Attention "Creationists"

[POI]

In the never-ending/perpetual 'god debate', Christians will often quote the following from Romans 1:20 (i.e.):

"20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."

Meaning, we atheists know 'god' exists because of the observed 'creation' all around us. We instead choose to suppress such obvious 'observation', for this or that reason. Well, I'm here to challenge this assertion from the Bible.

Many Christians need to really think about what 'creation' actually means? Meaning, I can 'create' stuff. Running water can 'create' stuff. Erosion can 'create' stuff. Pressure and time can 'create' stuff. Etc....

If I 'create' something, in reality, I'm instead repurposing or rearranging material. But it is still intentional. A 'mind' purposed it's reconfiguration.

If nature 'creates' something, like the Grand Canyon, Mount Everest, Yosemite, it was likely not reconfigured from a 'mind'. It's not intentional.

For debate:

1. Can you Christians distinguish the difference between both intentional and unintentional "creation" -- (in every case)?

Example 1: A straight row of almond trees was designed by a 'mindful' tree farmer. A random array of almond trees, in the middle of an uninhabited area, was likely not placed there 'mindfully' or intentionally.

Example 2: 99.9999% of the 'universe', in which we know about, is unihabitable for humans -- god's favorite 'creation'.

Example 3: The majority of the earth itself is also unihabitable for humans -- god's favorite 'creation'.

Example 4: An intentional mind 'created' humans, where an airway and a food pathway share the same plumbing, where a sewage system and sex organs share the same pathway, and also where a urine pathway routes directly through the prostate?

2. If you can distinguish the difference between intentional and unintentional "creation", is the author of Romans 1:20 still correct? If yes, why yes?

3. If 'science' is correct, and matter can neither be created nor destroyed, but instead only repurposed; this means there exists no reason to invent or assert a god in charge of 'creation', right?

[Clownboat]

I can agree that humans have no reason to invent God. If we agree on this, then it means God is not human invention?

Let's leave your God out of this for a moment...
With that said, what do you make of all the other thousands of god concepts? Do you see them as having been invented by humans, or would you argue that all/most of those gods are real too?

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to POI in post #49]

Reading that, I find myself thinking, with every other Christian conversion -story I can recall, 'That's a really poor reason'. Even assuming that was really what he worked out for himself, though they really, really smack of some crafty and mendacious distortion of morality to swindle and shame someone into faith. The normal humanist instinct of reciprocity - the golden rule, is made to look like only Jesus ever thought of that. What a swindle! What else? That the good - doing was inadequate? Not being comfortable with himself? Well I'm not sure that Jesusfaith has done more than allow him to forgive himself rather than improve himself.

And the stuff about 'none good but God'. That is hardly an argument that an atheist would buy unless he he was in a terrible state and Jesus had to pull him out of the gutter, or someone (the one that 'talked to him') convinced him that he was sick (the religious snake -oil ploy) and only Jesus could cure him.

That, frankly is where I'd place my bet, either someone bamboozled him into Faith with the same rhetoric he's using to try to fool us, OR that is just a stock 'i used to be an atheist, like you, until...; story, which I doubt is actually true.

I don't know of course, but like many of these conversion stories, they are either very bad reasons to convert or stories that don't make sense (1) But again and again I'm left feeling that I got a polished polemic rather than an honest account.

I know that many atheists here used to be theists. Maybe they can recall just how they were converted. After all, Flew was converted by a clever argument, though false, and the Gospels can be sold as true with some lawyer - tricks. The resurrection can be Sold as a coherent story; heck - even the nativity can be peddled as a selectively integrased tale, and is. Because people don't know what a shambles the stories are.

So yes, I imagine Christianity can be sold, but: 'I'm not perfect, only God is perfect. Jesus invented the golden rule, so I'd better believe and forget my faults' Really? That's a legitimate reason to convert? Hoo Boy.

(1) e,g the Strobel story which is not in fact particular to him. Supposedly an atheist, he was persuaded of the the resurrection. But only by the theist side; he never mentions any of the doubts an atheist would have or how he was talked around. It Looks like he has only ever heard the Christian side.

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #49]

Reading that, I find myself thinking, with every other Christian conversion -story I can recall, 'That's a really poor reason'. Even assuming that was really what he worked out for himself, though they really, really smack of some crafty and mendacious distortion of morality to swindle and shame someone into faith. The normal humanist instinct of reciprocity - the golden rule, is made to look like only Jesus ever thought of that. What a swindle! What else? That the good - doing was inadequate? Not being comfortable with himself? Well I'm not sure that Jesusfaith has done more than allow him to forgive himself rather than improve himself.

And the stuff about 'none good but God'. That is hardly an argument that an atheist would buy unless he he was in a terrible state and Jesus had to pull him out of the gutter, or someone (the one that 'talked to him') convinced him that he was sick (the religious snake -oil ploy) and only Jesus could cure him.

That, frankly is where I'd place my bet, either someone bamboozled him into Faith with the same rhetoric he's using to try to fool us, OR that is just a stock 'i used to be an atheist, like you, until...; story, which I doubt is actually true.

I don't know of course, but like many of these conversion stories, they are either very bad reasons to convert or stories that don't make sense (1) But again and again I'm left feeling that I got a polished polemic rather than an honest account.

I know that many atheists here used to be theists. Maybe they can recall just how they were converted. After all, Flew was converted by a clever argument, though false, and the Gospels can be sold as true with some lawyer - tricks. The resurrection can be Sold as a coherent story; heck - even the nativity can be peddled as a selectively integrased tale, and is. Because people don't know what a shambles the stories are.

So yes, I imagine Christianity can be sold, but: 'I'm not perfect, only God is perfect. Jesus invented the golden rule, so I'd better believe and forget my faults' Really? That's a legitimate reason to convert? Hoo Boy.

(1) e,g the Strobel story which is not in fact particular to him. Supposedly an atheist, he was persuaded of the the resurrection. But only by the theist side; he never mentions any of the doubts an atheist would have or how he was talked around. It Looks like he has only ever heard the Christian side.

You beat me to the punch there, in the end about Lee Strobel But regardless, he made the comment to "TCG" which looks to substantiate my OP. Meaning, he is telling us that atheists are "suppressing the truth". If he does not advance upon post #32, then he is just another theist here to preach a sermon. He is not really interested in true exploration or discovery.

[Clownboat]

I agree that nature doesn't 'create' but 'causes'. The difference is that 'create' implies planning and intent. Cause is just the result of conditions. And the evidence is that the 'causes' were not pre -planned.

I'm afraid that I see no point in your experiment other than to wish a Faith - posture on me in the hope that I'll get hooked. No thanks. How about you try one day of reading the Bible starting with genesis with an atheist mindset (including evolution and old earth and the not very hard assumption that the laws of physics don't have a meaning and purpose for us)? You might see that Genesis is total tosh and it's actually better if we create or own meanings and purpose than have them imposed either by a universe of physics or a god - such as Allah. How dye like his meaning and purpose for you?

I am a born-again Christian from a non-Christian household and an atheist before that.

I guess you don't like science?

I was a born again Christian for the first 2 decades of my life. If I can be set free from my beliefs, I have to believe others can be as well.
I like the method that is science.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to Wootah in post #29]

I suppose you were suckered into creationism by Creationist 'Science'? There are Creationists from Christian households that were deconverted in various ways, including I suppose realising that Genesis could not be right...What more do you have?

I don't feel suckered in.

I am just saying do the experiment.

As a born again Christian, I suckered many the child by offering free tickets to heaven to them if they would just listen to me and in the end accept Jesus in to their hearts. There was no god reaching out to them, just myself. That was the results of my experiments.

[Tcg]

I am a born-again Christian from a non-Christian household and an atheist before that.

You were an atheist before being born into a non-Christian household. How does that work?

I guess you don't like science?

Science is pretty cool. If it weren't we couldn't be conversing here.


Tcg

[POI]

You were an atheist before being born into a non-Christian household. How does that work?

Yea, that one left me scratching my head too.

[Tcg]

You were an atheist before being born into a non-Christian household. How does that work?

Yea, that one left me scratching my head too.

Perhaps in utero?





Tcg

[brunumb]

You were an atheist before being born into a non-Christian household. How does that work?

Yea, that one left me scratching my head too.

I'm thinking he was born into a non-Christian household and grew up as an atheist. later he became a born-again Christian. Based on his testimony, I'm guessing he went through some sort of crisis and a friend talked him into Jesus. Open to being corrected by Wootah.

[TRANSPONDER]

You were an atheist before being born into a non-Christian household. How does that work?

Yea, that one left me scratching my head too.

I'm thinking he was born into a non-Christian household and grew up as an atheist. later he became a born-again Christian. Based on his testimony, I'm guessing he went through some sort of crisis and a friend talked him into Jesus. Open to being corrected by Wootah.

That's pretty much how I read it, too, and we are all born atheist until we are taught to religion; by the parents, or in some school activity, if they can get away with doing it.

And, yes, it seems that someone talked him (unless it isn't) into it, which was passed over in a couple of words, but there's no way we can be sure how it happened.