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?

[POI]

We most likely are existing within a created thing.

Why? And who/what do you think is the creating agent?

What position are you on the question?

Why does that matter?

[William]

We most likely are existing within a created thing.

Why? And who/what do you think is the creating agent?

What position are you on the question?

Why does that matter?

It will help me determine how best to answer your question.

[POI]

We most likely are existing within a created thing.

Why? And who/what do you think is the creating agent?

What position are you on the question?

Why does that matter?

It will help me determine how best to answer your question.

Currently, I would classify myself as an "agnostic atheist". Just like I'm sure you possess SOME position, which will act as your 'bias'. However, if the 'evidence' is 'strong', I will have no choice but to be convinced, or apprehend/infer your given findings and then adjust accordingly.

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #183]

Currently, I would classify myself as an "agnostic atheist".

To answer your question "Why?" I have concluded, in my journey, thus far - that we most likely are existing within a created thing...

...I have been posting my reasons why, on this forum for many years now. You should be able to access these posts, but given the task involved in such undertaking, my advice to anyone wanting to know my reasons and rational, would be for them to follow my posts as they are published - I post almost daily on this site - and therein discover why I think as I do.

As to your question;

Who/what do you think is the creating agent?

I have no particular views on that as I am still examining the evidence of this thing we call 'reality' but am currently involved in a discussion with a Christian {Tanager} on the idea of YHVH being the principle Creator of this particular simulation experience.

That is how I work from the horse before cart position - examine the allegedly created thing and then explain how it was created - how a creator, created it.

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #183]

Currently, I would classify myself as an "agnostic atheist".

To answer your question "Why?" I have concluded, in my journey, thus far - that we most likely are existing within a created thing...

...I have been posting my reasons why, on this forum for many years now. You should be able to access these posts, but given the task involved in such undertaking, my advice to anyone wanting to know my reasons and rational, would be for them to follow my posts as they are published - I post almost daily on this site - and therein discover why I think as I do.

Would you mind cut/pasting the highlights here?

I have no particular views on that as I am still examining the evidence of this thing we call 'reality' but am currently involved in a discussion with a Christian {Tanager} on the idea of YHVH being the principle Creator of this particular simulation experience.

That is how I work from the horse before cart position - examine the allegedly created thing and then explain how it was created - how a creator, created it.

Why is that? Please cut/paste here....

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #183]

Currently, I would classify myself as an "agnostic atheist".

To answer your question "Why?" I have concluded, in my journey, thus far - that we most likely are existing within a created thing...

...I have been posting my reasons why, on this forum for many years now. You should be able to access these posts, but given the task involved in such undertaking, my advice to anyone wanting to know my reasons and rational, would be for them to follow my posts as they are published - I post almost daily on this site - and therein discover why I think as I do.

Would you mind cut/pasting the highlights here?

I have no particular views on that as I am still examining the evidence of this thing we call 'reality' but am currently involved in a discussion with a Christian {Tanager} on the idea of YHVH being the principle Creator of this particular simulation experience.

That is how I work from the horse before cart position - examine the allegedly created thing and then explain how it was created - how a creator, created it.

Why is that? Please cut/paste here....

I that how agnostic atheism works? An Agnostic atheist waits/expects for information to be handed to them?

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #183]

Currently, I would classify myself as an "agnostic atheist".

To answer your question "Why?" I have concluded, in my journey, thus far - that we most likely are existing within a created thing...

...I have been posting my reasons why, on this forum for many years now. You should be able to access these posts, but given the task involved in such undertaking, my advice to anyone wanting to know my reasons and rational, would be for them to follow my posts as they are published - I post almost daily on this site - and therein discover why I think as I do.

Would you mind cut/pasting the highlights here?

I have no particular views on that as I am still examining the evidence of this thing we call 'reality' but am currently involved in a discussion with a Christian {Tanager} on the idea of YHVH being the principle Creator of this particular simulation experience.

That is how I work from the horse before cart position - examine the allegedly created thing and then explain how it was created - how a creator, created it.

Why is that? Please cut/paste here....

I that how agnostic atheism works? An Agnostic atheist waits/expects for information to be handed to them?

If you do not want to give your reason(s), then please just say so. I'm not interested in playing "Where's Waldo".

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #187]

As I already said.

...I have been posting my reasons why, on this forum for many years now. You should be able to access these posts, but given the task involved in such undertaking, my advice to anyone wanting to know my reasons and rational, would be for them to follow my posts as they are published - I post almost daily on this site - and therein discover why I think as I do.

What about that makes you think I would copy and paste posts I have already made, here in this thread as well?

If you are truly interested, you will look and learn of your own volition.

Otherwise - good luck.

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #187]

As I already said.

...I have been posting my reasons why, on this forum for many years now. You should be able to access these posts, but given the task involved in such undertaking, my advice to anyone wanting to know my reasons and rational, would be for them to follow my posts as they are published - I post almost daily on this site - and therein discover why I think as I do.

What about that makes you think I would copy and paste posts I have already made, here in this thread as well?

If you are truly interested, you will look and learn of your own volition.

Otherwise - good luck.

Take a look at your response in post #182. Why ask me what you asked me, if you are ultimately going to tell me to just go find it? Geesh...

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #187]

As I already said.

...I have been posting my reasons why, on this forum for many years now. You should be able to access these posts, but given the task involved in such undertaking, my advice to anyone wanting to know my reasons and rational, would be for them to follow my posts as they are published - I post almost daily on this site - and therein discover why I think as I do.

What about that makes you think I would copy and paste posts I have already made, here in this thread as well?

If you are truly interested, you will look and learn of your own volition.

Otherwise - good luck.

Take a look at your response in post #182. Why ask me what you asked me, if you are ultimately going to tell me to just go find it? Geesh...

It is important to gauge interest. If you had of told me you were an atheist, I would have known you were definitely not interested in knowing. Since you also said you were agnostic, I thought you would perhaps be interested enough to do some leg work for yourself.

But hey! I can provide you with links to a couple of recent post I have made, if that will help ...