Seattle
Valued Senior Member
What do you mean by God?
Who designed the designer?
- Thread starter Xelasnave.1947
- Start date
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
One could ask.
And clearly he has been designed by humans.
Or made up, although less kind but still the same, made up stories to tell about creation, stories with out evidence...Certainly no human could witness the events laid out in careful detail in the start of the book.
But if one presents an argument that there must be a designer and teach that conclusion by suggesting given the complexity of all we see that on that approach there must be a designer one can only conclude the complexity of God must also lead to a like conclusion.
The world and living things are complex so there must be a designer... God and his multiple religions is complex so there must be a designer, of God.
And turtles down or up.
That's what I "feel" which is the most important operative in spiritual matters.
Alex
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
I have no need to justify my beliefs that God is a made up fictional character, that although real, as is Santa and the Easter Bunny, that does not exist.
Its fun to believe in Santa and the Easter Bunny kids love the fantasy and its fun to believe there is a God.
A concept of s God helps imaginative folk survive the drudge of existence and find a meaning to their life.
Its is unfortunate as the meaning for humans and indeed all species is to reproduce and send their genes into the future.
And as neat as that is some folk think that is not enough so besides making up a God they tack on another run at existence failing to understand you will exist in the future via your offspring.
Your job is to survive and contribute to the evolvement of a better form of the animal that we are...
Alex
No - 1
No - 2
No - 3
No - 1 There in no meaning to life, no purpose, no great plan or destination
No - 2 You will not exist in the future via your offspring. Like saying my tin can, containg baked beans, is my Rolls Royce I sent to the scrap yard
No - 3 You don't have a job or any commitment to the your own life, anybody else's life or the planet. Any you do take on is solely at your own discretion
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
Define meaning of life.
Define offspring.
I can't argue I suppose.
Let me put it this way if you want to look for a reason there is no need to think after life.
Be happy if the genes passed to you continue and be content countless ancestors in some sort of sense live on...
Alex
Clearly God hasn't been designed by humans.
God being the creator, is not required for belief in God. This is just something atheists have in their heads.
Only if one wants to perpetuate an idea to justify their God-less position. Other than that there's no need to to be stubbornly bringing that up.
Meh! You're just being stubborn.
Let me know when you have something reasonable to present.
Jan.
Sure you do, otherwise you're simply being irrational.
An atheist explaining why people believe in God. It's quite amusing.
Wow! I imagine Stalin or Pol Pot thinking the same thing. But you're not like them, you're a nice person. Aren't you?
I feel a eugenics song coming on.
All together now......
Jan.
Who else would understand why people believe in gods?
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Or who put the c*** in Scunthorpe.
As I understand reproduction only ½ of each of my genes will be passed on with no guarantee that my set will be dominant over the set they meld with
Funny I've never been concerned about passing on offspring so being happy about having children really only lasted while I was close with them. And I'm happy when they are around. When they are off doing their things I rarely think about them
I have 2 daughters from first wife, daughter and son from 2nd wife and a remote possibility of another from a single encounter. The time line fits but while we were in close proximity due our work she never came forward with any sort of claim. So I presume I was not or.... to many other factors to guess at or make a conclusion
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Indeed.
We had a great proponentsist* of Langan's ideas here at one time. Someone called Spellbound. I think he gradually went bonkers and got banned in the end. I must say always thought it was meaningless verbiage.
*ID-speak for proponent. Thanks to gmilam for reminding me.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
In the spirit of trying to get a tiny bit serious in the Religion thread, for once, this seems to be getting at the Cosmological Argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_argument . This argument seems to be a very ancient one and still has adherents today.
It seems to me the problem with it, as you rather imply in the way you pose the question, is that it is merely proposing that there is, or was, an initial uncaused entity or event which caused everything else. Some systems of thought term this "God" - and proceed to attribute various other characteristics to "God" as well, though that is another story.
But it seems to me that making this statement (without the name God) is little more than a truism: there has to be something uncaused behind the train of events leading to what there is now, doesn't there? Even some of the metaphysical speculations from science about the Big Bang speak in terms of a random - that is, uncaused - fluctuation performing this role.
I quite like the idea that God may have been a random fluctuation, actually. The ultimate "still, small voice"?
That's like asking a four-year-old why people believe in Santa Claus. A believer believes. They don't think about "why". You need an unbeliever to do that objectively.Erm.. People who believe in God?
Jan.
Poor you. You will accept any nonsense thing, as long as it allows you to keep the clothes on the naked Empower.
Jan.
Ironic, ain't it. You're the one who will accept any nonsense thing, as long as it allows you to keep the clothes on the naked God.
So explain the difference between believing in God and believing in Santa Claus.
No.
I accept that is how you understand God, and am prepared to leave you with that.
Jan.