RE: The absurd need for logical proofs for God
December 8, 2020 at 6:00 pm
(This post was last modified: December 8, 2020 at 6:04 pm by The Architect Of Fate.)
Quote:We really are here, and we should account for that.God is not an explanation it's a lazy excuse not to look for one.
(December 8, 2020 at 2:27 pm)Grandizer Wrote:Even if he brought the first cause argument he would fail anyway.(December 7, 2020 at 2:01 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: It is exactly the subject of debate. An atheist thinks that, because we figured out some of the processes that took place along this causal chain, we're free to dispense with its starting point. It's really, really, really stupid.
Well, it's a good thing that was not what I argued. My point is you can't appeal to apparent design in nature as evidence for the divine, since we have very good scientific/naturalistic explanations for that. If you want to argue that nevertheless there has to be some starting point ultimately, then you should've brought up one of the first cause arguments instead of this watchmaker type of argument.
ETA: A question out of curiosity. Do you believe God is involved in the natural selection aspect of biological evolution?
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
![[Image: Canada_Flag.jpg?v=1646203843]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=cdn.shopify.com%2Fs%2Ffiles%2F1%2F0630%2F5310%2F3332%2Fproducts%2FCanada_Flag.jpg%3Fv%3D1646203843)
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
