Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,259 Year: 5,516/9,624 Month: 541/323 Week: 38/143 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If complexity requires design, where did the Deity come from?
Jumped Up Chimpanzee
Member (Idle past 5059 days)
Posts: 572
From: UK
Joined: 10-22-2009


Message 27 of 111 (564967)
06-14-2010 4:27 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Jzyehoshua
06-14-2010 3:31 AM


Jzyehoshua says:
This concept is illustrated Biblically.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only way in which the above passage illustrates the concept [where a deity comes from] is by suggesting it is in the imagination. I don't see how that makes it in any way real, valuable or eternal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Jzyehoshua, posted 06-14-2010 3:31 AM Jzyehoshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Jzyehoshua, posted 06-14-2010 4:43 AM Jumped Up Chimpanzee has replied

  
Jumped Up Chimpanzee
Member (Idle past 5059 days)
Posts: 572
From: UK
Joined: 10-22-2009


(1)
Message 29 of 111 (564974)
06-14-2010 6:01 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Jzyehoshua
06-14-2010 4:43 AM


Therefore, God is not temporary as the physical is. He is described as 'eternal, immortal, invisible', a 'Spirit' and thus not subject to the same laws of physics which require a material beginning.
Simply quoting something someone once wrote, does not in any way add weight to your argument. It doesn't provide any evidence whatsoever for the existence of a god, let alone any evidence for it being eternal.
To my knowledge, the laws of science have yet to fully investigate the realm of spirit, what makes a person a person, or is responsible for morality. In dealing only with the physically testable and observable is neglected much of what's most important.
"the realm of spirit" - what is that?
"what makes a person a person" - how about a body and a mind?
"morality" - there have been studies on this (and I'll try and find some references). It is also a subject we've discussed quite a lot here.
Love, honor, justice - as Romans 1:20 stated, even the most hardened atheists would recognize those acting in violation of such concepts are doing something 'wrong'
I entirely agree. But it is very simply explained by the fact that we have evolved to follow behaviour that is beneficial to us (as have all other species). When we feel something is "wrong" it is an automatic emotional response to something we recognise as generally being harmful. If we were to feel good about things that were harmful to us, we would be attracted to doing harmful things, and would soon become extinct.
The fact that we understand why things are wrong, and more importantly have an emotional response to things that are right and wrong, which drives our behaviour, is logically compatible with a characteristic that has evolved. It is not logically compatible with "right" and "wrong" being a purely arbitrary notion that has been thrown at us by some other entity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Jzyehoshua, posted 06-14-2010 4:43 AM Jzyehoshua has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024