[Serious] Care to Seriously Consider the Existance of a Creator (God)?

[Peebothuhlu]

OK, give us FACTS (with supporting evidence)
If a god created everything who or what created that god?
If a god created the universe (that is everything that exists) then where was he/it before he created everything?

I do not pretend to know everything- do YOU?
Fact is all things HAVE been created- otherwise there would be nothing but un-organized matter.

Except it is you who are claiming 'Facts'. So this would seem to be an example of "Shifting the burden of proof"

---

So-are you telling me NONE of you see how molecules are used to form many specific kinds of cells- all ORGANIZED and WORKING TOGETHER- to perform FUNCTIONS?

These sentences do not actually follow.

We already see many cases of molecules 'Self organizing' with nothing but chemistry and physics interacting upon hem.

That you fail to acknowledge the muti-tiered system simply adding to itself (I speak very generally here for brevity) indicates an argument from incredulity.

---

Rhizomorph13I'm going to treat this seriously. Maybe we can at least present the information on what science thinks on the matter? I'm betting we will get horse-laughed, straw-manned, and maybe even some tu quoque. But I'm open to it.

_____________________________________________________________________
I have to wait to post science graphics, since I'm new here look forward to it!
To deny our bodies, for example. were designed, is to imply we are the result of uncountable accidents all happening at the right time, in the right order.

 I am not denying 'Design'. I am failing to see anything 'Inteligent' about such things.

Since, given the ample evidence of mutations both within an organism as it lives as well as mutations happening as they breed on top of simple gene shuffing and environmental/social pressures gives ample mechanisms for life to change over time.

If there is an inteligence 'Behind' the design? Then we can infer that it is incompetent, lazy and (In the case of parasitaztion) down right mean and nasty.

---

So, if you claim to understand something, having facts to back you up- that's being egotistical?
C'mon, me friend! You KNOW better!

Again, you shift the burden of proof.

You opened the thread claiming 'Proof' and 'Facts'.

So far neither have been forthcomming.

So, your facts please.


   Awesome! That posting method worked!  

Not at work.

[Belacqua]

Then tell us HOW they assembled themselves so very well ...on their own!

I'm curious how the Jehovah Witnesses describe the creator God. Is he like an individual, separate from other individuals? Does he make decisions, pull the levers of power, etc.?

I ask because there seems to be a variety of views among Christians. It may be fair, though, to group these roughly into two general types. 

The first type is what I've described -- God is a thinking changing individual, who makes decisions and creates as artisans do. "I think I'll make it so that parallel lines never meet, but I might change that later." This being operates somewhat like Plato's Demiurge, as described in the Timaeus. 

The second type is the one that all the major theologians hold to. Any theologian you can name from history, they don't agree with the type described above. For them, God (or the Second Person of the Trinity) is the Logos. This is a Greek word translated as "word" in John 1, but has a much wider meaning. It is used in the same way in Stoic and Neoplatonic, etc., philosophy.

The Logos is all of the principles and regularities of the world. It is the laws of nature and of logic. 

When people here object that no God is necessary because nature obeys the laws of nature, they are arguing against the first, Demiurgic type of God. But, again, theologians don't believe in that type. For them, God is the non-physical sustainer of 1) being, and 2) the operations of being. If a self-organizing system can self-organize, it is because 1) the parts of that system are held in being continually by God, and 2) the principles and laws by which it organizes are God -- not decreed by God like tyrranical laws, but an aspect of God himself. 

Does any of this sound familiar or right to you?

[zebo-the-fat]

This "design" you talk of is a very poor design. What kind of idiot designer would give a creature a common opening for breathing, eating and speaking, it's an accident waiting to happen, any first year engineering student could do better.
Your car has seperate places for fuel, water and air, and that's a much simpler design than a living creature.

Still waiting for your facts (with evidence)

[theMadJW]

I do not pretend to know everything- do YOU?
Fact is all things HAVE been created- otherwise there would be nothing but un-organized matter.

Except it is you who are claiming 'Facts'. So this would seem to be an example of "Shifting the burden of proof"

---

So-are you telling me NONE of you see how molecules are used to form many specific kinds of cells- all ORGANIZED and WORKING TOGETHER- to perform FUNCTIONS?

These sentences do not actually follow.

We already see many cases of molecules 'Self organizing' with nothing but chemistry and physics interacting upon hem.

That you fail to acknowledge the muti-tiered system simply adding to itself (I speak very generally here for brevity) indicates an argument from incredulity.

---

Rhizomorph13I'm going to treat this seriously. Maybe we can at least present the information on what science thinks on the matter? I'm betting we will get horse-laughed, straw-manned, and maybe even some tu quoque. But I'm open to it.

_____________________________________________________________________
I have to wait to post science graphics, since I'm new here look forward to it!
To deny our bodies, for example. were designed, is to imply we are the result of uncountable accidents all happening at the right time, in the right order.

 I am not denying 'Design'. I am failing to see anything 'Inteligent' about such things.

Since, given the ample evidence of mutations both within an organism as it lives as well as mutations happening as they breed on top of simple gene shuffing and environmental/social pressures gives ample mechanisms for life to change over time.

If there is an inteligence 'Behind' the design? Then we can infer that it is incompetent, lazy and (In the case of parasitaztion) down right mean and nasty.

---

So, if you claim to understand something, having facts to back you up- that's being egotistical?
C'mon, me friend! You KNOW better!

Again, you shift the burden of proof.

You opened the thread claiming 'Proof' and 'Facts'.

So far neither have been forthcomming.
So, your facts please.
   Awesome! That posting method worked!  
Not at work.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's see!
Uncountable random atoms begin assembling themselves together to form living things!
(Science doesn't even know what Life is- but pretends to know how it 'evolved', all by itself!)
No arms spring from the chest, nor eyes on the rump!
FUNCTIONING bodies- that just happen to be put together in such a way to exist in the Ecosystems, which just happen to have the right atmosphere, the right type of Gravity, etc!

---

Moderator Notice
Links removed due to yet another 30/30 violation

[The Architect Of Fate]

Let's see!
Uncountable random atoms begin assembling themselves together to form living things!
(Science doesn't even know what Life is- but pretends to know how it 'evolved', all by itself!)
No arms spring from the chest, nor eyes on the rump!
FUNCTIONING bodies- that just happen to be put together in such a way to exist in the Ecosystems, which just happen to have the right atmosphere, the right type of Gravity, etc!

So again incredulity and arguments from ignorance etc etc etc 



And that's just a heap of straw men and wtf ignorance

[Mr Greene]

Then tell us HOW they assembled themselves so very well ...on their own!

I'm curious how the Jehovah Witnesses describe the creator God. Is he like an individual, separate from other individuals? Does he make decisions, pull the levers of power, etc.?

I ask because there seems to be a variety of views among Christians. It may be fair, though, to group these roughly into two general types. 

The first type is what I've described -- God is a thinking changing individual, who makes decisions and creates as artisans do. "I think I'll make it so that parallel lines never meet, but I might change that later." This being operates somewhat like Plato's Demiurge, as described in the Timaeus. 

The second type is the one that all the major theologians hold to. Any theologian you can name from history, they don't agree with the type described above. For them, God (or the Second Person of the Trinity) is the Logos. This is a Greek word translated as "word" in John 1, but has a much wider meaning. It is used in the same way in Stoic and Neoplatonic, etc., philosophy.

The Logos is all of the principles and regularities of the world. It is the laws of nature and of logic. 

When people here object that no God is necessary because nature obeys the laws of nature, they are arguing against the first, Demiurgic type of God. But, again, theologians don't believe in that type. For them, God is the non-physical sustainer of 1) being, and 2) the operations of being. If a self-organizing system can self-organize, it is because 1) the parts of that system are held in being continually by God, and 2) the principles and laws by which it organizes are God -- not decreed by God like tyrranical laws, but an aspect of God himself. 

Does any of this sound familiar or right to you?

You think that this is a theologian?

[Rhizomorph13]

The complexity you see now developed over millions of years with small changes some beneficial, some not so much. We are the offspring of the beings that were the most adaptive to the environment. The evidence is in the fossil record.

[The Architect Of Fate]

So his whole case for god is 

Personnel Incredulity 

Arguments Ignorance 

Non Sequiturs

Straw men  

Thinking attacking evolution somehow proves god 

So can we kick him already or at the very least just ignore his post as i'm will beginning now

[Pat Mustard]

So-are you telling me NONE of you see how molecules are used to form many specific kinds of cells- all ORGANIZED and WORKING TOGETHER- to perform FUNCTIONS?

Yeah, but no. William Dumbski's assertions are completely free of facts.

Must try harder.

[Anomalocaris]

Just a serious discussion, free of egotism & assumption?
Can you TAKE facts?

I can...

the word “facts” doesn’t mean what you think it means, butt boi.