Well said!

--
I believe in Jesus Christ my Savior. If you do too and aren't scared to admit it, then copy and paste this in your signature.

"God is love... There is no fear in love."-1 John 4:17a, 18a

Excellent! Congratulations and Glory to God .

--
Behind each design, there is a Designer, and is there a better design than the universe?

Omega Digital Productions®

Eh, why not? I wasn’t too satisfied with our last debate, so this is a good place to reiterate some counterarguments more properly. My contending with the first point is that enough theists accept that god had no beginning or creator, but shun the possibility that the universe is a cause in and of itself and thus had no beginning or creator. The fact that god created all of existence entails a suggestion of prior non-existence, creating a bit of a paradox here: a non-existent being existed before existence to create existence.

“Though man is not at the physical center of the universe, he appears to be at the center of its purpose. Our planet was fine-tuned for our survival. Minor changes would cause our destruction. Coincidence? …Over the past thirty years or so, scientists have discovered that just about everything about the basic structure of the universe is balanced on a razor’s edge for life to exist. The coincidences are far to fantastic to attribute this to mere chance or to claim that it needs no explanation. The dials are set too precisely to have been a random accident.”

No. First of all, something that seems like a coincidence doesn’t automatically attribute to divine intervention. Second, you can look at a building and fairly conclude that a builder fine-tuned it for human inhabitation because we can empirically PROVE that builders actually exist. You can look at a sculpture and fairly conclude that a sculptor made it because we can empirically PROVE that sculptors actually exist. You can’t look at a planet or galaxy and empirically PROVE that a god exists to have “fine-tuned” it. A tragically flawed analogy used by one too many theists.

“Would it not be strange if a universe without purpose accidentally created humans who are so obsessed with purpose?”

Could this guy weigh the possibility that people are obsessed with finding purpose because the universe doesn’t automatically “hand one down” to us? I can speak from personal experience as a former nihilist that without giving yourself purpose, you may as well not be. It’s peoples’ aversion to nihilism and their affection to value that creates that obsession. Having an obsession with purpose is essentially having an obsession with life. And living things that must eventually expire having a passion about living? It seems rather commonsensical to me. Besides, boulders, inanimate objects without purpose of its own, can “accidentally” fall from a cliff and create an avalanche and reshape the landscape in an immeasurable number of ways.

“Chemical reactions have never produced something that has personality and desires. Therefore, if we have emotions, whatever caused us must have emotions. If we are rational, whatever caused us must be rational. In other words, the only way to account for the emotions and personality of humans is that there must be a personal creator.”

No. I’m sorry, but what the bloody HELL is he talking about? Phosphorus, testosterone, estrogen, salt, water, lipids, proteins, carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, iron, potassium, calcium, zinc… You can find all of these and more in a Wikipedia article. The hypothalamus is responsible for releasing various types of hormones in the human brain, for one example. And I suppose then that people on medication to stabilize the emotions conveyed in clinical depression, bipolar disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, or hell, people that just smoke a bit of reefer and feel carefree and happy-go-lucky for a few hours has nothing to do with chemical reactions producing personality and desires. Also, this fellow is drawing the conclusion that if something is, it must’ve been created. Like I said before, this is only plausible when one can empirically prove that a creator actually exists for rationality, like the builder for the building and the painter for the painting.

“And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else…”

While I could probably concur that the Christian god does not need, it does want. The idea that god creates, designs, and asks for homage incurs an obvious indication of want. It wants things to exist and purportedly has a master plan for them all. Want and even jealousy entails a current lack of fulfillment, and how an all-pervading, all-knowing, and all-powerful god could be lacking in even one department... Well, you do the math.

“..since human beings are infected with sin, they tend not to desire to honor and glorify the true God, who is righteous and holy. Rather, they tend to make gods for themselves that are pleasing to them or that satisfy some sense of what they think a god ought to be…”

I simply say that the same speculation can easily apply to the Christian god as well and I don’t see any specific, tangible reason(s) why his “true” god is any exception at all or more plausible than the others.

In conclusion, if there is a god, it most likely defies almost all human logic and it personally baffles me why then people assert that god can be proven through scientific means, through sermon, or even through religious scripture if people assert that it’s also beyond the realm of human perception. For god to “make sense” undermines the faith aspect; if a concept makes sense then faith in the concept is unnecessary, because you know and understand. I don’t have faith that 1 + 1 = 2, for instance. Adversely, if a concept doesn’t make sense, then faith can play a vital role in perpetuating it. I have faith that 1 + 1 = 14 somehow, for instance. Not that there’s anything wrong about trying to do the seemingly impossible, as it can be actually historically admirable and a bit humbling for naysayers if it’s accomplished. Keep measuring the possibilities, as life would be banal without such.

--
The divine is God's concern; the human, man's. My concern is neither the divine nor the human, not the true, good, just, free, etc., but solely what is mine, and it is not a general one, but is -- unique, as I am unique. Nothing is more to me than myself!

Indeed, you are the reason that I made my first point there. It’s a possibility, though, I have to say that most scientists say that the idea of the universe points to some beginning. Hmm, possibly, possibly. Hah, all right, I can’t say it in the same LUCID(thank you for the vocabulary lesson earlier) way that you did, but here it goes: I still have to say, that God doesn’t need a cause or a beginning, because he –IS- the beginning. Just.. when you ARE the beginning, you both existed, and didn’t exist before existence, didn’t you? But it’s really neither of that. It’s like completely separate from existence. For, it’s an Action, not a Thing.

Ah, no. Something similar to coincidence does not mean that it was divine intervention. Personally, I do not believe that everything happens for a reason. My goal is not to prove that God exists, but to create a CASE for God’s existence. Lol, which brings me to the already long debated debate of ours about how you can’t prove or disprove God’s existence.

As for the “Would it not be strange if a universe without purpose accidentally created humans who are so obsessed with purpose?” quote, well.. you have to admit that’s strange. And as a whole, we are obsessed with purpose. I feel that one can attribute that obsession just as much with spirituality as with an obsession with life.

This whole speech about chemical reactions, is perfectly lovely by the way. No complaints at this point in time. Fantastic job!

Well.. yes, I believe that God does want. But I also feel that God wants what is best for us, and does not force it upon us. However, I do not believe that he WANTS for his own gain, but for OURS.

And certainly the same speculation can apply to the Christian God. That’s the thing, if there’s any sort of chance that there’s a God out there, I feel that it’s our responsibility to try our best to figure it out. I believe in the God of Abraham, Jacob and Isaac. Why? Well.. I wrote an article about that once.

mmmm…again, I do not believe that one can prove or disprove God. I just believe that a case can and should be made. Faith is merely the evidence of things unseen. I admit, it does not –always- involve REAL evidence, but it can. and I believe that we need a reason for why we believe in something. Otherwise, it’s not much worth believing in.

--
"oh what a fine tale indeed."

So true ;3

--
«... Something goes here, but I don't remeber what...»

~ Stick Stickly [You never said this would be simple] ~

in the 3 laws of thermodynamics the second says that any structure will decline without matinence. chaos is not evident in the universe any where so to believe in coincidence over intelligence is proposterouse. for the universe to have come into existance without being designed is like finding a tree growing aeroplanes in a dessert. a christian god by the bible and not the church is logical. u must remember god says the system is evil satans, and he promises to come and free us when we realise the futility of rebellion to his way (the way of the universe , harmony not chaos) heaven is a concept invented by the evil powers to justify their power on earth, without acnolodging armogeddon.

to answer your question, no.

--
[link]

I don't really think so...

Cuz if there really was a God...

my life wouldn't suck this bad!!

Why is this posted here? Art is about truth, not about stale theological BS aimed at fear and intolerance as a form of thought control.

Even your headline is BS. You're not really asking us a question, just lining up an audience for cut-and-paste fairy tales. As fairy tales the so-called "holy" bible is a vast and venerable collection of folk art, but your insistence on literal interpretations won't even let it have that much dignity. Do yourself a favor and pick up a real book occasionally. Stephan Hawkings, "A Brief History of Time," is easy enough and fun. You'll find theoretical physics to be more grounded in reality than this mangled pretense of logic and debate.

Surely there're other sites for you to engage in mutual manual massage. Go peddle your be-there-then, death-cult, enslavement BS elsewhere and leave Deviant Art for freedom, truth, and love. Principles that do not lead me to apathy or require BS to discover.

BTW, I'm not an atheist but rather an apatheist: I just don't care either way; except for how this poison becomes the basis for political/societal control, eg., right-wing fundamentalists, Catholic excessess, the Taliban.

yup, this is an art site, not a theological debate site.


By all means post some of the wonderful artworks inspired by humanity's need to believe in something beyond this world - that could make a great feature - but I feel this article is out of place on dA

--
Don't try to engage my enthusiasm because I haven't got one.