A Christian Creationist Takes the Atheistic Evolutionist Side as a Debate Experience

[Zhavric]

A non-omnipotent creator could have created our reality by manipulating energy to initiate a big bang event.

Which came from where? Why can't your god make his own energy? Why does he need to manipulate existing energy? I can manipulate some energy so does that make me a god? If there's existing energy, why do we need a god? Do you want me to start listing the laws of physics manipulating energy to create the universe would violate? You're still at square one, CC. I can see that you believe changing the attributes of god is a clever way of sidestepping my argument, but you've got nothing; even less than theists. All you've done is offer a god-of-the-gaps what if and you've already agreed that such reasoning is suspect.

Your stance is untenable, my friend. Drop it. Volconvo doesn't need a second Fonceai.

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: Zhavric Which came from where?

How is that relevant? The possibilities are endless.

Why can't your god make his own energy?

Why don't we just assume that such an entity cannot do things that are truly impossible.

Why does he need to manipulate existing energy?

Because to do otherwise would imply creating something from nothing. If we are going to invoke acausality to begin with, we might as well just say that it all begin yesterday (memories and all) from nothing.

I can manipulate some energy so does that make me a god?

When you can do so to the degree that you can design and create realities such as our own, your godhood will be established.

Do you want me to start listing the laws of physics manipulating energy to create the universe would violate?

Yes, I really do. I have been trying to get you to debate a realistic notion of a god for quite a long time now. This would be a great start.

All you've done is offer a god-of-the-gaps what if and you've already agreed that such reasoning is suspect.

I don't think you really get the idea of what god-of-the-gaps arguments mean:

God of the gaps - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[KillerArgument]

Quote by: Captain Chaos Explain why the life review, a component of near death experiences, occurs so commonly and across cultures.

A person's mind can do anything. NDEs prove nothing.

[Zhavric]

Sounds like a great "what if?" you have going there. PM me when you get some evidence & valid logic to support it. Until then, I'll stick with established scientific law which your assertions impotently attempt to contradict.

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: KillerArgument A person's mind can do anything. NDEs prove nothing.

If people constantly dreamed about black cubes or green unicorns, would you not think there was some cause for this dream? Sure, one person could just randomly have such a dream, but it would not be expected to be prevalent.


So, tell me why so many people at the moment of death experience a life review?

[rez]

Quote by: Captain Chaos If people constantly dreamed about black cubes or green unicorns, would you not think there was some cause for this dream? Sure, one person could just randomly have such a dream, but it would not be expected to be prevalent. So, tell me why so many people at the moment of death experience a life review?

they are called memories, they exist within the subconscious. How you draw any type of conclusion from a "life review" baffles me.

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: Zhavric Sounds like a great "what if?" you have going there. PM me when you get some evidence & valid logic to support it. Until then, I'll stick with established scientific law which your assertions impotently attempt to contradict.

uh huh...

OK, so for anyone reading this, please realize he and I have argued in this direction before. What he is doing here is what I have dubbed "pulling a Zhavric" - he gets up to the plate, but then never actually takes a swing. It is a strange form of arrogant evasion.

You will notice that a couple posts back he said:

Do you want me to start listing the laws of physics manipulating energy to create the universe would violate?

I said yes, I would really like that. He cannot, and will not.



So...

Moving on to counter-atheistic arguments.

Given forever, how could a god (by which I mean a being capable of designing and implementing a reality such as our own) not evolve?

Also, if you are not familiar with it, apparent fine-tuning appears to be the handprint of a creator:

Fine-tuned universe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Most attempts at countering the idea that our universe appears fine-tuned depend on a multiverse hypothesis of some sort. This, however, leads to the idea that time, of some sort, goes back forever, and that things as complex as universes can emerge. Given forever, and the ability for super complex things to emerge, the only way a god would not emerge would be if there were some way in which the laws of reality prevented it. The laws of reality (and logic) may prevent an omnipotent being from existing, but I do not see why they would prevent non-omnipotent gods from emerging.

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: rez they are called memories, they exist within the subconscious. How you draw any type of conclusion from a "life review" baffles me.

The life review is far more than just memories popping up:

Life review - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


If you are interested in the topic, you could read a few accounts of life reviews from the iands website (iands.org) or one of the sites they link to.

[Zhavric]

CC, all you're offering is another god of the gaps-esque argument. "We've arbitrarily decided things are 'fine tuned' (which means whatever we want it to) so goddidit".

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: Zhavric CC, all you're offering is another god of the gaps-esque argument. "We've arbitrarily decided things are 'fine tuned' (which means whatever we want it to) so goddidit".

Infinite emergence is not a god of the gaps argument. Apparent fine tuning could be called that, but that does not make it incorrect.

The point is, if you work around the apparent fine tuning argument, you walk straight into infinite emergence.

[xJesterx]

Can't be bothered reading the rest of this thread but I'll take this one step further:

Quote by: Zhavric Wow. I'm honestly impressed. I'd re-word those slightly: 1) There is no evidence god exists and considerable evidence suggesting no god(s) exist. 2) There is no evidence anything beyond the physical universe exists. 3) Asserting god is the origin of life on Earth is "god of the gaps" reasoning and is not supported by evidence.

'Evidence' is a human concept deducted by the currently discovered elements. No human being can possibly know everything or is without fault therefore by any scientists deduction it is more than likely if not certain that the so called evidence is also faulty and/or tainted. It is also drawn from a scientific standpoint that partnered with the knowledge that everything is dependant on the currently known environment (which is not the same as the future environment) that evidence/lack of evidence is completely irrelevent. All it truly tells us is that in the current environment we have discovered some elements and not discovered others.

[Compugasm]

Quote by: xJesterx It is also drawn from a scientific standpoint that partnered with the knowledge that everything is dependant on the currently known environment (which is not the same as the future environment) that evidence/lack of evidence is completely irrelevent.

I agree, someone once postulated the earth was round... madness.

[rez]

Quote by: xJesterx Can't be bothered reading the rest of this thread but I'll take this one step further: 'Evidence' is a human concept deducted by the currently discovered elements. No human being can possibly know everything or is without fault therefore by any scientists deduction it is more than likely if not certain that the so called evidence is also faulty and/or tainted. It is also drawn from a scientific standpoint that partnered with the knowledge that everything is dependant on the currently known environment (which is not the same as the future environment) that evidence/lack of evidence is completely irrelevent. All it truly tells us is that in the current environment we have discovered some elements and not discovered others.

therefore, god did it

[Masoom]

I will quote some text here from the Quran though it might look critical as the subject is god and not Islam, however the Quran is not just for Muslims and Allah (god) has better explained our questions in the Quran.


Every existence was born from an already existing and anything at the time of his existing surly can’t see as the conscious mind has only come to existent with no prior knowledge of the past and yet to mature or remember anything as the conscious mind is yet to discover, store and build in time, just like any other creation.

{I did not make them witness the creation of the heavens and the earth, nor even their own creation, nor was I to take the misleaders as helpers}. Sura al kahf

The above Aayat (text) confirms that we are not nor any of his creation is witness to it’s existent. It is not hard to believe as this is the way everything is and even a genetic human did not see his creator at the time of his creation and only witnesses to that is his creators. There are many Ayats in the holy Quran and I will refer to them later with more detailed ayat as I am only building my argument.

We can’t argue that every existent can only exist from already existing and everything that we can observe is a creation and finite, and what is existent without existence is infinite, who we call Allah in different names.

Some atheist will justify their conclusion by saying everything just existed from chemical reactions, but this is not acceptable as all creation did not just exist at once and happens no more when 21st century should see more modern sudden existence, forget 21st century but centuries!

Among the laws for our physical existence in this universe is the transfer of heat from the hot bodies to the cold ones. So, if this transfer continues until the temperature of all bodies in the universe reaches an equilibrium, life would cease, and the universe would also cease to exist. Therefore, the universe is not eternal or everlasting. It had a beginning, and so it is doomed to have an end, as has been confirmed by experimental science.

[Compugasm]

Quote by: Masoom Allah (god) has better explained our questions in the Quran.

Hello, welcome to square 1. Of course, it's all written down. RTFM... why didn't we think of that?

[Captain Chaos]

Masoom,

Why should we believe the Koran's explanation?

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Masoom I will quote some text here from the Quran though it might look critical as the subject is god and not Islam, however the Quran is not just for Muslims and Allah (god) has better explained our questions in the Quran. Every existence was born from an already existing and anything at the time of his existing surly can’t see as the conscious mind has only come to existent with no prior knowledge of the past and yet to mature or remember anything as the conscious mind is yet to discover, store and build in time, just like any other creation. {I did not make them witness the creation of the heavens and the earth, nor even their own creation, nor was I to take the misleaders as helpers}. Sura al kahf The above Aayat (text) confirms that we are not nor any of his creation is witness to it’s existent. It is not hard to believe as this is the way everything is and even a genetic human did not see his creator at the time of his creation and only witnesses to that is his creators. There are many Ayats in the holy Quran and I will refer to them later with more detailed ayat as I am only building my argument. We can’t argue that every existent can only exist from already existing and everything that we can observe is a creation and finite, and what is existent without existence is infinite, who we call Allah in different names. Some atheist will justify their conclusion by saying everything just existed from chemical reactions, but this is not acceptable as all creation did not just exist at once and happens no more when 21st century should see more modern sudden existence, forget 21st century but centuries! Among the laws for our physical existence in this universe is the transfer of heat from the hot bodies to the cold ones. So, if this transfer continues until the temperature of all bodies in the universe reaches an equilibrium, life would cease, and the universe would also cease to exist. Therefore, the universe is not eternal or everlasting. It had a beginning, and so it is doomed to have an end, as has been confirmed by experimental science.

I'm going to ask the following question and I'd appreciate it if everyone not jump all over me. I DO NOT mean it as any form of insult and want to know out of genuine curiosity because it will determine who I respond to the above text:

Masoon, is English your first language?

[Masoom]

Quote by: Zhavric I'm going to ask the following question and I'd appreciate it if everyone not jump all over me. I DO NOT mean it as any form of insult and want to know out of genuine curiosity because it will determine who I respond to the above text: Masoon, is English your first language?

No. I speak 5 languages including English.

Sorry 4da spelling mistake and thanks pandaz

[pandaz xx]

*speak.