Do creationists critically examine their own ideas (re: creationism)?

[pitabread]

I made an observation, developed an opinion. Im not sure what emotion has to do with that.

You refer to the "wonders" of creation; that is an emotionally descriptive phrase given that the term "wonder" also refers to an emotion.

Why not just refer to things in the universe (or creation if you will) as just that: things or objects? Why call them "wonders"?

Again i ask Does critical thinking refuse to acknowledges that Gods existence is possible?

No, it does not refuse to acknowledge the possibility of a god. It just involves examining the idea without emotional prejudice.

 

[HitchSlap]

I made an observation, developed an opinion. Im not sure what emotion has to do with that. Again i ask Does critical thinking refuse to acknowledges that Gods existence is possible?

A supreme being/god may be possible, however, IMO the Christian god is a logical impossibility.

 

[W2L]

You refer to the "wonders" of creation; that is an emotionally descriptive phrase given that the term "wonder" also refers to an emotion.

Why not just refer to things in the universe (or creation if you will) as just that: things or objects? Why call them "wonders"?



No, it does not refuse to acknowledge the possibility of a god. It just involves examining the idea without emotional prejudice.

Scientists are never overjoyed to discover something?

 

[W2L]

A supreme being/god may be possible, however, IMO the Christian god is a logical impossibility.

Why?

 

[HitchSlap]

Why?

Infinite punishment for finite crimes.

 

[pitabread]

Scientists are never overjoyed to discover something?

Sure, but that's not the point.

The point is whether one can examine an idea dispassionately. You claimed, "I see the many wonders of creation and i know God is real."

My question to you is that can you examine things (not "wonders") dispassionately and come to the same conclusion?

 

[Tone]

Evolution cannot be false, because we see it and it works in our daily life. Its like saying sun is false

People live their lives through illusion everyday...just because something works doesn't mean it's true...it just means that the darkness is not yet completely faded away, yet; the True Light is already shinning.

 

[pitabread]

People live their lives through illusion everyday...

Considering that evolution has direct implication in things like antibiotic resistance (where people's health can be at risk), it's a bit of a farce to call that an "illusion".

just because something works doesn't mean it's true...

If creationists have a better explanation for changes in biological populations over time, they're more than welcome to bring it to the table. So far it's a been a big zilch, though.

 

[W2L]

Sure, but that's not the point.

The point is whether one can examine an idea dispassionately. You claimed, "I see the many wonders of creation and i know God is real."

My question to you is that can you examine things (not "wonders") dispassionately and come to the same conclusion?

I choose to believe in a creator rather than a cosmic accident. It seems logical to me that all this has a purpose. An accident just seems far fetched to me.

 

[Kylie]

Since the bible is supported it's claims have support.

Yet you have been incapable of showing it.

 

[Tone]

We see creatures changing

We see creatures being eradicated...and creation subject to decay...which it was not originally created to be.

 

[pitabread]

I choose to believe in a creator rather than a cosmic accident. It seems logical to me that all this has a purpose. An accident just seems far fetched to me.

How is it logical? What is the logic involved?

 

[Kylie]

If a person interprets what is reality without God they are not interested in truth.

If God is real, then God will end up in their interpretation anyway if they stick to reality.

 

[Tone]

I meant how the fossil records were made - from simple ancient organisms to todays ones.

Unnatural decay...darkness...

 

[W2L]

How is it logical? What is the logic involved?

The fact that logic is real, a thing that exists in reality, means creation must be at least partly logical in order to exist.

 

[pitabread]

The fact that logic is real, a thing that exists in reality, means creation must be at least partly logical in order to exist.

That's not what you described. You claimed "It seems logical to me that all this has a purpose".

How is it logical that our universe has a purpose?

 

[W2L]

That's not what you described. You claimed "It seems logical to me that all this has a purpose".

How is it logical that our universe has a purpose?

Is it logical to say it doesn't? Isnt it a matter of opinion not logical error?

 

[pitabread]

Is it logical to say it doesn't?

Answering a question with a question isn't an answer.

Isnt it a matter of opinion not logic?

Okay, so it's opinion and not logic then. What is the opinion based on?

 

[W2L]

Okay, so it's opinion and not logic then. What is the opinion based on?

I edited my post for clarity

 

[pitabread]

I edited my post for clarity

Your edited post didn't clarify anything.

After all this back and forth, I'm going to be blunt: it sounds like you haven't critically examined your idea.