That only applies within our understanding of time. The Creator exists outside of our understanding of time.
An intelligent designer can be deduced based on reason.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Best Argument For or Against God's Existence
- Thread starter Achilles6129
- Start date
- Status
That only applies within our understanding of time. The Creator exists outside of our understanding of time.
An intelligent designer can be deduced based on reason.
You're detecting things based on your understanding of patterns, faces, etc. From a more clinical point of view there's actually nothing there at all except a burnt piece of bread. Now if a toaster made a car, then you might have a better example.
Upvote
0
Do you mean creating something right in front of you or someone else?
If you saw a car, you could deduce it had a designer, right? You see a universe, and you can't deduce that it had a designer?
Upvote
0
Not when all the evidence is considered. And when all the evidence is considered, in my opinion, it points quite strongly to a Creator rather than not. At the very least, it's certainly far more unreasonable to claim that nothing (or an inanimate, unintelligent "thing") brought the universe into existence instead of a Creator God.
Upvote
0
Well if God isn't physical then how am I supposed to show you an example? The Kalam Cosmological Argument is based off of deductive reasoning. I contend that it's based off of sound deductive reasoning. I'd like to ask you why you think otherwise.
Upvote
0
Davian
fallible
- May 30, 2011
- 14,100
- 1,181
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Ignostic
- Marital Status
- Married
Was that not the challenge you put up?
Sure. I could establish verifiable criteria for that purpose. The existence of the manufacturers, identification markings in standard, consistent locations, etc.
Can I? I have not to date. If I did, would that make it true? No.
Back to your challenge; Can we see your "Creator God" creating something like a car or an airplane?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Everything in existence is the best evidence of a creator. Evil or suffering in the world is typically the reason people deny God because they attribute those things too God and will not believe in a God that would allow such things.Hello all,
In your opinion, what's the very best argument for the existence of God? Conversely, what's the top argument against the existence of God? Interested to hear your responses and subsequent reasoning. Thanks!
Upvote
0
Joshua260
Well-Known Member
- Oct 30, 2012
- 1,448
- 42
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Although the trinity can be difficult to understand, it is not really logically incoherent. I think many people get confused about this because they try to find an analogy in nature that perfectly relates to God. But God is not like anything else in nature so one should not expect to find a totally sufficient analogy. The trinity can be explained as "one God who is three persons, or, to put it another way, there is one God who has three centers of self-consciousness: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Craig does a great job of explaining it in following link:
Read more: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/defenders-2-podcast/transcript/s5-1#ixzz3c8qVlVdB
A square circle however is not coherent. A square is defined as having corners, and a circle does not have corners.
So again, your attempted analogy is incorrect.
Upvote
0
HitchSlap
PROUDLY PRIMATE
Too bad your holy book fails to mention these "three centers of self-consciousness." An ad hoc explanation intended to meld several belief systems into one, would be more parsimonious than the extremes scholars stretch to get everyone to believe something that is completely incongruent.
Upvote
0
No, and I'm not sure what you're referring to.
No, because it's already been created. You have to deduce it had a designer, that's the point.
When you see a car or an airplane, do you think that a tree made them? Of course not. You automatically claim an intelligence did. Now why not the same with the universe?
Upvote
0
This passage references all three as if speaking of the same God who is one.
Romans 8
10If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.
Upvote
0
The universe is the evidence. Extra-biblically and outside of personal experience, at least. Check out the Kalam Cosmological Argument.
Upvote
0
The point is that evidence really isn't evaluated very objectively. It's often evaluated based upon one's own beliefs. So if you're an atheist, you'll deny what theists believe are obvious pieces of evidence for a Creator.
Upvote
0
Not so. Evidence is subjective. Always has been. Evidence of something is only what you choose to accept.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
