Creationism

[brewer]

People don't build an intrusive social institutions around abstract mathematics. Tommy did not make this argument just for fun. 

This has nothing to do with whether I find examining his arguments to be fun or not.

Most people with hobbies don't insist that their abstract hobbies be taken seriously or divert all conversations to talk about their abstract hobbies.

This thread is about examining particular arguments for God. This will be like an intellectual exercise for some, and they are naturally going to participate in such threads. And perhaps they find that maybe someone else has not examined some of these arguments properly and would like to elaborate or whatever. Doesn't mean what this person is therefore insisting that their hobbies be taken seriously and definitely doesn't mean that they're diverting all conversations to talk about something else.

You brought up the fun aspect, and hobbies, not me.

No, this thread title is about Creationism (which is the counter to evolution) and all the baggage that apologists have attached to that school of thought (mostly watchmaker). Then Bel entered, stated that "what created god" was ignorant (a valid question in light of special pleading), making an insulting monkey reference, and then the next Bel post drags in first cause. And off we go. And if you differ with Bel, then you "haven't examined properly" is his go to position. And the forum has discussed the Aquinas 5 ad nauseam as an argument for god. 

I indicated that Aquinas (Tommy) did not make the fist cause argument for fun. It was not simple a mental exercise. It's purpose was for the justification, rationalization and validation that a god exists. A god which he also defines. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aquinas/

Why don't you ask Bel if his religious philosophy is only a hobby and that he should not be taken seriously.