If Adam and Eve had two boys, where did Cain and Abel's wives come from?

Don't tell me Venus.

LMFAO 

Sugar and spice. 

The troll store. 

That is a very old question. Good one but old. Tons of info, data, speculation available for you on the google. If you have a serious question and are truly researching others' thoughts don't start it with fundies. 

The western god works in mysterious ways is a pretty solid answer.

speculation

That about sums it up.

It's all speculation. 

Speculative info
Speculative data

Budda knows the real answer. 

It's all speculation.

So question back on the broad topic of speculation.

Why does man seem to have some innate need to look for meaning. Look for some reason why we are.

Yet, the really isn't any to be found.

This a philosophy of the Absurd, most notably written about by Camus in the stranger, and more directly in "the myth of sisyphis".

The answer is easy for the theist - Camus discounts this as too easy an answer -

But the answer is much harder for an atheist - leading an examined life. Camus answer - paraphrasing - was no more complicated or complete - just to be - keep looking for meaning, don't expect to find any - but don't worry about it.

So the question he asks, and I repeat is if you are not a theist, why do you exist? Why do you work ?

Camus was way more blunt, he asked - why not just kill yourself. As in the myth of Sisyphus - why are you pushing the rock up the hill. 

where did Cain and Abel's wives

Mail order from Russia, DUH. 

So the question he asks, and I repeat is if you are not a theist, why do you exist? Why do you work ?

I'm here because my mom gave birth to me. #science

Your question sounds like atheists should have no reason to live. How ridiculous.

What are you going to do when you finally realize that for decades you've devoted yourself to an imaginary being? 

I and Camus did not ask how you are here, we asked why are you here. Sorry but science can't answer that one.

Your question sounds like atheists should have no reason to live. How ridiculous.

Well the question is not mine, it is Camus' - wish it was mine. And the question is far from ridicules - but it does require some effort to truly understand the question - and much more thought to come to your own thoughtful personal answer.

What are you going to do when you finally realize that for decades you've devoted yourself to an imaginary being?

firstly it is an ignorant position to believe you know it, as a matter of fact, that God is imaginary. It is no such thing, and know intelligent person ever thought so. It is, as what started the thread a matter of speculation. Well, in thoughtful people a matter of more than speculation - but certainly not fact.

But to answer the question with a tongue in cheek answer - it is a win - win for me - if there is a God, I die and hopeful in a state of grace and enter paradise. If I am wrong, I'm dead.

What I really hope is I am right and we both get to argue about something else for eternity.

I make no sacrifice for my faith, it is no burden to live what I perceive as a good life. As I am sure many atheists feel about living a moral life. 

The story as told in the Old Testament of the Bible is allegory to start with. 

I make no sacrifice for my faith, it is no burden to live what I perceive as a good life.

Exactly. Which came first religious standards of conduct or societal/cultural standards of conduct? Descartes argued that point as well. 

Religion was created by man, therefore B. 

firstly it is an ignorant position to believe you know it, as a matter of fact, that God is imaginary. It is no such thing, and know intelligent person ever thought so. It is, as what started the thread a matter of speculation. Well, in thoughtful people a matter of more than speculation - but certainly not fact.

Lol. Many intelligent people assert that god is imaginary.

Is the statement "unicorns don't exist" ignorant too? 

Religion was created by man, therefore B.

agree, but who created man?? that one has not been answered yet by anyone as a matter of fact. It is a matter of reason, and I can make a very reasonable case that there was a non-created creator - even without using faith.

There is no reasonable case to be made that there is no uncrated - creator that I know of, there is only a case of faith - faith in science that there will be one day.

It is the paradox of where those who believe in science, leave reason and go to faith.

There is one good reasonable argument against the existence of God, the argument of evil - but, I think weaker in reason, and easier countered than the arguments that God exists. 

Lol. Many intelligent people assert that god is imaginary.

no intelligent person assert it as a matter of fact. It is far from fact. That is what I said.

Many intelligent people assert it as a matter of reason, but not as fact. 

But to answer the question with a tongue in cheek answer - it is a win - win for me - if there is a God, I die and hopeful in a state of grace and enter paradise. If I am wrong, I'm dead.

You've answered your own original question for me.

Assuming I'm right, and god doesn't exist, your life was not in vain. God didn't make your life fulfilling, but you did.

Atheists already realize this. 

I can make a very reasonable case that there was a non-created creator

No, you cannot without referring to scripture, which is self referential and paradoxical.

There is absolutely zero science to backup your claim.

Any reasonable person has stopped trying to argue there was an "un-created creator".

By your logic, you could just as easily argue that ANY thing was uncreated. 

and assuming I'm right ???

Atheists already realize this.

change "realize" to believe, or think.

You continue in this thread to respond like the absence of God is a matter of fact - it is no such thing.

What I am trying to get you to is we both can have reasonable beliefs - and they can be different - and we can respect each others beliefs as valid and reasonable, just different. 

No, you cannot without referring to scripture, which is self referential and paradoxical.

I have already done it on here like 20 times, and have never used the bible as support.

There is absolutely zero science to backup your claim.

Actually the big bang theory ( in large measure discovered by a priest) - removed the single best argument against the ontological argument.

But there is also no science behind a positive assertion that there is no god. 

You don't believe in the absence of something. Do you believe that unicorns don't exist, or do unicorns simply not exist?

I will change my language when you change "in god we trust" to "in a speculative god some of us trust" 

Any reasonable person has stopped trying to argue there was an "un-created creator".

not even close to true - it is argued in philosophy circles continually - it is the ultimate unanswered question. 

I have already done it on here like 20 times, and have never used the bible as support

Nonsense :) The origin of your entire viewpoint comes from the bible. It's a paradox. 

You don't believe in the absence of something. Do you believe that unicorns don't exist, or do unicorns simply not exist?

Fuzz - there are 3 kinds of things.

There are facts, such as 2 + 2 = 4. Objects attract each other, etc.
Whether or not there is a God, or a unicorn is not a matter of fact.

There is reason. I have never seen a unicorn, there has never been any credible evidence there has ever been a unicorn. There is no reasonable argument that makes me think there is a unicorn - therefor - I believe as a matter of reason - there is no unicorn.

there is matters of faith. I believe there are unicorns, And I do not need reason or science, I just believe. 

Nonsense :) The origin of your entire viewpoint comes from the bible. It's a paradox.

Yea because I lie so much on here. Or I am just so stupid I don't know what is in my argument.

There is no biblical reference in any reasoned argument I have ever made. Just go look up the ontological argument - tell me where the biblical reference is. 

So reason tells you there is no unicorn. But you believe in them anyway, despite reason.

That's the very definition of unreasonable. 

Yea because I lie so much on here. Or I am just so stupid I don't know what is in my argument.

There is no biblical reference in any reasoned argument I have ever made. Just go look up the ontological argument - tell me where the biblical reference is.?

I'm not saying you directly referenced or cited it. Your bias comes from it. 

So reason tells you there is no unicorn. But you believe in them anyway, despite reason.

I don't believe in unicorns, I belief in God, because I have read, understood, and challenged all the classic arguments in both directions, and as a matter of reason, I believe God is.

As a matter of faith I believe all kinds of other things about God that are not matters of reason, but of faith. 

That is a very old question. Good one but old. Tons of info, data, speculation available for you on the google. If you have a serious question and are truly researching others' thoughts don't start it with fundies.



Since it is speculation, it is all opinion. I am interested in the fundies opinions on this hot mess. 

I don't believe in unicorns, I belief in God, because I have read, understood, and challenged all the classic arguments in both directions, and as a matter of reason, I believe God is.

As a matter of faith I believe all kinds of other things about God that are not matters of reason, but of faith.

Now you're contradicting yourself 

I'm not saying you directly referenced or cited it. Your bias comes from it.

That is not what you said, or implied. but whatever -

That may well be, I started way back in the day when I seriously looked at this question from a philosophic perspective - not a theological perspective with the proposition that God exists. Not sure how this is any different than your coming at the same question with a proposition that God does not exists. 

Now you're contradicting yourself

Don't think so - can you explain ?? 

Since it is speculation, it is all opinion. I am interested in the fundies opinions on this hot mess.

It is not just opinion - it is more it is a belief driven by a reasoned argument.

Pure opinions are for the lazy and tend to be much more faith ( either secular or religious) than reason. 

You claim you believe in god through reason, by reading others people's opinion based on their faith.

People don't believe in god through reason as per your unicorn reason analogy. There is no evidence of god. Zero. Just like unicorns.

It's contradictory for you to say reason tells you unicorns don't exist, but god does. 

You're almost an atheist anyway. You already don't believe in 6000 gods. I just don't believe in one more. 

I guess Juanita or noone else can answer my initial question. 

I did. Sugar and spice. 

You claim you believe in god through reason, by reading others people's opinion based on their faith.

incorrect - I believe in God by reading, understanding and evaluating reasoned (an absence of faith) arguments for the existence of God.

People don't believe in god through reason as per your unicorn reason analogy. There is no evidence of god. Zero. Just like unicorns.

Many many many people believe God exists due to reason. You are just flat incorrect here. And it is your "faith" not "reason" in your beliefs that is making it difficult to see the point I am making.

It's contradictory for you to say reason tells you unicorns don't exist, but god does.

Most certainly not, I have never seen a good reasoned argument that makes me believe unicorns exist. I have seen maybe 15 good reasoned arguments that God exists, and only 1 good reasoned argument that He does not, and the counter to the latter is better. By reason alone, as I stated above, I believe God is, and unicorns don't. 

People don't believe in god through reason as per your unicorn reason analogy. There is no evidence of god. Zero. Just like unicorns.

You really need to stop saying that, and go to a philosophic site you like and type in arguments for God - you will find many arguments reasonable cases for the existence of God.

If what you really mean by this is - God is, is not a matter of fact. Then I agree, God is, is not a matter of fact. Just as much as God is not - is not a matter of fact. 

And back to my point that ANY attempt at reasoning for the existence of god is based solely on the bible.

It's really simple: no bible, no god.