Actual, this is not a particularly compelling or effective retort.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evolution?
- Thread starter MarvelousWorksofGod
- Start date
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Actual, neither is this.
OmarKhayyam
Well-Known Member
God sets on a three legged stool.
Human imagination ignorance and fear.
Human imagination ignorance and fear.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Well, at least his stool will be as stable as possible.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
Actual, it is.
My I ask why you think so?
Alceste
Vagabond
I'll bite.
Everybody thinks so, Jay, except creationists. The argument that in order to exist, the universe must have been created by a god requires that the god be created by some other god (because otherwise god, like the universe, could not exist), and that god by another, and so on. Like an infinite set of Russian dolls.
OK, now give me one of your standard churlish and obtuse retorts.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Not to be a pain... but I don't think so.
not always... one could think of 'god' as "co-existant" with the universe.
wa:do
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
More than likely... I've noticed that certain posters would rather attack and dismiss than explain. While challenge is good, there is a healthy and an unhealthy way of doing so.
wa:do
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Personally this statement: "The fact everything came from one particle is so childish to me!"
Makes me wonder how thinking everything came from "god" is any less childish?
It is almost mocking it's own theology. Everything can't come from one point of origin... this is equally against 'big bang' as it is 'god-did-it'... as both essentially propose the same idea.
It's like listening to Ben Stein mischaracterize and mock evolution as "lightning striking a mud puddle" yet find "god made man of dust" completely serious and noble.... they are essentially the same thing. You can't see one as silly but not the other.
wa:do
DarkSun
:eltiT
Firstly, I love your display picture.
Secondly, what you just alluded to has nothing to do with evolution.
DarkSun
:eltiT
I'll bite.
Everybody thinks so, Jay, except creationists. The argument that in order to exist, the universe must have been created by a god requires that the god be created by some other god (because otherwise god, like the universe, could not exist), and that god by another, and so on. Like an infinite set of Russian dolls.
OK, now give me one of your standard churlish and obtuse retorts.
Maybe God is so brilliant that He created Himself?
MarvelousWorksofGod
Everyone knows he's Real
Everything has to come from something, but that would be impossible because that would be a never ending cycle until you meet the beggining, so there has to be a God
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
So god is a 'nothing'?
if everything has to come from 'something' ... then god can't be a 'something'.
wa:do
if everything has to come from 'something' ... then god can't be a 'something'.
wa:do
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
First, explain how a cyclic universe is imposable.
Second, explain how your reasoning points to "there has to be a God"
Third, explain how the Abrahamic God is the God that "has to be"
Finally, explain how this, or your opening statement relates to evolution or the Theory of Evolution.
themadhair
Well-Known Member
Wait…wot?
Unless everything has a natural bottom up process, including your god.