Creation is evidence for which God?

@fmf said
You are one of RHP's most blatant purveyors of "forum combat". Probably 80% of your posts on this forum are devoted to engaging in it regardless of the content of posts you are replying to or the topics in hand.

Defense. Surely you know what that is.

Oh, wait, maybe you don't, Mr. Yakuza.

This, like that, is a legend in your own mind.

@suzianne said
Defense. Surely you know what that is.

Oh, wait, maybe you don't, Mr. Yakuza.

This, like that, is a legend in your own mind.

"Mr Yakuza"?

@darfius said
Even if other religions made the claim, there can be only one omnimax individual. That individual is God, whatever He is called or not called by anyone.

God will not circumvent the free will He gave us so that we can be good to make us merely happy. Happiness cannot be sustained until we are good. So while He mourns for the child with cancer, He knows that taking away t ...[text shortened]... lowing them to suffer from it with hope for a better future which would not exist without free will.

So now you are saying other religions 'might' make the same claims about their God?

Man, you folded easy.

@kellyjay said
It isn't a theory.
The creation story starts in Genesis and you see what God did.
God creates man, from Adam to Jesus we have a line of people begetting, boring reading, but very important.
You have anything close to that in any form? Written genealogy from the beginning to a few thousand years ago?

Unfortunately sir your line of descendants is broken at the very beginning, when we take into account that Adam, as an actual individual, never existed. (Evidenced of course by the fact that we evolved as a species and were never created in our current human form).

Nice story though.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I pick a flower and say, "Ah, evidence that the Christian God exists."

I then pick a second flower and say, "Ah, evidence that Brahma exists."


Can any religion claim an exclusive link between creation and their particular flavour of the divine?

If you were convinced there was a God, then I suppose you would look for evidence to see if that God can be known to you.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Unfortunately sir your line of descendants is broken at the very beginning, when we take into account that Adam, as an actual individual, never existed. (Evidenced of course by the fact that we evolved as a species and were never created in our current human form).

Nice story though.

You making that claim doesn’t make it true.

@kellyjay said
You making that claim doesn’t make it true.

True, but the vast amount of scientific evidence backing the claim up helps.

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

Unfortunately sir your line of descendants is broken at the very beginning, when we take into account that Adam, as an actual individual, never existed. (Evidenced of course by the fact that we evolved as a species and were never created in our current human form).

That is your religious faith speaking.
That is not your scientifically observed evidence of one species gradually evolving into another.

It has never been OBSERVED.

If you say "But we cannot observe it because it takes too many millions of years."

The Scientific Method if it could speak, would say, "That's too bad."

So you have, for lack of a batter word, a faith or faith like thing, that you just know we evolved from another species.

It takes one of faith to recognize one of faith.
I don't know that Adam was the first man.
But I noticed that Jesus took Genesis as history. And the integrity of Jesus is for me beyond questioning.

Call it an argument from authority of you wish. It is not necessarily wrong.
Its just not rigorous.

I think certainly there was a first man and woman - Adam and Eve.

@sonship said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

Call it an argument from authority of you wish. It is not necessarily wrong.
Its just not rigorous.

I think certainly there was a first man and woman - Adam and Eve.

I'd call it an 'argument from mythology'. It is wrong and it is anything but rigorous, it is in fact laughable.

You may 'think certainly' there was a fist man and woman, but again, the evidence tells us otherwise.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I pick a flower and say, "Ah, evidence that the Christian God exists."

I then pick a second flower and say, "Ah, evidence that Brahma exists."


Can any religion claim an exclusive link between creation and their particular flavour of the divine?

We do have some facts:

* If somebody claims causeless cause it is regardless if they speak about a singularity (the farthest to go back in the big bang hypothesis) or the creator. The question what causes either is not possible to answer in the relevant framework.

* Any religion which claims that creation was caused by a god is in fact giving a hypothesis as in the first point.

So creation as such is not evidence for any specific god. In fact as humans we can't answer the question where matter and energy came from without resorting to some beginning beyond which we can't ask.

@Proper-Knob

I'd call it an 'argument from mythology'. It is wrong and it is anything but rigorous, it is in fact laughable.

Well, you may have a hearty laugh. But I know of one very powerful person in human history - Christ. And He is described as "the second man" or "the last Adam" by Paul who authored much of the Christian church's document.

The presence of such a person called "the second man" or "the last Adam" tends to make me think a previous very powerful individual preceded Him sometime in the remote history.

So though we may await scientific evidence that we are all descendant from a first couple, I suspect we were. And that that man and women, if could be known personally today, would be quite unique and striking as the "second man" who is hard to ignore as historical is.

You may 'think certainly' there was a fist man and woman, but again, the evidence tells us otherwise.

No it doesn't. We both have a faith. I acknowledge that I have one.
You don't.

Let me know when it is ok for me to speak of your "tactics".

@sonship

We have lots of scientific evidence regarding human history. None of it points to Adam and Eve. You can bluster all you want about 'the second man', 'the last Adam' and how much you know Christ. It still doesn't change the fact there is no evidence, outside of the Bible, that points our ancestry back to Adam & Eve.

@sonship said
@Proper-Knob
Let me know when it is ok for me to speak of your "tactics".

You don't need my permission to post.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
So now you are saying other religions 'might' make the same claims about their God?

Man, you folded easy.

Can you read? I said it doesn't matter if they do and explained why.

@Proper-Knob

I didn't say we don't have lots of scientific evidence regarding human history.

Evidence that surely there was not a first man or first woman as parents of us all? What's your strongest piece of evidence that that is impossible ?