☢The Theistic Response➼ to Atheists saying, "It Doesn't mean God Did it"

[The Joker]

I appreciate your point, but I am having trouble accepting that common argument from atheists, when getting deep into the cosmological argument "It doesn't mean God did it, so I lack belief in God".

This is False dilemma, The problem I see.

If it can be proven that we didn't come here by an accident by mindless dumb products of evolution without meaning or purpose, then we obviously know God did it, But the atheist may say "BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN GOD DID IT Just because we didn't come here by an accident through chance of evolution!" Well in that case if you prefer not to use the term "God," you may simply call him/it: "The Extremely Powerful, Uncaused, Necessarily Existing, Non-Contingent, Non-Physical, Immaterial, Eternal Being Who Created the Entire Universe...And Everything In It." With a meaning and a purpose to life.

[Silver]

If it can be proven that we didn't come here by an accident by mindless dumb products of evolution without meaning or purpose, then we obviously know God did it.

False.

[Jesster]

Making yet another thread with the same flawed argument does not make it any less flawed.

[Simon Moon]

If it can be proven that we didn't come here by an accident by mindless dumb products of evolution without meaning or purpose, then we obviously know God did it, But the atheist may say "BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN GOD DID IT Just because we didn't come here by an accident through chance of evolution!" Well in that case if you prefer not to use the term "God," you may simply call him/it: "The Extremely Powerful, Uncaused, Necessarily Existing, Non-Contingent, Non-Physical, Immaterial, Eternal Being Who Created the Entire Universe...And Everything In It." With a meaning and a purpose to life.[/color]

I see several problems.

First of all, the use of pointing out to theists that " it doesn't mean god did it", is in response to their attempts at disproving evolution. But what it seems like you may not be fully understanding is, that if evolution were to be proven wrong, our existence could be due to some other natural process.

You are the one proposing a false dichotomy. "It's either evolution or a god". But it could be, either evolution, or some other natural process yet discovered.

"Magic" does not become the second best choice, if one natural process is eliminated.

Next up on the list of problems with your OP is this phrase: 'accident by mindless dumb products of evolution without meaning or purpose'. This is a strawman. Please take note of the word "selection" in the phrase "natural selection". Evolutionary traits are SELECTED by environmental pressure, not by accident. Just like dog breed traits are not accidental.

[Minimalist]

If it can be proven that we didn't come here by an accident by mindless dumb products of evolution without meaning or purpose,

But you cannot do that.

Case dismissed.

[Simon Moon]

I appreciate your point, but I am having trouble accepting that common argument from atheists, when getting deep into the cosmological argument "It doesn't mean God did it, so I lack belief in God".

This is False dilemma, The problem I see.

If it can be proven that we didn't come here by an accident by mindless dumb products of evolution without meaning or purpose, then we obviously know God did it, But the atheist may say "BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN GOD DID IT Just because we didn't come here by an accident through chance of evolution!" Well in that case if you prefer not to use the term "God," you may simply call him/it: "The Extremely Powerful, Uncaused, Necessarily Existing, Non-Contingent, Non-Physical, Immaterial, Eternal Being Who Created the Entire Universe...And Everything In It." With a meaning and a purpose to life.

So, I see you opened another thread with much the same misunderstandings in it. You were corrected in that one too. So, from now on, should I expect you will not pay attention to corrections for any of your strawman arguments? Please let me know so I don't have to waste my time responding to you.

To repeat, in hopes it will sink in, if evolution were to be proved wrong tomorrow, that would not mean a god is responsible for our existence. It would just mean that the process that lead to our existence would be unknown. It would also not mean that positing a god would become the next most likely explanation.

If you want to posit that a god is the most likely explanation for our existence, you know what you have to do? Provide demonstrable, falsifiable evidence, and reasoned argument to support your hypothesis. Disproving a natural explanation for any observation, does not mean the supernatural becomes the better explanation, by default.

[downbeatplumb]

I appreciate your point, but I am having trouble accepting that common argument from atheists, when getting deep into the cosmological argument "It doesn't mean God did it, so I lack belief in God".

This is False dilemma, The problem I see.

If it can be proven that we didn't come here by an accident by mindless dumb products of evolution without meaning or purpose, then we obviously know God did it, But the atheist may say "BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN GOD DID IT Just because we didn't come here by an accident through chance of evolution!" Well in that case if you prefer not to use the term "God," you may simply call him/it: "The Extremely Powerful, Uncaused, Necessarily Existing, Non-Contingent, Non-Physical, Immaterial, Eternal Being Who Created the Entire Universe...And Everything In It." With a meaning and a purpose to life.

Well here's your problem.

The alternative to evolution is not god but just something other than evolution.

In order to get some traction for your god idea you'd have to do more than just say god did it you'd have to say how god did it , what process did it use how did it do it. Why all the excess sperm and wasted ova if its all directed. Why in fact make it look for all the world like it is a process of natural selection.

You'd also have to prove that god was a thing before you can show it did something.

God  is like an invisible six foot rabbit that lives in my house and eats all the biscuits.
The biscuits keep going but I'm sure there's a better explanation.

[Whateverist]

[color=#333333]I appreciate your point, but I am having trouble accepting that common argument from atheists, when getting deep into the cosmological argument "It doesn't mean God did it, so I lack belief in God".

I object to your phrasing. "It doesn't mean God did it" --so--> "I lack a belief in God". Are you being deliberately obtuse about this? The lack of any belief in God is my initial state. Your cosmological mumbo jumbo, even if it succeeded, would have nothing to do with my disbelief. The disbelief is where I start and only a successful demonstration of a God's existence -preceded by an adequate definition- will change that.

This is False dilemma, The problem I see.

Indeed it is, why do you bother manufacturing it?

[size=large]If it can be proven that we didn't come here by an accident by mindless dumb products of evolution without meaning or purpose,

It has been adequately demonstrated that evolution is precisely how we've come to be as we are to minds much better than your own. The only 'accidentalness', 'mindlessness', 'dumbness', 'meaninglessness' and 'purposelessness' involved is in the morass of your own twisted mind. Take those gratuitous adjectives away and you'd have an unambiguously true statement. With them you have the same incoherence that infects your 'definition' of God.

[The Joker]

I appreciate your point, but I am having trouble accepting that common argument from atheists, when getting deep into the cosmological argument "It doesn't mean God did it, so I lack belief in God".

This is False dilemma, The problem I see.

If it can be proven that we didn't come here by an accident by mindless dumb products of evolution without meaning or purpose, then we obviously know God did it, But the atheist may say "BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN GOD DID IT Just because we didn't come here by an accident through chance of evolution!" Well in that case if you prefer not to use the term "God," you may simply call him/it: "The Extremely Powerful, Uncaused, Necessarily Existing, Non-Contingent, Non-Physical, Immaterial, Eternal Being Who Created the Entire Universe...And Everything In It." With a meaning and a purpose to life.

Well here's your problem.

The alternative to evolution is not god but just something other than evolution.

In order to get some traction for your god idea you'd have to do more than just say god did it you'd have to say how god did it , what process did it use how did it do it. Why all the excess sperm and wasted ova if its all directed. Why in fact make it look for all the world like it is a process of natural selection.

You'd also have to prove that god was a thing before you can show it did something.

God  is like an invisible six foot rabbit that lives in my house and eats all the biscuits.
The biscuits keep going but I'm sure there's a better explanation.

Thanks, An alternative natural process will still fall into the category of "we came by an accident". Furthermore there are two types of magic. Type 1 and Type 2. Type 1 is is a "Magic trick" it seems like a magic but it is fake and Type 2 is a "Supernatural Magic done by a spirit".  Spirit Magic is a real phenomena whereas fake magic like tricks are fake. We have not found any natural process other than evolution you are placing your hope in blind faith in the hope that other natural explanations will come along in the future, we can't go beyond what we know. But above all, why would think that evolution is true?

---

Making yet another thread with the same flawed argument does not make it any less flawed.

Point dismissed on saying this is flawed, as no reason given.

[Jesster]

Making yet another thread with the same flawed argument does not make it any less flawed.

Point dismissed on saying this is flawed, as no reason given.

Thread dismissed on the basis of stubborn repetition after several clearly missed rebuttals of the same points in previous threads.