Atheistic evolutionists.....

[MrGoodBytes]

No one did --- God is self-existing.

Nowhere in there does it say "God is self-existing", whatever that means. If your argument is that complex things necessarily need a designer and that God is complex, God needs a designer. QED.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nowhere in there does it say "God is self-existing", whatever that means. If your argument is that complex things necessarily need a designer and that God is complex, God needs a designer. QED.

Someone needs a course in Basic Theology --- doesn't he?

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Someone needs a course in Basic Theology --- doesn't he?

Definitely, but not me.

 

[AV1611VET]

Definitely, but not me.

Good --- then maybe you'd like to vouch for the fact that God is self-existing?

What did you learn in Basic Theology about where God came from?

 

[MoonLancer]

Good --- then maybe you'd like to vouch for the fact that God is self-existing?

What did you learn in Basic Theology about where God came from?

The self existing god is a poor argument. its special pleading and fallacious.

its an empty assertions that holds no substance.

You need a god to build a foundational argument, you know you cant show he exists, so you simply assert that he must.

someone does need a theology course, but theology is just current day mythology.

someday we will add "yahweh' to list of dead gods.

 

[AV1611VET]

You need a god to build a foundational argument, you know you cant show he exists, so you simply assert that he must.

No --- what I would like --- is for one special person here who has had Basic Theology as well to step up to the plate and agree with me that said Basic Theology teaches that God is self-existing --- not just take pot-shots at the verse I used to quote that assertion.

If this one special person has had the Basic Theology, perhaps he could provide a better verse to support this assertion.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Good --- then maybe you'd like to vouch for the fact that God is self-existing?

What did you learn in Basic Theology about where God came from?

I learnt that God has always existed. In any case, this is irrelevant. I am merely pointing out that if you claim that complexity necessarily needs a designer and God is complex, you must agree that God had a designer.

 

[Split Rock]

The self existing god is a poor argument. its special pleading and fallacious.

its an empty assertions that holds no substance.

You need a god to build a foundational argument, you know you cant show he exists, so you simply assert that he must.

someone does need a theology course, but theology is just current day mythology.

someday we will add "yahweh' to list of dead gods.

***removed to avoid offense*****

 

[AV1611VET]

I am merely pointing out that if you claim that complexity necessarily needs a designer and God is complex, you must agree that God had a designer.

What say we wait until I claim that first; until then, let's not jump to conclusions, eh?

 

[MrGoodBytes]

What say we wait until I claim that first; until
then, let's not jump to conclusions, eh?

I thought you already did...

Um, can't Argument from Design be simply refuted by asking "who designed the designer?"

No one did --- God is self-existing.

 

[BananaSlug]

That is the biggest problem with Intelligent Design. If something is irreducibly complex, it must have a designer. The logic following is the designer is irreducibly complex as well.

1. Irreducible complexity requires a designer.
2. The designer is irreducibly complex.

Now if you say the designer is self-existing, then you have to change the definition.

1. Irreducible complexity requires a designer.
2. The designer is irreducibly complex.
3. Irreducible complexity does not require a designer.

If the designer is irreducibly complex but it does not have a designer then the first rule does not count.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

That is the biggest problem with Intelligent Design. If something is irreducibly complex, it must have a designer. The logic following is the designer is irreducibly complex as well.

1. Irreducible complexity requires a designer.
2. The designer is irreducibly complex.

Now if you say the designer is self-existing, then you have to change the definition.

1. Irreducible complexity requires a designer.
2. The designer is irreducibly complex.
3. Irreducible complexity does not require a designer.

If the designer is irreducibly complex but it does not have a designer then the first rule does not count.

But what if the designer is not irreducibly complex?

 

[Tinker Grey]

Then, he/she/it could evolve?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Then, he/she/it could evolve?

Well, irreducible complexity doesn't preclude evolution: the bacterial flagellum, while irreducibly complex, could have evolved.

 

[MoonLancer]

No --- what I would like --- is for one special person here who has had Basic Theology as well to step up to the plate and agree with me that said Basic Theology teaches that God is self-existing --- not just take pot-shots at the verse I used to quote that assertion.

If this one special person has had the Basic Theology, perhaps he could provide a better verse to support this assertion.

The bible could directly and explicitly say, GOD is the first uncaused cause, but you still have the problem of showing that the bible is the word of god and that its true.

 

[Tenka]

Atheistic evolutionists.....
... do you have an atheistic and/or evolutionary explanation for why the question of origins should be of any concern to you?

Sure.
Curiosity is a byproduct of our ability to use abstract thoughts which we evolved to better plan hunts and survive changing conditions.

 

[Skaloop]

Someone needs a course in Basic Theology --- doesn't he?

Yes, you do.

 

[AV1611VET]

... but you still have the problem of showing that the bible is the word of god and that its true.

Only God can do that (and He has) ---

And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

 

[BananaSlug]

But what if the designer is not irreducibly complex?

Well, natural selection is not irreducibly complex. All it requires are influencial factors (environment, etc) and DNA. However, ID proposed a designer, which is an intelligent being that creates. Natural selection is not intelligent, yet it can design.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Well, natural selection is not irreducibly complex. All it requires are influencial factors (environment, etc) and DNA. However, ID proposed a designer, which is an intelligent being that creates. Natural selection is not intelligent, yet it can design.

But natural selection is an emergent phenomenon, not a thing unto itself. It's not irreducibly complex insofar as it doesn't physically exist.

I'm also hesitant to say that it 'designs', since that smacks of forethought and purpose.