derek
Lets try this again. Let say God creates a box full of complex things out of nothing. Why do you assume that God has to be one of the complex things inside of the box?
D Dog
Intelligent Design
by Delta20 234 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
funkyderek
Lets try this again. Let say God creates a box full of complex things out of nothing. Why do you assume that God has to be one of the complex things inside of the box?
I don't. Given that we have no information about what's outside the box, why do you assume it has to be God? Why couldn't it be, for example, an algorithm for generating complexity?
-
Midget-Sasquatch
Why do you assume that God has to be one of the complex things inside of the box?
Whose assuming God to be one of those things in the box? You're just side-stepping the point. Is God a complex entity or not? Wouldn't many people's conception be that God is the most complex entity of all?
-
Deputy Dog
derek
You talk about "laws of our universe". Some people call them laws of nature. Most everyone that believes in God, believes He is supernatural. I would simply maintain that natural laws do not apply to a supernatural being.
D Dog
-
funkyderek
You talk about "laws of our universe". Some poeple call them laws of nature. Most everyone that believes in God, believes He is supernatural. I would simply maintain that natural laws do not apply to a supernatural being.
In which case, we have no way of determining anything about such a being. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that such a being exists. Therefore, your theories prove nothing and we're right back where we started.
-
seeitallclearlynow
In which case, we have no way of determining anything about such a being. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that such a being exists. Therefore, your theories prove nothing and we're right back where we started.
You gotta love Derek.
-
funkyderek
You gotta love Derek.
Thanks seeit
-
Deputy Dog
derek
As I said about the evidence, we could argue all day. But if I believe that the universe is too complex to have evolved, is it not illogical for me to think that maybe, we were created? I never said it (ID) proves anything. But, it is one logical conclusion. You are welcomed to your own idea.
D Dog
-
Liberty II
Thanks seattleniceguy for the welcome.
The purpose of my post was simply to explain how I came to my own conclusions about whether God exists or not by allowing myself to be exposed to rational/scientific thinking after years of Christian/JW brainwashing. The problem many Theists face in understanding our point of view is that they are woefully ignorant of science and how it works. I know I was before reading up on the subject and then taking University classes.
There is no "word game" to win or tactics to "outsmart" the sloppy language used by an opponent in a contest debate. This subject is so important that only reality and clear thinking should prevail and not debating skills or points for misused words. I am not interested in who is the most skilled and eloquent writer but rather in how the arguments stack up against the natural Universe I am experiancing for real during my life.
God may well exist, but He has chosen to remain invisible, silent, and inactive. At the same time He has given us as our only evidence for His existance a Universe which is chaotic, illogical, cruel, and filled with constant and violent change. If the Bible is His true guide book, then it presents us with many huge contradictions since He is said to be unchanging, loving, just, and that we were made in his image. If humans are able to think and behave rationally and to contruct logic systems then shouldn't the Universe reflect these qualities as well? How could a reasonable God demand our full belief in Him as a condition for our salvation by offering such flimsy and contradictory evidence?
It is also possible that our own dark and irrational natures and the cruel chaotic Universe are a reflection of the Creator but if that is the case His promises of salvation would be unreliable and belief in Him would be pointless in any case.
-
funkyderek
I never said it (ID) proves anything. But, it is one logical conclusion. You are welcomed to your own idea.
OK. We've been talking at cross-purposes then. It's certainly conceivable that there's a complex invisible creator outside our universe that is not detectable in any way nor subject to the laws of our own universe nor even laws of logic. He may be able to make something out of nothing or square a circle, but without any evidence he's no more likely than the Invisible Pink Unicorn (PBUH).
I see no reason to believe in such a being, when there is no evidence.