Questions for atheists

Care to answer these?......

#1 - If no supernatural Creator exists, how did the universe originate?
What was the nature of the enviroment that the 'big bang' emanated from?

#2 - If no supernatural universal Designer exists, why is the earth suitable for the existence of life? Why isnt there life on other planets?

#3 - If no supernatural universal Designer exists, how did life originate? Did life come from inanimate objects?

#4 - If no supernatural universal Designer exists, what caused the repeated disappearance of more primitive forms of life and the appearance of new more advanced forms of life?
[For example, at the beginning of the Mesozoic and Cenozoic.]

#5 - If no God exists who can work miracles and communicate with men, how did the ancient Israelites come to believe that their ancestors experienced the Exodus and the Revelation at Mt. Sinai?

#6 - If God did not give the 10 commandments at Mt. Sinai, why is it that societies that have adhered to them have been relatively stable and why is it that the judges, magistrates and politicians of the new self appointed patrician caste have sabotaged them? Is this not an act of war against God?

#7 - If we have no soul, why do we feel conscious of ourselves?

#8 - If we have no free will, why do we feel that we are making free choices?

#9 - If no God exists, why are we obligated to be nice other people? Why do we feel the need to? Is it that we are mere animals who just seek material gain from others?

#10 – If we live in a purely material world then how do we account for the many supernatural experiences that people have, such as encounters with God, ghosts, spirits, etc (obviously, exactly what all of these encounters actually are are all interpreted by different people in different ways but the fact remains that people encounter things that do not fit a purely naturalistic world view). Are we really to conclude that all of these people are delusional, deceptive, or mad? Or could it be that people are having real encounters with real supernatural beings not explainable through purely scientific mediums?

#11 - Where does all of the incredibly complex information come from that is stored within DNA? Information doesn’t just appear by itself. Someone has to put it there.

#12 - Atheists are mostly found to be employed in the academic/government fields. What is it about the atheist personality that attracts them to these fields? And why have these fields been overrun by political correctness?

#13 - Where does all the matter in the universe come from?

#14 - What is the source of math and logic? The existence of this remarkably fine-tuned universe aside, how is it that we have these "languages of reality" to so elegantly describe and interact with it?

#15 - What type of government does atheistic philosophy translate into?
How does it understand the relationship between man and government?
What type of government structures flow from an atheistic world view?
Does it merely rely on someone else's system of thought, like the assumptions of naturalistic science?

#16 - Believers are often accused of being simple-minded,superstitious, or irrational.
Why is it so irrational for us to believe that the universe had a beginning because it actually was created; the laws of physics are so fine-tuned because it had a designer; people are preoccupied with good and evil because they are real things; we long for purpose and meaning because they exist to be had; life from non-life really is miraculous; consciousness and freewill seem real because they are; people are incurably religious because there is actually something real in religion.
If there really is no meaning or purpose to life, no objective good or evil, and the existence of "truth" itself is open to debate, by what standard will you condemn the beliefs of believers?

#17 - How does an atheist assign meaning to human activity? Is all meaning subjective, or do some activities have self-evident and objective worth and meaning. If so, what are these activities, and how to you arrive at their value?

#18 - Are humans of more intrinsic value than animals? Why or why not?

#19 - How does an atheist determine what is moral or immoral, right or wrong. Is there any objective standard or principles?

#20 - If you claim that Jesus was a myth then what alternative explanation do you offer to the New Testament documentation and the tradition of the church, and what support do you have for your theory? Is it because of the miracles that you doubt the Scriptures?

#21 - Why is it that despite all the lauded scientific 'achievements' that there is an interest in the occult and magic which is increasing?

#22 - Many people believe that the moon and other planets have an effect on the psyche. Although this may be called astrology the fact is that the moon has effects on the likes of ocean tides. Do you call this a superstition under the name of astrology or a scientific fact?

#23 - The problem of abiogenesis (the origin of the first lifeform) is one of the thorniest and most intractable issues in chemistry. Our increasing knowledge of microbiology and earth history has only added to the complexity of what needs to be explained. The simplest life is equivalent to modern bacteria, which is loaded with complex activity, information, and molecular "machines." The fossil record does not give evidence that there was a "prebiotic soup," or that there were any biological precursors to the first organisms, or that the atmosphere was the ideal mix to yield the necessary molecules, or that there was the expected long period of time between when the Earth could support life and when it actually appeared.

Evolutionists regularly segregate the abiogenesis problem from the issue of evolution because (1) it is a challenge they'd rather not be saddled with, or (2) it is the most logical point for possible divine intervention.
However, for the atheist there is no escaping this issue; they are obliged to seek out some purely natural explanation.

a). What hope for an explanation do you have? Are you satisfied to have problems like this that are unanswered, or even unanswerable?

b). In telling the tale of life on earth science writers often unconsciously use the word "miracle" for the appearance of the first organisms. Is this doubt on their behalf as to what they would like to prove as to the creation of existance?

c). What kind of evidence is needed before we are to actually accept that something like this really is a miracle?

#24 - The past several decades have added profoundly to our knowledge of chemistry, physics, and cosmology.

It has become increasingly clear that we live in a universe finely tuned for the support of complex life.

This fact is so universally acknowledged that even secular scientists have coined the term "Anthropic Principle" to describe it.
How is it that we live in such an exquisitely fine-tuned universe?
Even assuming that the universe could have popped out of nothingness, why should it have been such an orderly and hospitable one? Is there a scientific, testable answer for this question that does not simply appeal to imagination?

#25 - Atheism, by definition, holds that there is no God and nothing beyond this world of matter, space, time, and energy. Consistent with this viewpoint come a large number of necessary truths and the problems relating to them. Atheism is not made rational merely by the rejection of the evidences for God; it has its own wares to sell and difficulties to overcome.

a.) What Is the Evidence Against the Existence of God?

b.) If everyone on earth became an atheist how would the world be better off?

c.) Does not atheism have to rely on a system of coercion to enforce non belief?

d.) Most nations that have a system of government under a monarchy do so because of strong religious connection. The USA is referred to as 'One nation under God'. Is it a atheist aim to abolish royal families and the sovereignty of nations like the Maoists have achieved in Nepal and replace all sovereign nations with a world government?

e.) Why are atheists always at the forefront of marxist tainted 'causes' such as global warming, unrestricted immigration, gay marriage and other latte type neo-liberal causes?

f.) Why have atheists, pagans and satanists been infiltrating 'white supremacist' organisations and attempting to turn racial issues into solely religious issues? Examples being the anti-3rd world immigration issue is now an anti-muslim issue. The same could be said for leftist 'anti-zionist' causes that attack Jews solely on the basis of their religious beliefs and nothing else.

#26 - Why is it that atheists only target their approach to the young (20 and under) instead of those of their own age? Is it because people who are 40+ are not worth 'educating'? Or is it that gullible teenagers have bodies worth 'indoctrinating'?

#27 - If evolution is true, why is everything so determined that we can study it?

#28 - Is it possible to study something that is always changing, like evolution?

#29 - If you believe that there is no god, how do you explain the concept of synchronicity. Do you dispute it because of the law of large numbers says otherwise? Maybe you just have faith in this axiom and it is really not an accurate description of reality.

On Baal/Bael

First things first, let’s deal with the members of the disholy trinity. I am not a biblical scholar of any sort, nor do I specifically read the Bible. In fact I do rarely if ever, the only time I use it is for the psalms which I use in Shem ha Mephorash rituals. Nevertheless I will try to explain to you about the likes of Baal, Moloch and Mammon, about where they first come into our history and where they fit in today. I could give you endless Bible quotes about them but I just turn off at endless Bible quotes, so I won’t impose them upon you as a be all and end all concerning this but I will use some as examples. Regardless of what branch of the Abrahamic faith you belong to you should be asking your clergy or those who pertain to be of that faith for an explanation about these three. Maybe both of you might be better informed about them as a result of the research and notation that you will both do. If you are not of an Abrahamic faith then you might relate to what I say in a different context with different names. And if you are an atheist then you might find that you are no really an atheist by default because you do serve entities which by your own adoration you have made into gods.

The information that I am going to tell you is not entirely my own and is readily available on the internet, all I am going to give you is opinion and commentary. I think you will tell the difference between established fact and my opinion, if you cannot then as I said – check it out for yourself.
Let’s start with Baal.

Baal
Baal is both a name and a title; it can be taken to mean “lord” or “master”. It can be applied to both human and non-human entities, the head of a household can be considered a ‘baal’, cities and professions can have their own ‘baals’ and so on. But at the end of the day there can be only one supreme baal and that would depend on how many people worship him and their influence in the society of his acolytes. There was a Baal of Carthage and a Baal of Tyre in ancient times and this seemed to be a Canaanite custom.

There were also priesthoods devoted to Baal indicating that Baal was something more than just a title which could be assumed by humans. There were the Baals of Carthage and Tyre but there were also the likes of Baal-hamon (who had children sacrificed to him by being burned alive) and a name that will get your attention: Baal Zebub. Baalism infected ancient Israel with people using the name of one entity to describe God even though they are completely different beings. Here is an example from the wikipedia page on Baal – “After Gideon's death, according to Judges 8:33, the Israelites started to worship the Baalim (the Baals) especially Baal Berith ("Lord of the Covenant.")”.

If the Israelites were worshipping Jehovah in the beginning why would they begin to worship another entity which seems to be a plural ‘god’ if anything? The names of the baals came after the baals made or were given their positions, titles and claims. By confusing and misusing names and titles as well as redefining their applications it is easy to see how the ancient Israelites were led into corruption and apostasy even though they believed they were being faithful to God the entire time. But is this not the case today with the various sect and religions with their self made celebrity clergy?

Even back then there were many baals who were deemed to be masters and lords of many things, again is this not true today with celebrities now deemed experts on many subjects? Not only many subjects but varying ones at that. They will offer opinions on everything from the serious to the mundane and because they have been on TV their opinions are now deemed facts even though before their celebrity status their opinions regardless of how factual or infactual or just plain biased were deemed as just nonsense rants. And in fact they will change their opinions depending on the audience or person they are speaking to or wish to entertain, convert or both. If one was to say that their opinion on one subject contradicts a previously stated opinion on that subject the reply would be that either it was just an opinion at the time and the latest one is fact. Or that both opinions are true and you just don’t understand. But the most likely response is to either not answer you or drag in their groupies to attack you like a bunch of feral dogs, and this they will do because celebrity is now more important than facts or truth.

You have the likes of Richard Dawkins who is more renown for his celebrity rather than any science achievements, he writes books which atheists regard in a biblical manner in that they are infallible gospel and never to be questioned or challenged. He is regarded as a master of atheism but even by his own standards he is not 100% atheist. Then you have the likes of Katy Perry who is an outspoken supporter of gay marriage, but as she is not gay herself how is it she speaks on behalf of gays? And yet her fans will support and propagate her position whether or not they actually agree with it themselves. Why do fans of these two go against their natural thought processes in regards to decisions that might adversely affect their communities, their societies and possibly their families? I will call it a type of mob mentality, but to say mob mentality implies that there is no leadership in all of this. Maybe the best way to describe it is ‘in a dirty lake the scum always floats to the top’, but even then someone has to be stirring up the lake with a giant stick to drag the filth off the bottom and in addition someone has to constantly polluting it to encourage the bacteria.