29 Mar 06
Originally posted by ChessJesterHuh?
Fair enough... But you speak of God from a Christian perspective - "HE" - And then argue a non-christian perspective therefore contradicting yourself in the process.
Mankind created the christian god. They also created all the other gods as well. They like to pretend it's the other way around, but it isn't.
29 Mar 06
Originally posted by rwingettAnd by that logic you have created that perspective for yourself as well.
Huh?
Mankind created the christian god. They also created all the other gods as well. They like to pretend it's the other way around, but it isn't.
I think you are lacking in one vital understanding of the concept of "God" and this is the hindu concept, that god has no identity, god is the sum of all things... and by this token, does not create us nor do we create it.
29 Mar 06
Originally posted by ChessJesterGod is the sum of all things?
And by that logic you have created that perspective for yourself as well.
I think you are lacking in one vital understanding of the concept of "God" and this is the hindu concept, that god has no identity, god is the sum of all things... and by this token, does not create us nor do we create it.
Where does that get us? It may sound all nice and mystical, but it's not a terribly helpful definition ...
29 Mar 06
Originally posted by ChessJesterWho cares?
And by that logic you have created that perspective for yourself as well.
I think you are lacking in one vital understanding of the concept of "God" and this is the hindu concept, that god has no identity, god is the sum of all things... and by this token, does not create us nor do we create it.
30 Mar 06
Originally posted by ChessJesterNo I think the problem is that you have a different deffinition for the word God than most people and somehow expect everyone else to understand what you are saying. However by your own new definition the origional post immediately looses all meaning. So what is going on?
Well he was trying to argue that humans created God which relies on the fact that we created our definitions for everything which means that he created his own argument to satisfy his own outlook... so its a void argument to begin with... lets get back to the topic please.
30 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeyI think what he meant what that God is not a physical being (or non physical being for that matter) but rather a figment of our imaginations. If that is the case then we created him and he did not evolve from us.
So God was created by us? Don't you mean he evolved from us? You really need to watch the words you use.
30 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadAnd what I meant was that if you are an evolutionist then nothing is a result of "creation". In effect, all things evolve and are not created. THerefore, the concept of God is merely a Darwinian phenomenon. What is odd is that evolutionsists spend all their time attacking this evolutionary progression.
I think what he meant what that God is not a physical being (or non physical being for that matter) but rather a figment of our imaginations. If that is the case then we created him and he did not evolve from us.
30 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeyYou clearly have no understanding of evolution or creationism. I can create a house, a work of art or any number of thoughts in my head. They do not evolve. Evolution says that life evolved not "all things". It is now even possible to create new varieties of life without evolution. The concept of God may be an evolutionary phenomena but so is me making houses and art. Did houses evolve or are they created by people? It is not what words you use but how you use them.
And what I meant was that if you are an evolutionist then nothing is a result of "creation". In effect, all things evolve and are not created. THerefore, the concept of God is merely a Darwinian phenomenon. What is odd is that evolutionsists spend all their time attacking this evolutionary progression.
30 Mar 06
Originally posted by twhiteheadHow is it hhat we are able to create new varities of life without evolution? Also, if you are able to create, does this make you a god?
You clearly have no understanding of evolution or creationism. I can create a house, a work of art or any number of thoughts in my head. They do not evolve. Evolution says that life evolved not "all things". It is now even possible to create new varieties of life without evolution. The concept of God may be an evolutionary phenomena but so is me making ho ...[text shortened]... ouses evolve or are they created by people? It is not what words you use but how you use them.