Ppl who don’t believe in God

[subhuman1996]

This is something you wrote in a thread before: ”So many ppl on this forum do not follow God or his teachings or EVEN WORST some do NOT even believe in Him. Which is rlly messed up because not believing in Him is a sin not even the devil would dare commit. We need to spread the Gospel and God’s words so that we can save as many ppl before too late. Once u die there will be no coming back and u’ll have to suffer from ur consequences for eternity so REPENT NOW God is still patiently waiting for u ”

Yet you don’t even follow what you wrote. Teachings etc, Jesus loves us the same, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, LGBTQ, satanists, you and me. But if you really want to spread the gospel, trying to force people and shame them for not believing isn’t the right path brother.

No Lgbt is sin

 

[Meteor21]

They're retarded, reality is just one big oopsie to them

 

[Shrek2OnDvD]

There are plenty of flaws with evolution that scientists have discussed.

please name them

Also OP, my answer is the concept of infinite hell. nothing about that idea is divine wisdom. It’s pure sadism and cruelty

 

[lowltn222]

No one cares abt ur reasons

clearly you arent on the higher end of intelligence, so i have to accept ur religion as the truth because "no one cares abt ur reasons"??? what kind of argument is that

 

[Deleted member 51358]

cause he aint real

 

[subhuman1996]

clearly you arent on the higher end of intelligence, so i have to accept ur religion as the truth because "no one cares abt ur reasons"??? what kind of argument is that

Because it true u irrelevant nigha

 

[jeremyy]

Why?

i will kill god

 

[lowltn222]

Because it true u irrelevant nigha

i am actually astounded by ur lack of argumentative skills, saying "no one cares" is shockingly enough, not a good point

 

[subhuman1996]

i am actually astounded by ur lack of argumentative skills, saying "no one cares" is shockingly enough, not a good point

It very good point it just doesn’t match ur expectations that why u say that

 

[CWESH2]

No Lgbt is sin

Did you even read what I wrote nor read the bible?

 

[lowltn222]

No Lgbt is sin

why is that the case subhuman1996?

 

[Insomnia]

i am actually astounded by ur lack of argumentative skills, saying "no one cares" is shockingly enough, not a good point

Bro this nigga is a retard. Can’t even bring good arguments and claims he’s a Christian while he calls everyone a retard

 

[subhuman1996]

Did you even read what I wrote nor read the bible?

Yes i read the Bible but sometimes i have trouble understanding it completely cause i never found one that is in Inuktun Greenlandic

 

[lowltn222]

It very good point it just doesn’t match ur expectations that why u say that

no it isn't? the name of the thread is "why dont you believe in god", i state why and you say "no one cares about ur opinion" like what are you talking abt

 

[lowltn222]

Bro this nigga is a retard. Can’t even bring good arguments and claims he’s a Christian while he calls everyone a retard

he is honestly one of the most closed minded individuals ive ever met

 

[Insomnia]

he is honestly one of the most closed minded individuals ive ever met

True

 

[CWESH2]

Yes i read the Bible but sometimes i have trouble understanding it completely cause i never found one that is in Inuktun Greenlandic

I’m no one to judge you. It looks like your trying to spread the gospel but your doing it completely wrong. Calling people stupid for not beliving in something doesn’t align with the teaching sir the bible or will convert people and believe in God. The only thing you will accomplish is hatred towards you and Christianity.

 

[subhuman1996]

he is honestly one of the most closed minded individuals ive ever met

No ? Niggas who don’t believe in God are the ones who r close

 

[lowltn222]

No ? Niggas who don’t believe in God are the ones who r close

so i am closed minded for not looking at surface level and taking everything said in the bible as objective fact?

 

[bimaxmaxxer]

 

[subhuman1996]

I’m no one to judge you. It looks like your trying to spread the gospel but your doing it completely wrong. Calling people stupid for not beliving in something doesn’t align with the teaching sir the bible or will convert people and believe in God. The only thing you will accomplish is hatred towards you and Christianity.

But they should take example from me. Also not sure if yall noticed but English isnt my first language we can debate in Inuktun, Kalaallisut or even Tunumiisut Greenlandic if u want

 

[subhuman1996]

so i am closed minded for not looking at surface level and taking everything said in the bible as objective fact?

Yes

 

[stevielake]

I'd say women are goddesses, they shit, fart and have smelly holes and feet. Only a perfect being could pleasure your cock and nose at the same time.

 

[subhuman1996]

I'd say women are goddesses, they shit, fart and have smelly holes. Only a perfect being could pleasure your cock and nose at the same time.

No! Shame if u think any woman’s level is even near God Himself

 

[lowltn222]

Yes

closed minded - having or showing rigid opinions or a narrow outlook. not looking at any sources outside ur beliefs, and denying anything anyone else says is textbook "narrow outlook". just to note, i was christian at one point, yet after looking a little beneath the surface i dropped ts

 

[stevielake]

No! Shame if u think any woman’s level is even near God Himself

Why did he say this? @Node

 

[lowltn222]

I'd say women are goddesses, they shit, fart and have smelly holes and feet. Only a perfect being could pleasure your cock and nose at the same time.

intelligence incarnate

 

[subhuman1996]

closed minded - having or showing rigid opinions or a narrow outlook. not looking at any sources outside ur beliefs, and denying anything anyone else says is textbook "narrow outlook". just to note, i was christian at one point, yet after looking a little beneath the surface i dropped ts

wtf? Ur stupid for leaving

 

[CWESH2]

But they should take example from me. Also not sure if yall noticed but English isnt my first language we can debate in Inuktun, Kalaallisut or even Tunumiisut Greenlandic if u want

English isn’t my first language either. Eitherway I don’t think the Greenlandic bible says to shame people for not believing. You’re not doing anyone a favour of doing these shame-converting stuff and then calling them retards. As a Christian we strive to live like Jesus. Personally I don’t think Jesus would want us to shame people and call them retards just because they aren’t believers of Christ

 

[selfascender]

As much as I hate Islam , it makes the most logical sense out of any religion , but I still don’t underhand a bunch of stuff from it tbh , agnostic for now

 

[lowltn222]

wtf? Ur stupid for leaving

for changing my beliefs due to disillusionment with the preachings and hate directed from it? yeah not really bro

 

[Deleted member 20890]

like what

Five Fatal Flaws With Biological Evolution | Truth Story

Demonstrating five reasons naturalistic, biological evolution didn’t happen, and why evolution is impossible.

truthstory.org

 

[User28823]

Five Fatal Flaws With Biological Evolution | Truth Story

Demonstrating five reasons naturalistic, biological evolution didn’t happen, and why evolution is impossible.

truthstory.org

debunked by chatgpt LMFAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​

1. Abiogenesis vs. Evolution​

• Claim: Life cannot arise from non-life, therefore evolution is impossible.
• Response:
  Abiogenesis (the origin of life) and biological evolution (how life changes over time) are different scientific questions. Evolution does not require us to know how life began; it describes how life diversifies once it exists.
  • Pasteur debunked spontaneous generation (the idea that fully formed organisms like mice could pop out of grain). That’s not what modern abiogenesis research suggests. Instead, scientists investigate how chemistry produced self-replicating molecules (like RNA) in early Earth conditions.
  • The fact that we don’t yet fully understand abiogenesis doesn’t invalidate the overwhelming evidence for evolution once life started.

---

2. DNA and “No New Information”​

• Claim: Mutations only destroy or reduce genetic information.
• Response:
  This is false. Mutations can and do create new information:
  • Gene duplication: A gene can be copied; one copy keeps its function while the other mutates and acquires new functions. Example: antifreeze proteins in Antarctic fish evolved from duplicated digestive enzymes.
  • Viral insertions & recombination: Viruses insert genetic material that organisms later co-opt.
  • Point mutations can add new functions (e.g., nylon-digesting bacteria developed a novel enzyme from a frameshift mutation).
    Evolutionary “information” is not like words in a sentence—it’s the ability of DNA to encode traits that affect survival. Mutations increase diversity, giving natural selection raw material to work with.

---

3. Fossil Record Lacking Transitional Forms​

• Claim: There are no transitional fossils.
• Response:
  The fossil record is full of transitional forms. Examples:
  • Fish → Amphibians: Tiktaalik (375 million years old) shows both fish traits (fins, scales) and amphibian traits (a neck, rib bones supporting lungs, wrist-like fins).
  • Reptiles → Birds: Archaeopteryx had feathers like a bird but teeth, claws, and a long tail like a reptile.
  • Land mammals → Whales: Fossils like Ambulocetus and Pakicetus show gradual transitions from four-legged land animals to aquatic whales.
    Scientists don’t claim the record is complete—it never will be—but what we do have is exactly what we’d expect if evolution were true.

---

4. Irreducible Complexity​

• Claim: Complex systems (like blood clotting or the bacterial flagellum) cannot evolve step by step.
• Response:
  • “Irreducible complexity” assumes all parts must appear at once, but research shows systems can evolve by co-option (parts originally used for other functions later combine).
  • Example: The flagellum shares components with the bacterial Type III secretion system, which functions independently. This suggests stepwise modification.
  • Blood clotting: simpler clotting systems exist in jawless fish, showing intermediate versions that work. Complexity was added gradually.
  • Nature is full of examples where complex systems evolved from simpler versions—so irreducible complexity is more of a rhetorical claim than a scientific one.

---

5. “Ambiguous” Evidence​

• Claim: Examples like Darwin’s finches only show variation within species, not new species.
• Response:
  • Darwin’s finches are a textbook case of adaptive radiation: one ancestral species diversified into over a dozen species with different beaks, diets, and behaviors. Some of them can no longer interbreed—meeting the definition of speciation.
  • Speciation has been directly observed:
    • Cichlid fish in African lakes split into hundreds of species within just thousands of years.
    • Apple maggot flies in the U.S. split into two reproductively isolated populations (those preferring hawthorn vs. apple).
      Evolution doesn’t mean a finch turns into a kangaroo overnight. It’s cumulative change, with small variations over long timescales leading to big differences.

---

Conclusion​

The five “fatal flaws” don’t actually undermine evolution:

• Evolution ≠ abiogenesis.
• Mutations can add new genetic information.
• Fossils do show transitional forms.
• “Irreducible complexity” can be explained by stepwise evolution and co-option.
• Evidence like Darwin’s finches isn’t ambiguous—it’s direct observation of evolutionary processes.

Evolution is one of the most strongly supported scientific theories we have, confirmed by genetics, fossils, comparative anatomy, embryology, and observed natural processes.

---

Do you want me to also write this in a point-by-point rebuttal style (like a debate response to the original article), so you can directly counter those arguments if someone presents them?

 

[subhuman1996]

debunked by chatgpt LMFAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​

1. Abiogenesis vs. Evolution​

• Claim: Life cannot arise from non-life, therefore evolution is impossible.
• Response:
  Abiogenesis (the origin of life) and biological evolution (how life changes over time) are different scientific questions. Evolution does not require us to know how life began; it describes how life diversifies once it exists.
  • Pasteur debunked spontaneous generation (the idea that fully formed organisms like mice could pop out of grain). That’s not what modern abiogenesis research suggests. Instead, scientists investigate how chemistry produced self-replicating molecules (like RNA) in early Earth conditions.
  • The fact that we don’t yet fully understand abiogenesis doesn’t invalidate the overwhelming evidence for evolution once life started.

---

2. DNA and “No New Information”​

• Claim: Mutations only destroy or reduce genetic information.
• Response:
  This is false. Mutations can and do create new information:
  • Gene duplication: A gene can be copied; one copy keeps its function while the other mutates and acquires new functions. Example: antifreeze proteins in Antarctic fish evolved from duplicated digestive enzymes.
  • Viral insertions & recombination: Viruses insert genetic material that organisms later co-opt.
  • Point mutations can add new functions (e.g., nylon-digesting bacteria developed a novel enzyme from a frameshift mutation).
    Evolutionary “information” is not like words in a sentence—it’s the ability of DNA to encode traits that affect survival. Mutations increase diversity, giving natural selection raw material to work with.

---

3. Fossil Record Lacking Transitional Forms​

• Claim: There are no transitional fossils.
• Response:
  The fossil record is full of transitional forms. Examples:
  • Fish → Amphibians: Tiktaalik (375 million years old) shows both fish traits (fins, scales) and amphibian traits (a neck, rib bones supporting lungs, wrist-like fins).
  • Reptiles → Birds: Archaeopteryx had feathers like a bird but teeth, claws, and a long tail like a reptile.
  • Land mammals → Whales: Fossils like Ambulocetus and Pakicetus show gradual transitions from four-legged land animals to aquatic whales.
    Scientists don’t claim the record is complete—it never will be—but what we do have is exactly what we’d expect if evolution were true.

---

4. Irreducible Complexity​

• Claim: Complex systems (like blood clotting or the bacterial flagellum) cannot evolve step by step.
• Response:
  • “Irreducible complexity” assumes all parts must appear at once, but research shows systems can evolve by co-option (parts originally used for other functions later combine).
  • Example: The flagellum shares components with the bacterial Type III secretion system, which functions independently. This suggests stepwise modification.
  • Blood clotting: simpler clotting systems exist in jawless fish, showing intermediate versions that work. Complexity was added gradually.
  • Nature is full of examples where complex systems evolved from simpler versions—so irreducible complexity is more of a rhetorical claim than a scientific one.

---

5. “Ambiguous” Evidence​

• Claim: Examples like Darwin’s finches only show variation within species, not new species.
• Response:
  • Darwin’s finches are a textbook case of adaptive radiation: one ancestral species diversified into over a dozen species with different beaks, diets, and behaviors. Some of them can no longer interbreed—meeting the definition of speciation.
  • Speciation has been directly observed:
    • Cichlid fish in African lakes split into hundreds of species within just thousands of years.
    • Apple maggot flies in the U.S. split into two reproductively isolated populations (those preferring hawthorn vs. apple).
      Evolution doesn’t mean a finch turns into a kangaroo overnight. It’s cumulative change, with small variations over long timescales leading to big differences.

---

Conclusion​

The five “fatal flaws” don’t actually undermine evolution:

• Evolution ≠ abiogenesis.
• Mutations can add new genetic information.
• Fossils do show transitional forms.
• “Irreducible complexity” can be explained by stepwise evolution and co-option.
• Evidence like Darwin’s finches isn’t ambiguous—it’s direct observation of evolutionary processes.

Evolution is one of the most strongly supported scientific theories we have, confirmed by genetics, fossils, comparative anatomy, embryology, and observed natural processes.

---

Do you want me to also write this in a point-by-point rebuttal style (like a debate response to the original article), so you can directly counter those arguments if someone presents them?

Dnr

 

[User28823]

Dnr

I know u didnt

u theists dont know how to read, if u did you wouldn't believe in a fairytale

 

[Deleted member 20890]

debunked by chatgpt LMFAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​

1. Abiogenesis vs. Evolution​

• Claim: Life cannot arise from non-life, therefore evolution is impossible.
• Response:
  Abiogenesis (the origin of life) and biological evolution (how life changes over time) are different scientific questions. Evolution does not require us to know how life began; it describes how life diversifies once it exists.
  • Pasteur debunked spontaneous generation (the idea that fully formed organisms like mice could pop out of grain). That’s not what modern abiogenesis research suggests. Instead, scientists investigate how chemistry produced self-replicating molecules (like RNA) in early Earth conditions.
  • The fact that we don’t yet fully understand abiogenesis doesn’t invalidate the overwhelming evidence for evolution once life started.

---

2. DNA and “No New Information”​

• Claim: Mutations only destroy or reduce genetic information.
• Response:
  This is false. Mutations can and do create new information:
  • Gene duplication: A gene can be copied; one copy keeps its function while the other mutates and acquires new functions. Example: antifreeze proteins in Antarctic fish evolved from duplicated digestive enzymes.
  • Viral insertions & recombination: Viruses insert genetic material that organisms later co-opt.
  • Point mutations can add new functions (e.g., nylon-digesting bacteria developed a novel enzyme from a frameshift mutation).
    Evolutionary “information” is not like words in a sentence—it’s the ability of DNA to encode traits that affect survival. Mutations increase diversity, giving natural selection raw material to work with.

---

3. Fossil Record Lacking Transitional Forms​

• Claim: There are no transitional fossils.
• Response:
  The fossil record is full of transitional forms. Examples:
  • Fish → Amphibians: Tiktaalik (375 million years old) shows both fish traits (fins, scales) and amphibian traits (a neck, rib bones supporting lungs, wrist-like fins).
  • Reptiles → Birds: Archaeopteryx had feathers like a bird but teeth, claws, and a long tail like a reptile.
  • Land mammals → Whales: Fossils like Ambulocetus and Pakicetus show gradual transitions from four-legged land animals to aquatic whales.
    Scientists don’t claim the record is complete—it never will be—but what we do have is exactly what we’d expect if evolution were true.

---

4. Irreducible Complexity​

• Claim: Complex systems (like blood clotting or the bacterial flagellum) cannot evolve step by step.
• Response:
  • “Irreducible complexity” assumes all parts must appear at once, but research shows systems can evolve by co-option (parts originally used for other functions later combine).
  • Example: The flagellum shares components with the bacterial Type III secretion system, which functions independently. This suggests stepwise modification.
  • Blood clotting: simpler clotting systems exist in jawless fish, showing intermediate versions that work. Complexity was added gradually.
  • Nature is full of examples where complex systems evolved from simpler versions—so irreducible complexity is more of a rhetorical claim than a scientific one.

---

5. “Ambiguous” Evidence​

• Claim: Examples like Darwin’s finches only show variation within species, not new species.
• Response:
  • Darwin’s finches are a textbook case of adaptive radiation: one ancestral species diversified into over a dozen species with different beaks, diets, and behaviors. Some of them can no longer interbreed—meeting the definition of speciation.
  • Speciation has been directly observed:
    • Cichlid fish in African lakes split into hundreds of species within just thousands of years.
    • Apple maggot flies in the U.S. split into two reproductively isolated populations (those preferring hawthorn vs. apple).
      Evolution doesn’t mean a finch turns into a kangaroo overnight. It’s cumulative change, with small variations over long timescales leading to big differences.

---

Conclusion​

The five “fatal flaws” don’t actually undermine evolution:

• Evolution ≠ abiogenesis.
• Mutations can add new genetic information.
• Fossils do show transitional forms.
• “Irreducible complexity” can be explained by stepwise evolution and co-option.
• Evidence like Darwin’s finches isn’t ambiguous—it’s direct observation of evolutionary processes.

Evolution is one of the most strongly supported scientific theories we have, confirmed by genetics, fossils, comparative anatomy, embryology, and observed natural processes.

---

Do you want me to also write this in a point-by-point rebuttal style (like a debate response to the original article), so you can directly counter those arguments if someone presents them?

The fossils are still lacking. Also since this topic is about God’s existence abiogenesis is relevant.

 

[subhuman1996]

I know u didnt

u theists dont know how to read, if u did you wouldn't believe in a fairytale

We can always argue in Inuktun Greenlandic I would end ur bs

 

[Deleted member 20890]

for changing my beliefs due to disillusionment with the preachings and hate directed from it? yeah not really bro

“Hate” from Christians is not a good reason to leave. That’s sjw mindset.

 

[User28823]

The fossils are still lacking. Also since this topic is about God’s existence abiogenesis is relevant.

when your all knowing all seeing omnipotent god designed the recurrent laryngeal nerve

 

[User28823]

We can always argue in Inuktun Greenlandic I would end ur bs

ur country will be invaded and enslaved by the united states of america.

ur gonna be my little slave nigger, now make me a sandwich, cuck.

 

[lowltn222]

“Hate” from Christians is not a good reason to leave. That’s sjw mindset.

Not from Christians, from Christianity, i was already growing disillusioned with it, and then my best friend came out as gay, so I didn’t particularly want to support a religion that diametrically opposed my friends existence so

 

[subhuman1996]

ur country will be invaded and enslaved by the united states of america.

ur gonna be my little slave nigger, now make me a sandwich, cuck.

Stfu niggas in us are abt to explode

 

[User28823]

Stfu niggas in us are abt to explode

yeah, we're about to explode in greenland stacy pussy

 

[subhuman1996]

yeah, we're about to explode in greenland stacy pussy

Wait u would go to Greenland one day? Rlly?

 

[Deleted member 20890]

Not from Christians, from Christianity, i was already growing disillusioned with it, and then my best friend came out as gay, so I didn’t particularly want to support a religion that diametrically opposed my friends existence so

So because of a friend wanting to sodomize other men you chose to ditch religion.

 

[Deleted member 20890]

when your all knowing all seeing omnipotent god designed the recurrent laryngeal nerve

View attachment 4110478View attachment 4110479

View attachment 4110476


View attachment 4110482

 

[User28823]

thx for conceding

 

[Deleted member 20890]

thx for conceding

No it’s just weak evidence against God.

 

[lowltn222]

So because of a friend wanting to sodomize other men you chose to ditch religion.

I guess, however i was already partially disillusioned with the religion prior, due to the suffering in the world, and the fact that while having the ability to stop it, god had not stopped such things. Effectively the main reason I stopped is because of the innate suffering in the world, and no matter how you cut it, I refuse to believe in any god that allows for people to die gruesome deaths for any reason

 

[User28823]

Wait u would go to Greenland one day? Rlly?

yeah, when we invade i'll be there