fellowtraveller Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Or did man create God? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad_Michael Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Or did man create God? Personally, I go with Fichte's assertion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
margrace Posted June 15, 2007 Report Share Posted June 15, 2007 Since God is everything in the universe and man also is God, then man is an extention of universal growth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 "Man" created God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottSA Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 "Man" created God. Oh, thanks BC Girl. Glad you have that all figured out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 "Man" created God. Oh, thanks BC Girl. Glad you have that all figured out. If I'd started the thread, I would have just conducted a poll. But as it stands, I was given two choices and I picked one. I figured the people of this forum are intelligent enough to know the arguments for and against each one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BornAlbertan Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 "Man" created God. Oh, thanks BC Girl. Glad you have that all figured out. If I'd started the thread, I would have just conducted a poll. But as it stands, I was given two choices and I picked one. I figured the people of this forum are intelligent enough to know the arguments for and against each one. Now given that thought, do you believe we are alone in the universe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Who's Doing What? Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 Now given that thought, do you believe we are alone in the universe? No. What an arrogant thought to think we are so special as to be the only living creatures to ever evolve in a place so vast as the universe. Yes Man created god(s). It/they are nothing more than a way to explain the unknown. They have been perverted by man to further his own needs, by using them to control the scared and uneducated, and systematically rob them a little at a time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 As a species or as individuals? As a species no because by maths the odds are against us being alone. As an individual yes because you are all figments of my imagination.........,:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottSA Posted June 16, 2007 Report Share Posted June 16, 2007 Now given that thought, do you believe we are alone in the universe? No. What an arrogant thought to think we are so special as to be the only living creatures to ever evolve in a place so vast as the universe. Yes Man created god(s). It/they are nothing more than a way to explain the unknown. They have been perverted by man to further his own needs, by using them to control the scared and uneducated, and systematically rob them a little at a time. The same argument you use for the existence of other beings can be used against your broad proclaimation that God doesn't exist. Especially the "arrogant" part. Imagine the arrogance of claiming that the vast majority of the people on this planet are merely "scared and uneducated." I can point out a dozen theologians right off the top of my head who are quite a bit more educated than you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electric Monk Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 We need to define "God" before we can have a meaningful discussion on this topic. The traditional Triple O God, (Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnipotent) has a much smaller probability of existence than an alien race with sufficiently advanced technology to appear "godlike" to us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 I think it's akin to the question of the tree that fell in the forest. Clearly, the rather well-formed attributes of earth and for that matter the universe didn't just arise out of chaos. On the other hand, for G-d to be recognized as such, a reasoning animal such as man is needed. The ultimate source on this is the Canadian Charter of Arbitrarily Awarded Rights and Fickly Determined Freedoms: "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God...." (Link) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electric Monk Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 Clearly, the rather well-formed attributes of earth and for that matter the universe didn't just arise out of chaos. Can you clarify this? What do you mean by well-formed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 Clearly, the rather well-formed attributes of earth and for that matter the universe didn't just arise out of chaos.Can you clarify this? What do you mean by well-formed?Ever see a picture of the Earth from space? Or even look at a loved one, and concentrate? Do you really think such things emerge randomly from the chaos of atoms and molecules? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 Ever see a picture of the Earth from space? Or even look at a loved one, and concentrate? Do you really think such things emerge randomly from the chaos of atoms and molecules? Ah, the teleological argument. Before I begin, allow me to say that I am agnostic, I believe that as a mere mortal, I am not in a position to prove or disprove the existence of God. However, the intricacies of nature are not, IMO, compelling enough to prove the existence of God. Some things in this world are a wonder, no doubt. But proof of the existence of God? Hardly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 Ah, the teleological argument. Before I begin, allow me to say that I am agnostic, I believe that as a mere mortal, I am not in a position to prove or disprove the existence of God.I came up with that argument myself and it reflects my own thoughts, not that of others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 I came up with that argument myself and it reflects my own thoughts, not that of others. Well, it's not original, it's been proposed before. It's called the teleological argument, and my argument (which was below the passage you quoted) still stands.... marvel and wonder are not "proof" of God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 Well, it's not original, it's been proposed before. It's called the teleological argument, and my argument (which was below the passage you quoted) still stands.... marvel and wonder are not "proof" of God.At least in Canada, a proof is a proof. And a proof is something that proves something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 Well, it's not original, it's been proposed before. It's called the teleological argument, and my argument (which was below the passage you quoted) still stands.... marvel and wonder are not "proof" of God.At least in Canada, a proof is a proof. And a proof is something that proves something. Good rebuttal Council. Are you saying that in the US, circumstantial evidence is considered "proof?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 "Man" created God. "Man" created 'God'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 Well, it's not original, it's been proposed before. It's called the teleological argument, and my argument (which was below the passage you quoted) still stands.... marvel and wonder are not "proof" of God.At least in Canada, a proof is a proof. And a proof is something that proves something. Good rebuttal Council. Are you saying that in the US, circumstantial evidence is considered "proof?" Yes. But purely circumstantial evidence is, in general, not sufficient to convict for a capital crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 "Man" created God. "Man" created 'God'. Touche! How did I miss that one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 Purely circumstantial evidence is, in general, not sufficient to convict for a capital crime. Exactly! And that's all the teleological argument is - circumstantial evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottSA Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 The traditional Triple O God, (Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnipotent) has a much smaller probability of existence than an alien race with sufficiently advanced technology to appear "godlike" to us. We don't have the information needed to draw those probabilities. We would have to know the exact chemical conditions and circumstances for the generation of carbon-based life in order to draw the probability of carbon-based life existing elsewhere, and we certainly can't begin to be able to draw probability parameters around the existence of God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted June 17, 2007 Report Share Posted June 17, 2007 "Man" created God. "Man" created 'God'. Touche! How did I miss that one? Come to think of it, how did both of us miss this one? "Man" `created` 'God'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.