic origin of life theory.

 

Uninterrupted? What evidence can you show that is true? Hell, even Jesus's youth to young adult is an interrupted story, it doesn't exist. Again yet again, you need to be told that stories from the bible don't make them true just because they were written down on paper. Someone claiming they were healed or saw someone else healed is not a documented fact of a miracle, it's a story, period. Even in this day, miracles are not proven facts, so it's utterly retarded to think miracle stories told from 2000 yrs ago are somehow true. 

 

Present reality is Israel survives because they get help from us and others to help them survive. You want to think that's a prophecy that's on you. FYI, the Jews are far from the only ones to suffer through a genocide, though I think they are one of the few to have an ego from it. 

 

As for faith, as I stated before, I have faith in the odds of alien life existing, we dont have evidence of their existence so I can't say they do as a fact. The big difference between you is that Im open to being wrong and I understand that we may not know in my lifetime. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
trieste

Arguing that there is no proof for Jesus is as good as arguing that there is no proof of the Roman Empire.

 

http://christianity.about.com/od/easter/a/7-Proofs-Of-The-Resurrection.htm

 

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

 

 

Answers in Genesis did the heavy lifting of dissecting and compiling the host of scientific evidence that counter the theory of evolution. It is unbecoming of an intellectual to fail to recognise scientific facts for what they are, and to disregard them because of their usage in a particular scientific debate. Saying "we are here because of a naturalistic origin of life" and "there is a naturalistic origin of life, hence we are here" is circular. The Bible confirming itself is not, because all it takes is a single self-contradiction to defeat its self-consistency. Aside from misinterpretations from erroneous contexts and poor understanding of journalistic reporting (which all don't qualify), there are none. Working from the axiom of a good God who does not lie and can not lie, the accusation of circularity is also voided.

 

The Wiki entry on eugenics says nothing that contravenes the tenets of evolution. Where we have natural selection in nature to weed out the unfit and weak, we have human agents who aid the process along via artificial selection along the same principle - weeding out the weak and the unfit by rendering them unable to reproduce.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ice_Blue

Arguing that there is no proof for Jesus is as good as arguing that there is no proof of the Roman Empire.

 

http://christianity.about.com/od/easter/a/7-Proofs-Of-The-Resurrection.htm

 

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

 

 

Answers in Genesis did the heavy lifting of dissecting and compiling the host of scientific evidence that counter the theory of evolution. It is unbecoming of an intellectual to fail to recognise scientific facts for what they are, and to disregard them because of their usage in a particular scientific debate. Saying "we are here because of a naturalistic origin of life" and "there is a naturalistic origin of life, hence we are here" is circular. The Bible confirming itself is not, because all it takes is a single self-contradiction to defeat its self-consistency. Aside from misinterpretations from erroneous contexts and poor understanding of journalistic reporting (which all don't qualify), there are none. Working from the axiom of a good God who does not lie and can not lie, the accusation of circularity is also voided.

 

The Wiki entry on eugenics says nothing that contravenes the tenets of evolution. Where we have natural selection in nature to weed out the unfit and weak, we have human agents who aid the process along via artificial selection along the same principle - weeding out the weak and the unfit by rendering them unable to reproduce.

 

Are you telling me there are no contradictions in the bible? OK then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

 

Also, I don't think I'm not evil. I know, for a fact, that I'm not evil.  Evil is defined in the bible as an act against god. As god does not exist, I cannot commit any acts against it and therefore cannot be evil.

 

 

According to the Bible each of us is evil because we came into the world full of sin, as a gift from Adam. Also, just to point out, that evil can be against god but it's considered evil to do harm to your neighbor, with your neighbor being essentially all mankind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rohdekill

Why is out flawed logic? Even if you narrow your search field to earthlike planets even we've found similar ones in the extremely tiny area of space that we can see. 

 

Remember when Hubble looked at an area of space thought to be empty? Look at what it saw. 

 

hubble-deep-field-northern-detail-rw-cap

Where's the "you are here" arrow??

Link to post
Share on other sites
thomastmc

Religion used to help to progress our understanding of the world around us. Sadly, that stopped being true thousands of years ago.

 

There is by far more evidence that shows that aliens almost certainly do exist than there is for the existence of God...

Link to post
Share on other sites
mudslag

Arguing that there is no proof for Jesus is as good as arguing that there is no proof of the Roman Empire.

 

http://christianity.about.com/od/easter/a/7-Proofs-Of-The-Resurrection.htm

 

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

 

 

Answers in Genesis did the heavy lifting of dissecting and compiling the host of scientific evidence that counter the theory of evolution. It is unbecoming of an intellectual to fail to recognise scientific facts for what they are, and to disregard them because of their usage in a particular scientific debate. Saying "we are here because of a naturalistic origin of life" and "there is a naturalistic origin of life, hence we are here" is circular. The Bible confirming itself is not, because all it takes is a single self-contradiction to defeat its self-consistency. Aside from misinterpretations from erroneous contexts and poor understanding of journalistic reporting (which all don't qualify), there are none. Working from the axiom of a good God who does not lie and can not lie, the accusation of circularity is also voided.

 

The Wiki entry on eugenics says nothing that contravenes the tenets of evolution. Where we have natural selection in nature to weed out the unfit and weak, we have human agents who aid the process along via artificial selection along the same principle - weeding out the weak and the unfit by rendering them unable to reproduce.

 

 

 

First off Answers in Genesis is a heavily biased for obvious reasons. Second plenty of people believe the Jesus the man was real, but a man ONLY and not some supernatural figure. There is zero evidence of any of the supernatural events from the bible, and yet again NO the scriptures do not count as evidence. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bi4me

I don't know about this survey but I'm sure I'm Orthodox Christian and believe in aliens as well :alien:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
bradsday

I believe in God and I believe in the possibility of alien life.  God is the creator.  He created the heavens and the earth, the creatures on the land and the creatures under the seas.  The Bible teaches that He created man in his own image.

 

However, nowhere does it state that this is all He ever created.  God the creator could have gone on to create other universes, worlds, and beings.  In actuality, the better question is: If God is the omnipotent creator, why wouldn't He go on to create other life?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
bradsday

To Trieste Or whatever he calls himself now:

 

I would like you to continue this family tree:

 

Adam/Eve -> Cain|Abel -> ?

 

 

That would be exhaustive.  However, the point you are trying to make does pose a number of questions for theological debate.  Simply that at the time of Abel's murder, there were only four people (presumably) on earth.  So, how does humanity continue?  We obviously did.  The following is all there is about it in the Bible.  Cain was cast from Eden, he dwelt in the land of Nod, there he knew his wife, and she bore him a son.  However, if you continue on in Genesis, you will note that Cain builds a city.  I would imagine this feat would take considerably more than just a father, his son, and wife. So, where did all of these people come from - and why were they not mentioned previously?

 

"....went out from the presence of the LORD and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch..."

 

Again, this is a subject of religious debate that has been ongoing for hundreds if not thousands of years.  Some nonbelievers would decry it as yet another Biblical inconsistency; I would say it just adds more to the mystery of our creation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hum

Merry Xmas Aliens. :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
compl3x

Merry Xmas Aliens. :D

 

Xenomorphs ######in' love Xmas.

Link to post
Share on other sites
+Raze

Merry Xmas Aliens. :D

 

Thank you, Hum, and a Happy Holidays to you. :alien:

 

By the way, Hum, have you had your anal probe this year?  :shifty:

Link to post
Share on other sites
compl3x

 

 

By the way, Hum, have you had your anal probe this year?  :shifty:

 

 

Are you upset he didn't come to you for his annual probe? I am sure he isn't seeing other probists, he has just been busy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
+Raze

Are you upset he didn't come to you for his annual probe? I am sure he isn't seeing other probists, he has just been busy.

 

Very upset, I have quotas to meet!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Jay Bonggolto
      Twitter seems to be surveying users about potential features for its subscription model
      by Jay Bonggolto

      Last month, Twitter posted a job listing as part of its search for a software engineer for its new team, codenamed Gryphon, which would be responsible for developing a subscription platform. Now, Twitter appears to be advancing its push for a subscription model.

      The micro-blogging site is said to have started a survey asking users what features they would want to see in a paid service. The poll comes more than a week after Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey confirmed that his company was exploring the idea of subscription options for users. Screenshots of the new survey have been shared on Twitter by reporter Andrew Roth.

      In the survey, the company presents a number of capabilities that it may be considering adding to its paid tiers, such as the ability to undo tweets shortly after they are posted and customize the font or theme colors on mobile devices and desktops. Potential premium features also include the option to post longer videos with a higher resolution than normal and auto responses in reply to tweets. Survey participants are asked to rate the suggested features based on their importance.

      Twitter also appears to be gauging whether users would like to pay for an option to see fewer ads or remove these completely. In addition, the social networking site seems to be concerned about how users might react to a subscription model as it will limit some of its features to paying members.

      Dorsey recently disclosed that Twitter was in an early stage of exploring new ways to monetize its platform. Time will tell whether any or all of the features listed in its latest survey will make it to a public release.

    • By zikalify
      Facebook hopes to shine a light on true COVID-19 case numbers
      by Paul Hill



      Mark Zuckerberg has announced that Facebook will release an opt-in survey for users all around the world in a bid to figure out how many coronavirus cases each country really has. The official number of cases published on tracking websites only reveals confirmed cases but in many countries, there are just not enough tests to test everyone.

      The survey is already available in the United States where Facebook has partnered with health researchers at Carnegie Mellon University. The survey asks people if they have any symptoms including fevers, coughs, shortness of breath or a loss of smell – symptoms that are all associated with COVID-19. It said the millions of results it has had so far are promising and correlate with publicly available data on confirmed cases.

      In order to make its data even more useful, the team at Carnegie Mellon is building an API which will let researchers access the results and develop applications using the data. In order to serve people outside the U.S., Facebook will be working with the University of Maryland.

      In the United Kingdom and the United States, the health firm ZOE has been developing an app called COVID-19 Symptom Tracker with various educational institutions over the last few months. In the UK, it uses data to build maps showing coronavirus hotspots and was the project which revealed that a loss of smell and taste were stronger indicators that a person had COVID-19 than having a fever. While this project will remain relevant, it does not have the reach that Facebook’s tracker will have.

    • By Steven P.
      Less than three percent of people would use Facebook Libra cryptocurrency
      by Steven Parker



      According to a survey conducted by messaging app Viber, which by the way is direct competition to Facebook-owned WhatsApp, Viber asked 2,000 participants from the U.S. and UK if they would trust Facebook to keep their information secure when using its new crypto payment service, Libra which launches next year. Nearly half of all Americans (49%) say they would not trust Facebook at all, and barely 3% of Americans say they would be willing to try Libra for payments.

      Over in the UK, only 1.4 percent of Brits would consider trying Libra, while 49% also said they did not trust Facebook at all to keep their information secure. In addition, 13.9 percent of Americans and 16.6 percent of Brits said that they definitely wouldn't use Libra for payments.

      When the survey results are broken down by gender, women are much less likely to trust Facebook, with only 1.8 percent of women from the US willing to try Libra for payments, compared to 3.2 percent of men. In the UK, only 1.7 percent of men were willing to try Libra for payments, while even less women at 1.1 percent were willing to use the currency.

      Gen Z users are the most likely to try the Libra cryptocurrency at 2.7 percent, while they were also the most trusting in that they also agreed that Facebook would keep their info secure at only 4.1 percent. In the UK though, this position is reversed, with zero percent of Generation Z willing to try Libra payments, while 1.5 percent of baby boomers, and 2.1 percent of Millennials would.

      The results are hardly surprising given the widely reported scandal on Cambridge Analytica where it became clear that Facebook sold data on its users. Facebook are facing a fine north of $100 million from the to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the privacy breaches, while the UK's Information Commissioner’s Office levied a fine of £500,000 on the company in relation to its privacy violations last October.

      You can read the full Viber report here, but it's clear that Facebook has a long way to go in winning back the trust of its users and even whole countries, with France questioning the currency, as well as Japan and China conducting its own investigations, among others.

      Source: Viber via BetaNews

    • By Ruel Revales
      Instagram eclipses Snapchat as the most-used app among American teens, according to survey
      by Ruel Revales

      Instagram's Stories feature surpassed Snapchat in terms of daily usage in August last year. Today, the multimedia messaging app might be in for another blow to its stats as a new survey conducted by investment banking firm Piper Jaffray has revealed that Instagram has gained a lead over Snapchat as the most-used social networking application among teenagers in the U.S.

      According to the company's 36th semi-annual "Taking Stock With Teens" report, which polled 8,600 teens aged 16 on an average across 48 states, 85% of teens said they use Instagram at least once every month while 84% stated that they use Snapchat on the same frequency. It is worth noting that this is the first time the Facebook-owned service has eclipsed its closest rival in that respect since the spring of 2016, based on Piper Jaffray's surveys.

      Even so, Snapchat continues to be the most favorite social media platform among teenagers, with 46% of them choosing the service, in comparison to 32% picking Instagram. While both platforms remain two of the most-used applications among American teens, Twitter and Facebook are trailing behind.

      It's worth pointing out that Snapchat recently faced backlash after a revamp to the platform's design. Over the past few years, Instagram also introduced features that appeared to be taking a page from Snapchat's book including Stories and vanishing direct message photos, and the move seems to have benefited Instagram in terms of user growth, with it having reached one billion active users in June.

      Source: Piper Jaffray via Yahoo Finance

    • By ShirtShanks
      Apple is asking for direct feedback on key features from iMac Pro buyers
      by Sharath Ravishankar

      If you're an iMac Pro user, you should be receiving a survey from Apple asking you about your use of the various features that accompany the device on the hardware front.

      The survey includes questions about which of its features you use most, asking users to pinpoint the ones that could use some improvement and the ones that they already find themselves pleased with. It would appear that through some of the questions - namely, the ones that question users over their decision to buy their iMac Pro over other Macs and PCs - Apple is trying to gain a better understanding of the demographic it is catering to.

      Given Apple has a dedicated "Pro-Workflow Team" tasked with tailoring its computers for professional users, it is possible that this very team is responsible for the survey's circulation.

      One could also infer that Apple is trying to not repeat the mistakes it made with its original trashcan-esque Mac Pro, a product that Craig Federighi himself admitted could have been a lot better designed for its target market of power-users. A new Mac Pro is in the works for a reported 2019 release, and Apple is perhaps also attempting to better distinguish this upcoming device from the iMac Pro through the questions it has asked here.

      Source: a f waller (Twitter) via MacRumors | Image via Apple