|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 47 (9216 total) |
| |
KING IYK | |
Total: 920,531 Year: 853/6,935 Month: 134/719 Week: 126/116 Day: 40/13 Hour: 1/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: A fatal logical flaw in creationism? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HoonWoo Inactive Member |
If we are too complex and thus must be created by God, then who created God? A super God? Or is it just us?
A fatal logical flaw? We created God, not the other way round!We created many Gods, but One God tries to rule us all! Hmmmmm.... this is begining to sound like poetry from LOTR...It wasn't intentional. I'm not into poetry but let me try. God created us,But who created God? A super God? Or is it just us? It's us! it's us! We created God, Not the other way round! We created many Gods, But one God tries to rule us all! Hehehe... Any suggestion on how to improve on it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trofim Inactive Member |
Clever!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221 ![]() Inactive Member |
Neat-O
The earth is flat.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 483 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Creationism is not concerned with logic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1720 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
I am curious why admin leaves this in ID space. A fatal flaw in creationism is of no real concern to proper ID as the two are intrinsically incompatable.
(Not that ID is concerned with logic either)
{{{sits back and waits for flood ... }}} we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HoonWoo Inactive Member |
Doesn't ID implies a creator?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1720 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Doesn't ID implies a creator?
Technically no. In practice yes. But that doesn't make it creationism. Intelligent design - Wikipedia
ID itself does not specify the identity of the designer. The major promoters take pains to publicly separate it from religion and the biblical account of creation.
The designer could be the archtypical SciFi Horror Green Monster Drooling Spacecreature ... The common usage of "creationism" in America is creation according to a literal interpretation of the bible ... which is not ID. Creationism - Wikipedia
Creationism is a belief that the origin of the universe and everything in it is due to an event of creation brought about by the deliberate act of a creator god. Most religions have significant creation myths, but 'creationism' in its modern form is associated with the religious tradition of conservative Christianity which includes members of many groups and denominations. Fundamentalists are credited as the originators of the movement, but Creationists are also Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Wesleyan/Holiness and conservatives of mainline Protestant churches, such as the Confessing Movements, and some Roman Catholics, Jews and many Muslims. In ID the design process is ongoing -- a constant tweaking of the design if you will -- and does not confine itself to a single moment of creation. The fact that this makes it fundamentally incompatible with creationism seems to escape the attention of most proponents. And the fact that the "tweaking" must be done by supernatural action means that it is a faith ("Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence."). Even if the activating agent and the whole implementation process is purely natural (such as radiation causing mutation causing change over time with selection by survival and sounding a lot like evolution ... ) the belief of a designer behind the process is based on faith. Note that there is no fundamental incompatibility between ID and evolution. See is ID properly pursued? (click) thread for more discussion on what ID (should not be and) is and (what it should be and) is not. Enjoy. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gman Inactive Member |
This is my understanding of the concept of "God".
Where would a mass of infinite space end?If I were to ask this question it would show that don't understand the concept of infinite space. In the same way God doesn't need a maker because he isn't "a thing". If we assume that time actually exists as we perceive it to exist, (A linear series of events moving from past to future) then time must have a starting point. Otherwise we would never have reached the present moment because an infinite number of events would have already happened in the past...and infinity can't end. God does not exist within time as experiencing a series of events but simply "is". Therefore he would not need a starting point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Almost everybody now believes that something had to be eternal. Why not then an intelligence to explain the complexity and wonder of the rest?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HoonWoo Inactive Member |
All the complexities and wonder... You forgot to mention diversity.
The diversity that we see which include bad Designs suggests there's no ID. Random variations which gives rise to diversty is common in the Universe and implies no creator. We created many Gods!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gman Inactive Member |
By "bad designs" I will assume you are referring to the existence of death and pain. This is only a problem from a non-eternal worldview. Below is one worldview in which this is not a problem.
---------- 1. God is eternal 2. Evil is temporary 3. Without wounds there can be no healingWithout wrong doing there can be no forgiveness Without death there can be no resurrection Without sacrifice there can be no love God in himself is loving and merciful and all that good stuff.. but in order to play out these attributes so that WE can know him - evil must temporarily exist.Imperfection is an infinitesimally small blip in eternity that God endures only because it is essential to reveal Gods glory, which lasts forever. --------------------------- The above stated worldview is one based off of an interpretation of Romans 9:22-23 in the bible. "Rom 9:22 [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to makehis power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: Rom 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1720 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
actually
By "bad designs" usually means things like backwards facing retinas in humans, but forward facing for octopuses. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HoonWoo Inactive Member |
Octopus is a brilliant design, in some ways superior to human.
But is there a perfect design - a perfect complex organism? ID 'scientists' should look at the big picture - not small parts here and there. My challenge to ID: find me a perfectly designed complex organism!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gman Inactive Member |
First one would need a standard by which to define perfect. Assuming the existance of God, God would be the standard, so only God, or an exact replica of God would be "perfect".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gman Inactive Member |
By your definitions, what would make one thing bad and another thing perfect?
I think first one must determine what the meaning of life is, and then measure how well life is achieving that goal in order to measure any level of good or bad.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025