That violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. So you have to decide if you are going to ignore one of the laws accepted by science or if you are going to abandon that belief.

Yes, that true. Were you trying to make a point or just stating the obvious? Did your really think saying "stars blow up" would invalidate the Second Law of Thermodynamics?

1. Every finite and contingent being has a cause.
2. A causal loop cannot exist.
3. A causal chain cannot be of infinite length.
4. Therefore, a First Cause (or something that is not an effect) must exist.

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The Universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the Universe had a cause.

Regardless of if you believe in God or a material universe, you have to believe that something has always existed.

If you state that a material cause has always existed, that violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the Law of Conservation of Mass and Energy and I'm sure a number of other laws.

If God exists as a being outside of time and space, that does not violate any laws of science. It's not something we can fully comprehend, but noncomprehension does not mean nonexistence.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics invalidates that theory. The end result of all energy is entropy and entropy is a byproduct of all processes. Entropy cannot do work and cannot be turned back into matter.

Ummmm....no. The Second Law of Thermodynamics invalidates that law. Now if you said "Conservation of Mass and Energy", you would be correct.

Ah, the arrogance of youth.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the President to call her to comfort her...

Maybe Darwin was a Christian as a child, but he wasn't as an adult. That's a fact. I don't know why you find that offensive.

Some of the greatest scientists in history were Christians, get out of here with this crap. Don't you have anything better to do than to spread lies and misinformation?

It was actually far more eloquent and thought out than volant7's post deserved.

He was my favorite character from the original Dune series.

He burned historians alive on a pile of their books, if they knowingly lied about history.

Similarities that don't exist. But then you get all butt hurt and cry that I'm being "kind of lame" when I point out that those similaries don't exist and were invented from thin air in an attempt to discredit Christianity and discourage people from believing. Why do you care if people become or stay Christians? Why do you hate Christianity so much that you would knowingly push historical lies?

Credible historians. Not frauds and hucksters like Gerald Massey and Acharya S. I know you don't believe me. That is perfectly fine. I want to argue about the validity of the Christ myth theory like I want to argue that frozen dog poo is a workable substitute for chocolate ice cream.

It's not. The whole subject has been debunked countless times.

So you are going to post a link filled with BS about Jesus just being a copy of 10 figures from mythology and then say it's "kind of lame" for me wanting to show why those mythological stories are nothing like Jesus?

That's really screwed up man. You need to learn how to be reasonable. If you already knew that your link was BS, you shouldn't have posted it.

Pick one, I'll rip it apart. I'm not going to do all of them.

I'll just refute the #1 "christ like figure".



One line at a time...



Isis was not considered to be a virgin. She was married for a time before her husband was murdered and dismembered. She got pregnant by putting all of his body back together, save for his penis, which had been eaten. She carved a giant wooden penis, attached it to her dead husband and had sex with it.



There is no such story about Horus.



There is no mention of a manger in Horus' birth story. He was born in a swamp. Jesus' birthday is only celebrated on December 25th, Jesus was born in the early fall, as Shepherds were still in the field.



In both cases, the parents were told to flee with their child. That is how you escape from someone who wants to kill you. If a battered woman were to move to another state to avoid her violent ex, would that mean she's a myth?



There is no discussion of Horus from birth until adulthood. There was no description of him being 12. There is no mention of the age of 30 either, all that is known is that Horus is an adult and that his member has doubled in size and his strength has doubled.



Horus was never baptized, he had no baptizer.



While Horus is storied to have created miracles, he was never recorded to have walked on water, cast out demons or raised the dead.



There is no mention of Horus having been crucified. Horus merged with the sun god in some stories and was dismembered in others. Horus did not descend into hell and was not resurrected three days later. In the stories that claim he joined with the sun god, he dies every night and comes back to life every morning.

All of these false claims originate with Gerald Massey, who was a liar. He claimed to be able to read Egyptian, before the Rosetta stone was discovered. After hieroglyphics were translated, they didn't read anything at all like Massey claimed.

Not only is that not true, but it's obviously false.



Maybe I should care to make you a Christian, but I don't. I'm just defending the faith from spurious attacks. If you choose to believe or choose to not believe, that's between you and God. I just want it clear that there are very good reasons to be a Christian and I do that by setting the facts straight.



I don't believe that.

This is a known issue in Google Chrome. Switch to FireFox and you shouldn't have as many issues.

I would also do a thorough scan for viruses / adware / malware and go ahead and do a disk defrag while you are at it.

Scientists do the research and they find the data. The data is then interpreted to come to a conclusion. howzityoume disagrees with their conclusions, not their data. I am the same way. How is that not acceptable to you? Isn't that what scientists do with new hypothesis? The only difference is that howzityoume and I don't immediately exclude the possibility that God exists from the discussion. In the end, we are more scientists than any so-called scientist who excludes conclusions because it's now fashionable to declare those who reject the existence of God to be more intelligent and those who accept it.