evolution or creation? lets talk... (page 18)

Satanus

DD

I don't need to give you a natural response to that question.

You let your god off too easily. Creationists like to keep their god free of any further responsibility. The point is that he provides no direct evidence of his existence, when it is the easiest thing for him to do.

You on the other hand have no other force to attribute nature to, or do you? I will accept a supernatural explanation from you for the origin of life if you would like.

In pantheism, it is a god of sorts in the works, a subtle force that underlies everything.

S

caligirl

In my opinion, I think that God created life originally and then let it evolve for entertainment. Then to further his fun, leave bits and pieces of evidence of that evolutionary process for us "higher" life forms to find and ponder over.

Highly entertaining to watch scientists try to come up with a good explanation for a platapus, eh?

Deputy Dog

S

The point is that he provides no direct evidence of his existence, when it is the easiest thing for him to do.

If we are here and we don't have a workable natural explanation of how we got here, I would say that God exist because of the impossibility of the contrary. We would be the evidence of His existence.

TopHat

Do you not think that God had the capability to design the start of the Universe in a manner that it evolved to where we are now?
steve

The Universe can be as old as you want it to be...God didn't say when he started the creation of the Universe. But the Creation of life on earth. I believe it would be a total waste of time to have any life evolve over billions of years when one can create a whole being at one sitting.

stevenyc

D Dog:

Steve
Do you not think that God had the capability to design the start of the Universe in a manner that it evolved to where we are now?
That sounds a little supernatural does it not?

Maybe, but what is your answer to my question? steve PS, welcome to the Jedi club!

Little Drummer Boy

LDB,
2) They are far better word-smiths than I am, and anyway exactly how many people does it take to tell you that, in effect, the sky is blue and not purple with pink polka dots?
The sky is NOT blue. It only seems that way from your perspective, due to (1) the physical phenomenon known as Rayleigh scattering and (2) your capacity to perceive wavelengths/particles of light.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul

I had you in mind as one of those word-smiths. I defer to you and say that I mis-spoke. Only by the way that my eyes perceive existance is the sky what I term to be blue. And when I say blue, I mean blue compared to other objects that I perceive that I also describe as being blue. I would humbly opine that most people would also describe the sky as being some shade of blue (unless they are those pesky creationists).

Satanus

DD

If we are here and we don't have a workable natural explanation of how we got here, I would say that God exist because of the impossibility of the contrary. We would be the evidence of His existence.

In this scenario, you are rejecting simpler solutions and excepting one that is infinitely more complex, ie an omniscient, onmipotent god solution. In pantheism, it is all natural, all evolves. S

Deputy Dog

Steve

Maybe, but what is your answer to my question?

God has the ability to do what ever He likes. This would still make this a supernatural creation.

PS, welcome to the Jedi club!

Thanks!

Deputy Dog

S

We are back to square 1. How do you get pantheism started in a natural way?

Satanus

DD

It starts from a random turbulence in the void.

S

evolution or creation? lets talk...

Share this