Why do Creationists have faith in a second rate creator?

They were surely based on an interpretation of reality? They are imaginary concepts used to illustrate an idea, as are all Gods.

The central question is getting somewhat lost here. JUC's imaginary examples served only to muddy the waters.Leaving aside quibbles over the definition of "better", the basic question is why anyone should consider the Judeo-Christian God over and above all other options. Why not worship Zeus, for example? It's a fair question.Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

Why not just address the argument?

Purpledawn,Having watched this thread I feel that you've really not engaged with JUC in a fair way. If someone asks you what the time is do you ask them for previous examples of such a question being asked?Arguing that JUC's initial characterisations were limited is all well and good, but you now appear to be looking for increasingly spurious reasons not to answer JUC's question. Why is that?Why should any one god be chosen above all other possibilities? What makes one concept of God more valid, so to speak, than another? Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

Yes, but JUC designed them as examples Gods that might have evolved if history had taken a different course.In any case, as things stand one is presented with a whole host of Gods from different cultures. Why pick one above all others?Of course, the one obvious answer is that humans are given to taking up the mantle of the culture into which they are born, but that weakens the claim that one God is objectively more "valid" than another, unless a God's "validity" is directly related to either the number of followers it has or the predominance of the culture that surrounds it.Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.