Defining God: Discussing the nature and attributes of God

I didn't say believable........I said credible.

and no......faeries, trolls and the like are believed to be beings that exist in another dimension of space that visit our own on purpose or by accident from time to time..........like their world and ours crossing paths from time to time.

God exists.

The universe is far to complex to have happened by chance.

If you found a watch in the middle of the woods, one may ponder as to where this decvice came from?

Well, the same can be said about the universe we live in. Everything is in uniform with the other.

Take all the parts of a watch and place them in a cup. Shake them up for as long as you wish, and the end result will ALWAYS be a pile of aimless, non-productive parts.

Knowing so, the world must have been created with a divine mastermind... God.

Surely I provide no proof. But, this message is simply devised to inspire deep thought. What came first, the egg or chicken? Either answer, your stuck explaining how that egg or young chicken grew to reproduce it's own and fend for itself.

The idea of wether or not god exists is a personal matter, there is no proof for it and there will never be found any proof for it.

Fire

There is proof. It's called Science. You need to read more.

There is proof. It's called Science. You need to read more.

Same question, I think you are seeing things that aren't there usho

Finti

Read books on evolution and Darwin's theory.

There is more evidence to suggest that life on this planet was created by a higher power as opposed to happening by chance.

Answering a question of this magnitude requires knowledge and understanding of Biochemistry! It's that simple. I'm currently reading a book about it, and so should you for the matter.

If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could NOT possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modification, my theory would absolutely break down. -Charles Darwin

Please continue.

Charles Darwin believed that the cell is a relatively simple structure that could've evolved through natural selection. But as the quote above illustrates, Darwin himeslf saw holes in his theory should cells be proven to be too structurally complex to have evolved on their own.

Due to technological advances over the past 30 years, scientists no longer have to speculate on the cell. They now have the abililty to view and understand a cell's composition in ways that were unheard of in Darwin's time.

With this newly discovered knowledge in tow, scientist Michael Behe writes in his book "Darwin's Black Box" (Free Press, 1998) that it's impossible for cells to have evolved through a gradual process, because they're irreducibly complex.

In other words, a core set of parts has to be present in a cell in order for it to function in the first place. To explain his point, Behe uses the example of an ordinary mousetrap.

Behe argues that a mouse trap is irreducibly complex, because all it's pieces have to be present and in working order for it to function. You can't just put a piece of wood out in the attic and catch a mouse or two, then add a spring to snatch a second, and then assemble the hammer for even more.

This incremental appraoch doesn't work. Instead, all these pieces must be assembled together and functioning properly before the challenge of mouse catching can even begin.

In the same way, cells and other living organisms are irreducibly complex, which seems incompatible with the survival-of-the-fittest theory and suggests strong evidence that cells were created by God.

There is more evidence to suggest that life on this planet was created by a higher power as opposed to happening by chance.

Finti

You have the IQ of a popcorn fart.

Is it fair to say that the computer you use could have been created over time thowing all it's parts and pieces into a blender, or simply leaving the items static for millions of years would produce a computer by chance? How about the 2005 Corvette? How about Cellular phones? How about televisions and DVD players? How about satellites that revolve in outerspace?

All these things require an intelligent creator. Elephants, Blue Whales, Sharks, Dinosaurs and YOU are no different. We (Humans) are too complex to have happened by chance. Think about how complex you are. You... all the way down to the last cell that makes up your body and organs, are just as complex... like a computer!

Do you ever have anything intelligent to say? What facts do you have to support that there is no creator? And what scientific sources are you utlizing?

Are you studying facts or using your own philosophy?

The existence of something can be proved by more methods than just science.
I have stated this before, a god is personal. Look up the meaning of "god" and "God". It is stupid to call something god when you do not worship it or consider it your god.

The Christian god does exist, but it is not what most think it is.

The Christian god does exist, but it is not what most think it is.

You have the IQ of a popcorn fart.

All these things require an intelligent creator. Elephants, Blue Whales, Sharks, Dinosaurs and YOU are no different. We (Humans) are too complex to have happened by chance.

Do you ever have anything intelligent to say? What facts do you have to support that there is no creator? And what scientific sources are you utlizing?

Are you studying facts or using your own philosophy?

yeah it is called evolution

Yes, there is something called evolution but one must understand the flaws in the theory and understand that there are two types of evolution. Microevolution = yes

Macroevolution = unproven, evidence that should be there supporting it (if it were true) is not.

Spontaneous generation of life from non life by random chance= unproven and is seemingly ridiculous

If somebody is willing to believe things that like, that those are somehow reasonable explanations for life existence and so on, its unfathomable that they would not accept a more logical explanation. One might suggest that creationism is not more logical but that is a completele lie and we all know it. That is what is known as denial. One can deny the truth, one can hope and wish it away but it will not change, they will remain none the less wrong.

If as Atheists believe, life were the result of random chance then life would have no purpose. It would lack the the meaning they (atheists) show it to have. There is a moral issue that they pretend to believe and yet their actions and other beliefs of theirs contradict it . As we see however, contradiction and logic matter not to an Atheist, not when it gets in the way with their worldview.

While atheists suggest that they depend on logic and evidence, we know that to be untrue. They depend on avoidance of the issue, sidestepping, backtracking, ignoring their contradictions and so on.

Science is supposed to be objective yet there is nothing objective about an atheism. They do not go hand in hand as an atheist despite what an atheist would like to believe. There has been a craftiness that I will not deny, trying to paint it as science vs religion. In truth though that is a fallacy.

I always wonder why they fear accepting that a creator created the universe,its laws and so on. They instead are willing and do accept anything else instead, full of completely unproven and illogical theories instead. It shouldnt be a mystery to me why this is and yet I am amazed by it every time I see it.

oke just give me one piece of evidence that there
A) is a creator? (SERIOUS evidence nothing like the bible says so cause that's BS)
B) that he created the universe?

Science is supposed to be objective yet there is nothing objective about an atheism. They do not go hand in hand as an atheist despite what an atheist would like to believe. There has been a craftiness that I will not deny, trying to paint it as science vs religion. In truth though that is a fallacy.

I always wonder why they fear accepting that a creator created the universe,its laws and so on. They instead are willing and do accept anything else instead, full of completely unproven and illogical theories instead. It shouldnt be a mystery to me why this is and yet I am amazed by it every time I see it.

Should read :

Science is supposed to be objective and but there is nothing objective about atheism. They do not go hand in hand despite what atheists would like you to believe. There has been craftiness that I will not deny, trying to paint it as science vs religion but in truth that is a fallacy.

I always wonder why they fear accepting that a creator created the universe, its laws and so on. They are willing to and do accept anything else instead, full of completely unproven and illogical theories. It shouldnt be a mystery to me why this is and yet I am amazed every time I see it.

If as Atheists believe, life were the result of random chance, life would have no purpose.

Spontaneous generation of life from non life by random chance= unproven and is seemingly ridiculous

They depend on avoidance of the issue, sidestepping, backtracking, ignoring their contradictions and so on.

I always wonder why they fear accepting that a creator created the universe

full of completely unproven and illogical theories instead

One can deny the truth, one can hope and wish it away but it will not change, they will remain none the less wrong

oke just give me one piece of evidence that there
A) is a creator? (SERIOUS evidence nothing like the bible says so cause that's BS)
B) that he created the universe?

There are some things that you must consider first. If you are an atheist, are you willing to be objective? If not, this could and probably would indeed be fruitless.

I will not tell you here that the bible says this or that, you underestimate me. On the subject of the bible (briefly here), it is there for people to know the truth but I will move on from that for now. You must also consider what kind of evidence you are expecting for a creator. For if you are asking for visual proof, I can assure you that I can not offer you that kind of "proof". However do not mistakingly assume this to mean that there is no evidence. However we can delve into philosophical aspects, aspects of science and so on.

I am also curious as to how much evidence really plays a role in your current worldview. It certainly can not be the reason that you are (im sorry to assume) an atheist. So I must wonder how much evidence really even matters in your worldview.

As to creating the universe, I will get to that in time.

Basically I would like to know those things.

Are you an atheist?
How important evidence is in your worldview?
Also, can you accept that you will not get visual proof of the creator but that there are other forms of evidence?

-life has no other purpose than to live it

-maybe to you not to me, I find the belief in an omnipotent oniprecence being ridicoluse

-actually thats how I look at christians

-dont fear it just dont believe in it, big difference there

-instead of what? illogical and laughable beliefs thats, guess what, unproven too!!!!!!!!!!!

-no more wrong or right just as it is with those of faith they are no more wrong or right

Why would it even have that purpose? It has no purpose whatsoever according to atheism. It can merely be described, as they would, what can be known as the battle to stave off entropy. A battle though that has no real purpose, it just exists according to atheism. Now as I have stated, their actions and some of their beliefs (atheists) simply do not coincide with this one belief. They contradict themselves and dont even realize it.

Though you state that you find the notion of a creator to be ridiculous, that was not was not unexpected given our last go round. However, let me give you an example of something. Lets say for instance one found 2+2 equalling 4 to be ridiculous, how would you look at that? As you know that creators can create, you can not resonably state that a creator is a ridiculous belief. However, random chance creating the universe and life from non life, is ridiculous in premise even if one chooses to accept it. I would like to see mere random chance (sans influence) create me a TV, a Mcclarren, 200 mill in cash and so on.

As to how you look at christians, that comment takes us nowhere so I will just leave it as is.

Now, you stated that its not fear but rather disbelief, however I suggest (in this case) that they are interwined.

As to the 'illogical beliefs' of christianity, elaborate if you will.

Well I believe there is a right and a wrong in this case however people are entitled to their beliefs. I do suggest to you though that everybody operates on faith.

Evolution is true. However, it doesn't bring light to the beginning of life on this planet.

Let me say one more thing about objectivity.

If one is unwilling to be objective and they just want to argue, then just let me know. Its like somebody plugging their ears and yelling. Sometimes I feel like these discussion approach that. I am not here to insult anybody for differing beliefs (this includes condescention), I am simply here to share my views.

If one is willing and able to be objective, then we can have ourselves a fruitful discussion. The discussions with potential I have some time for, the ones without however, I will dismiss.

I am not going to argue just to argue, that is so pointless.

Evolution is true. However, it doesn't bring light to the beginning of life on this planet.

Not quite sure why you felt the need to state that (no offense) if this was a response to me. I did not dimiss evolution entirely, we know that microevolution exists.

I wont even entirely dismiss the theory of macroevolution (though I do have many problems with it and the evidence is just not there though it should be).