Usenet.com

www.Usenet.com

Group Index

Sci Thread Archive from Usenet.com

<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->

Re: Proof of God's existence?



"John Ings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:10:00 -0800, "Not so quick"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >If I believe/have reason to think that we may have
> >been put here by an advanced species or something
> >like that, but don't accept the traditional account of
> >creation, what does that make me?, a non-deist-creationist?
>
> Whether you believe it was an advanced civilization or a deity,
>  you a creationist (lower case c) as opposed to a Creationist.
> The Creationist is a biblical lieralist-inerrantist who dupes the
> scientifically illiterate with lies that sound like science.
>
> You should beware of the Hall of Mirrors trap however.
> The path leading to it goes like this:
>
> Look at this watch I found! See it's intricate mechanism?
> Just look at those tiny gears, the precision jewels, the delicate
> balance wheel. Such a wonder could not have arisen by itself!
> Thus without ever seeing him we can deduce the existence of a
> watchmaker.
>
> Behold the watchmaker! See his clever hands, his intelligent mind,
> capable of making this beautiful watch.  Such a clever being could not
> have arisen by himself! Thus without ever seeing him we deduce the
> existence of a creating intelligence.
>
> But what of this creating intelligence? Capable of so cleverly guiding
> evolution? Such a wondrous being cannot have arisen by himself!
> Thus without ever seeing him we deduce the existence of a intelligent
> creator creating intelligence.
>
> And what of this intelligent creator creating intelligence. Surely it
> must have been created?
>
> Proposing a greater complexity to explain a complexity merely
> postpones answering the problem NotsoQuick. It begs the question,
> removing it a step without answering it.
>
> ## Never undertake vast schemes with half-vast methods.
>

Doesn't Occam's Razor demand that we explain
all phenomena? It seems that evolution is over-
simplified.

And I must say that the science I have read so
far would serve well as an answer to people who
are seeking something to believe in to achieve a
sense of order in the universe, and it seems to run
as wide and deep as the dogma of organized
religion.





<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->


Usenet.com



Please check out one of the premium Usenet Newsgroup Service Providers below for access to Usenet.