The most stupid misconceptions about Islam

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Kant rejected the teleological argument, explicitly, in the same work that you just quoted.

I'm aware of that, pal. I don't recall claiming that Kant defended the teleological arguemnt. Read what I wrote, again :

"Even Kant, a reference in your western culture, cited the teleological argument with respect."

You read that right, congratulations. Cited, not defended.

Told ya, you do misunderstand words and make stupid mistakes. The kafir concept might actually be too hard for you, just like all these uneducated suicide bombers and extremists out there.

---

Yes, but Khloro thinks he was, which - for purposes of discussion - is what counts.

So, besides your expertise at evaluating teleological arguments, one so profound that you dismissed it immediately as rubbish whereas Kant needed to write elaborate refutations, you can read my thoughts too?
No, I never said Kant was in agreement with the argument, I was just responding to your "rubbish" comment on it.

---

Before Darwin, many scientists and philosophers, including Newton, thought that the complexity of life was evidence of a Deity. They were wrong.

Edit: Kant actually thought that living things were their own cause.  Actually, he wasn't far off.

W.L. Craig does have a good updated argument. Darwinism, even if fully accepted by the theist, actually supports his case. How unlikely it is for natural selection and mutation to yield to conscious creatures ? The idea is simple : whatever the mechanism that lead to all the variety of life, it was the supreme being's plan all along.

This line of thought clearly shows that Darwin's discoveries are irrelevant to the question of whether God exists or not. And we're back to square one : whether one is genuinely prepared to accept that all the majesty one sees in the universe is the product of absolute chaos and randomness, or worse, nothingness.

When backpedaling that quickly, it’s important to use your mirrors.

Boru