Creationist Should Dismiss Genesis Quickly (page 2)

Coded Logic

coded logic, explain to us why you think there could not be a creator?

prologos

You're attempting to shift the burden of proof by saying that I believe, "there cannot be a creator." However, this is NOT the position that I've taken nor is it a belief that I hold. I don't know if there "can" or "cannot" be a creator.

The burden of proof is on the person saying "there is a creator" to show evidence for that claim. In the absense of evidence we disbelieve the proposition. But just because I'm not convinced of the proposition DOESN'T mean I have taken the opposite position (null hypothesis). Here's some more information on the topic for you:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof

prologos

coded logic, you gave us more than one scripture and it's incompatability with research, to show that the Bible can not be inerrant. agreed, but

Your PROGRESSION from a believer in Creation to your present, different position interests us.

After the bible is relegated to the fiction section, we still have the 'elephant in the room' of the work started, and in progress, of the universe.

If its not about the bible, could you adress that issue? No proof of the non-existence of a creator asked for, from a deist like me.

Phizzy

I think your question to C.L is for another Topic Prologos. This one is about Genesis, the Bible book.

Vidiot

simon - "Genesis is a worse origin story than batman."

Hey, I love Batman's origin story!

Phizzy - "This one is about Genesis, the Bible book."

Maybe he thought it was about the band.

Theology is, after all, a Land of Confusion.

notsurewheretogo

Jehovah's Magic Wand sorts all of that out!

Coded Logic

Your PROGRESSION from a believer in Creation to your present, different position interests us.

-prologos

I fear we may be cross talking here. Are you asking why I am no longer convinced there is a creator?

prologos

Coded Logic, yes. cross talking could bring to the surface what many are intrigued with. In my case, it is not evolution, a distinct possibility, certainty even. Genesis deals with the BIG questions, of time, light, the beginning. and Genesis is wrong. but

having read Krauss, Penrose and others, and scouring the Science journals, I still can not see all that all this EXPLAINING precludes the possible existence of a deist creator.

Try us. Be generous on genesis with us laymen/women. (pun not intended man)

Coded Logic

One can't "disprove" the existance of an unknown. As far as the God Hypothesis goes, it gives us no explanitory nor predictive capabilities. And, as far as anyone can tell, our universe works just fine without a creator.

It's like your asking me to "disprove" that the Nile river wasn't designed by aliens.

prologos

Coded Logic, It was just probing for your personal insight into the Big Question, not to come up with the theory for everything.

you said: "--the Universe works just fine without a creator"--*. that might be the genius behind the true, natural genesis.

* unlike Newton, who posited, that god have to give it a nudge once in a while, and Albert, who opined that the lord had no choice in formulating the laws his way.

The Deist is in general that " The Universe works just fine --" now, but how couls have not taking work to make it start, work in the first place?

Even well made cars nowodays work fine without tune-ups, tinkering. copy cats.

Coded Logic

It was just probing for your personal insight into the Big Question

You should have just asked. Ever since I learned the total sum energy in our univers is zero that was pretty much the nail in the coffin. My video pretty much sums up my thoughts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2_CCHQo_AA

Creationist Should Dismiss Genesis Quickly

Share this