Evolution or Creationism?

[HitchSlap]

Yes. Fossil fuel has made modern life as we know it possible.

Your god created billions of species, then murdered them, so we can drive to Walmart and buy a two liter Mountain Dew.

Got it.

 

[HitchSlap]

The fact that there is always a cause and effect in our universe provides evidence of something outside of the universe for its creation.

So denying that a cause outside of your god, created your god, is not special pleading, how again?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Your god created billions of species, then murdered them, so we can drive to Walmart and buy a two liter Mountain Dew.

Got it.

Interesting that it is murder if creatures die but if they die under an evolutionary view it is just a fact of life. Got it. I find it interesting that you view having fuel to drive as something as trivial as going for Mt. Dew rather than supporting your family or warmth or the emergency run to the hospital to save the life of someone you love but whatever...

 

[Oncedeceived]

So denying that a cause outside of your god, created your god, is not special pleading, how again?

It is consistent with our worldview.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Scientists are in agreement in that "assertion".

The short answer to the question ‘why is the universe so big?’ is that, since Erwin Hubble’s observations in the first half of the 20th century, we have come to realise that theuniverseis expanding and therefore its huge size is a consequence of its great age. This rate of expansion and vast expanse of time turn out to be critical for the development of complex life for a variety of reasons.

Any universe that contains the kinds of things you need to develop complexity must be sufficiently old enough for stars to form and generate the elements on which life is based. The universe throughout its history has been constantly changing and has gone through around 10-15 billion years of expansion. As the universe expanded it became a continually changing enviroment; sparser, more rariefied and cooler. As this process occurs certain conditons can then arise. The tempreture of the universe at the moment is pretty low. If we ran the tape back to when the cosmos was 300,000 years old, the conditons become very extreme and too hot for even atoms to exist. As things got cooler atoms and molecules were able to form and basic chemistry was able to begin. Once this occurred, great islands of material were able to form and get denser, until eventually their gravity became great enough to form stop them expanding. They formed great achipeligos of material where such objects as stars, planets and people could eventually form.

Absolutely none of which actually answers the criticism I raised. You can't assert how conditions for life 'must be' on one hand and invoke an omnipotent creator god on the other. There is no condition he couldn't change or circumvent.

Nor does it answer why you've singled out life as the purported purpose of the universe, as opposed to any other feature which developed as a result of its immense age. That part is still completely arbitrary.

He created it the way He wanted it, your idea on how He should have done it is of no concern to Him.

How strange of him then to create it in such a way as to make himself look weak, stupid or incompetent. Or non-existent, for that matter.

So nice of you to speak for him on his behalf by the way, as he apparently is unable to do so himself.

Or...you are blind, uninformed and biased.

I admit an adamant, unapologetic bias toward reason, logic and critically robust evidence. You may level that accusation at me any time you wish.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Absolutely none of which actually answers the criticism I raised. You can't assert how conditions for life 'must be' on one hand and invoke an omnipotent creator god on the other. There is no condition he couldn't change or circumvent.

There was a reason He made it the way it is, it was to show the fine tuning was needed for life...thus a Creator.

Nor does it answer why you've singled out life as the purported purpose of the universe, as opposed to any other feature which developed as a result of its immense age. That part is still completely arbitrary.

Did your neck snap back at the speed in which you changed the goal posts?

How strange of him then to create it in such a way as to make himself look weak, stupid or incompetent. Or non-existent, for that matter.

It is only my opinion but I think He finds it somewhat humorous when those He created in this immensely complex universe call Him weak, stupid or incompetent, but like I said it is only my opinion.

The Foolish to Shame the Wise
…26For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; 27but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, 28and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are,…

So nice of you to speak for him on his behalf by the way, as he apparently is unable to do so himself.

I wouldn't grow to complacent, He may not stay silent to unbelievers for much longer. You just never know either when you will die and will be face to face with Him.

I admit an adamant, unapologetic bias toward reason, logic and critically robust evidence. You may level that accusation at me any time you wish.

You like to think you are reasonable but in reality you deny evidence to keep your biases intact. You use reason when reason is not something even reliable if your position is correct.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, it's nothing like a swimming pool. SS answers should stay in SS.

And I'll take yours with a grain of salt as well.

I think you overlook the fact that Adam & Eve were not meant to die; and that death is a result of the Fall.

This means that they could have went swimming in a volcano if they wanted to and wouldn't have been affected.

The universe is the way it is because it was tweaked for our optimal pleasure; but after the Fall occurred, it became our enemy.

Under the guise of the New Heaven and New Earth, we will enjoy the full benefits of God's creation.

Your way of thinking is just what one would expect from someone who can't separate Creationism from the Fall; and is a perfect example of why I tell others to NEVER discuss anything that happened after the Creation week, or they will get sidetracked and the conversation is over.

 

[AV1611VET]

You can't assert how conditions for life 'must be' on one hand and invoke an omnipotent creator god on the other.

Really?

I can.

 

[HitchSlap]

00

It is consistent with our worldview.

Which is inconsistent with reality. It's time to upgrade to Worldview 2.0.

 

[Oncedeceived]

00

Which is inconsistent with reality. It's time to upgrade to Worldview 2.0.

I think it is very cohesive and consistent with reality.

 

[bhsmte]

00

Which is inconsistent with reality. It's time to upgrade to Worldview 2.0.

You need the hardware to be able to run that.

 

[HitchSlap]

I think it is very cohesive and consistent with reality.

If you ignore everything else incohesive/inconsistent, then sure.

 

[HitchSlap]

You need the hardware to be able to run that.

Alas, obsolescent equipment may be incompatible with WV 2.0.

 

[Oncedeceived]

If you ignore everything else incohesive/inconsistent, then sure.

Such as?

 

[bhsmte]

Alas, obsolescent equipment may be incompatible with WV 2.0.

Some folks just don't have the available RAM, to run any upgraded software (accept new information).

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

There was a reason He made it the way it is, it was to show the fine tuning was needed for life...thus a Creator.

If the universe is 'fine-tuned' for life, then a gun that fires once correctly for every nine hundred trillion misfires is 'fine-tuned' for sharpshooting.

Did your neck snap back at the speed in which you changed the goal posts?

Firstly, the fallacy is called moving the goalposts, not 'changing'. If you're going to try and sound smart by invoking logical fallacies, at least name them correctly.

Secondly, you should also learn to correctly identify fallacies. I didn't move the goalposts. The arbitrary ad hocery of your position is a separate issue from its internal incoherence.

It is only my opinion but I think He finds it somewhat humorous when those He created in this immensely complex universe call Him weak, stupid or incompetent, but like I said it is only my opinion.

You're right, it is. You have no means of actually gleaning whether or not this 'god' character is even capable of finding things humorous, what those things are, what he thinks about those things, what he thinks about anything at all or even that he thinks in the first place. Your theology, like all theology, is epistemologically vacuous.

I wouldn't grow to complacent, He may not stay silent to unbelievers for much longer. You just never know either when you will die and will be face to face with Him.

I knew a kid growing up who would tell me her imaginary friend would get me some day. Such threats didn't even scare me as a child, so how scared do you suppose I am right now?

You like to think you are reasonable but in reality you deny evidence to keep your biases intact.

I deny naked assertions put forward as 'evidence', yes.

You use reason when reason is not something even reliable if your position is correct.

Easy there, van Til. Are you sure you want to go down that road? I'm happy to follow you down presup lane, as it is my favorite apologetic method to dismantle, but I don't know if it's worth getting yet another thread shut down for 'general apologetics'.

 

[Oncedeceived]

If the universe is 'fine-tuned' for life, then a gun that fires once correctly for every nine hundred trillion misfires is 'fine-tuned' for sharpshooting.

You do realize that the majority of Astrobiologists, cosmologists, and physicists agree that the universe is fine tuned. Your analogy would be considered uninformed.

Firstly, the fallacy is called moving the goalposts, not 'changing'. If you're going to try and sound smart by invoking logical fallacies, at least name them correctly.

You have me there.

Secondly, you should also learn to correctly identify fallacies. I didn't move the goalposts. The arbitrary ad hocery of your position is a separate issue from its internal incoherence.

Moving the goalposts, similar to "shifting sands" and also known as raising the bar, is an informal fallacy in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded. That is, after an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt.[3] The problem with changing the rules of the game is that the meaning of the end result is changed, too.

You're right, it is. You have no means of actually gleaning whether or not this 'god' character is even capable of finding things humorous, what those things are, what he thinks about those things, what he thinks about anything at all or even that he thinks in the first place. Your theology, like all theology, is epistemologically vacuous.

Oh I know He has a sense of humor and He gives me insights into His thoughts at times. Which is meaningless to you and I would not think that unfounded as I would feel the same way if I had not experienced God's personality.

I knew a kid growing up who would tell me her imaginary friend would get me some day. Such threats didn't even scare me as a child, so how scared do you suppose I am right now?

The Creator of the universe (and you too by the way) is certainly not on the same par as a childhood imaginary friend. I mean if a Being creates the universe and the laws that it operates by (very intelligent), the life forms that live in it is very much permissive in your denial. He will let you spend eternity by choice. So scare tactics might not concern you, you must have thought it through and decided hell is better than life in the presence of God.

I deny naked assertions put forward as 'evidence', yes.

We will see about that, I don't know you well enough to know yet.

Easy there, van Til. Are you sure you want to go down that road? I'm happy to follow you down presup lane, as it is my favorite apologetic method to dismantle, but I don't know if it's worth getting yet another thread shut down for 'general apologetics'.

It is not general apologetics. It is in keeping with evolution vs. creation so go for it.

 

[HitchSlap]

You do realize that the majority of Astrobiologists, cosmologists, and physicists agree that the universe is fine tuned.

"Is" fine tuned, or appears, "fine tuned."

You seem to be grasping at straws, here.

 

[Oncedeceived]

"Is" fine tuned, or appears, "fine tuned."

You seem to be grasping at straws, here.

It is fine tuned. It "appears" designed due to the fine tuning.

 

[Loudmouth]

It is fine tuned. It "appears" designed due to the fine tuning.

It is fine tuned in the same way that the coffee is finely tuned to fit the inside of the coffee cup.