Sorry, I'm poisoning the well. I'll address your argument itself when I'm finished with my fallacy. |
|
Yes sir I am. Born and rasied. And I am proud. |
|
Sorry, I'm poisoning the well. I'll address your argument itself when I'm finished with my fallacy. |
|
Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.
Hahaha... |
|
How do you know he is a force unlike any? How do you know he has always been and always will be? How do you reconcile your answers to these questions with your statement of "we cannot explain that?" |
|
The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended. - Frédéric Bastiat
I try to deny myself any illusions or delusions, and I think that this perhaps entitles me to try and deny the same to others, at least as long as they refuse to keep their fantasies to themselves. - Christopher Hitchens
Formerly known as BLUELINE976
Here's what I don't understand about the Creationists' argument: |
|
Last edited by Sageous; 01-09-2013 at 11:36 PM.
Wow Sage - expecting religious arguments to actually make sense? What's up with that? |
|
But why? |
|
The whole conept of creationism and sin together makes no sense, if god wanted us to live without sin, he would have either created us without the knowledge of doing bad or he would have showed us that he is indeed real so that people would follow his teaching. The case however is now that he expects you to blindly follow his teachings which is obviously a very ineffecient way of getting people to not commit sin. |
|
Why did God punish Adam and Eve for sinning when it was God in the first place who had withheld from them the knowledge of good and evil? |
|
Last edited by Xei; 01-11-2013 at 11:13 AM.
... not to mention that the game was rigged -- curiosity (the need to know more) and desire for growth are basic God-given human traits, and the only thing that God withheld from Adam & Eve was, yes, the source of knowledge and growth. They never had a chance. Why would God do that? |
|
Are you seriously not seeing a slight problem here? |
|
Obviously God wanted followers who don't question but only do as they're told - those make the most compliant subjects and if given pithy statements to believe in will rise up in righteous indignation and strike down those who dare to look for actual answers (especially if those answers run contrary to what said blind followers have been told). By appealing to strong emotions rather than reason religion breeds a contempt for rigorous thought that ensures backwardness and ignorance among the faithful. Early religious leaders were extremely canny and probably among the first great con men. They had an innate understanding of human motivations and how to control them. They knew the majority of humanity would rather believe in comfortable fantasies that make absolutely no sense rather than be bold enough to seek the actual truth even when it isn't comforting, and they also knew that these kinds of people are the ones who are much more easily led. The ones who actually evaluate what they're being told and try to discern truth from fantasy don't make very good compliant sheep. Ergo all the injunctions to slaughter them by stoning or various other methods. |
|
Last edited by Darkmatters; 01-11-2013 at 08:41 PM.
I'd like to inject something related to the original topic of this thread. In a universe without matter or energy, the very notion of time makes no sense. So it's not a case of matter not existing and then existing, since without time there is no 'then'. Thus you could say matter had 'always' existed, since time and matter/energy is so strongly linked, but it wouldn't really mean anything. |
|
April Ryan is my friend,
Every sorrow she can mend.
When i visit her dark realm,
Does it simply overwhelm.
^^ But then again, remember that there is no such thing as time. |
|
There actually might be such things as time , I read this artical that meson decay seems to prefer going in one direction of time and if it was reversed you would not witness a reversed reaction. The perception of time is relative but there might actually exist a timeline that only works one way. |
|
The job of physics is to create working models. A model for something unobservable with no empirical consequences is a nonsense. In my opinion, the statement "time existed before the universe started" (and its negation) are literally meaningless, and are symptomatic of the human tendency to vastly overestimate the efficacy of the thing we call 'thought'. |
|
|
|
Bookmarks