Dr.Grass said:
AbbathTheGrim said:
Dr.Grass said:
The intersection of people that believe man evolved from an African ape-like creature AND that a God caused it all is already pretty small.
Then you had to go and assign a genetic make-up to this all-powerful creator based on the small variations shown by our species on this planet, assuming that this all powerful God would resemble the earlier variants.
Completely ignoring the fact that we as humans are pitiful in most respects, you ascribe to this eternal, transcendent person a designation which holds no value whatsoever in any actual sense.
Not to mention your omission, or rather unbeknownst acknowledgement that even though evolution is a continuous process in the vein of calculus, you for some reason assign more value to a later-developed specimen and somehow ignores the numberless species that came before. This is a tremendous paradox as you are assigning a type of godliness to the first men, but not to the species before them. The only solution to this paradox is to designate later-developed humanoids as more godly, otherwise we eventually end up at the "God is a single celled organism" (or something of the like) statement.
Of course you could be flying the "He made is in His image" flag, but if you will be quoting from 2000 year old texts to make (what I have tried to show up till now) no point at all, then I'd have to throw hundreds of quotes from that self-same text right back at you that are no-doubt in direct contradiction with (at least some of) your inherent belief systems; Effectively shattering your concept of reality.
So what is it you are trying to do?
|
So God is either a single cell organism or we need to wait and keep developing right before the moment of Rapture to have an idea of how God looks? I like that part of shattering my reality, how does that go? Do you always write your post like this or are you trying to look sofisticated in here?
|
"So God is either a single cell organism or we need to wait and keep developing right before the moment of Rapture to have an idea of how God looks? "
Neither. The entire argument points to the fact that the very idea of surmising qualities of God in the way you have done is fallacious.
" I like that part of shattering my reality, how does that go?"
That part is dependent on your adherence to biblical statements.
" Do you always write your post like this or are you trying to look sofisticated in here?"
I didn't try to do anything. I refuse to dumb myself down so that people who can't even take the time to learn the only damn language they're supposed to know properly can feel more adequate. Being stupid is a choice. I made no extra effort in writing that; It happened quite quickly tbh.
Your lack of appreciation for my argument isn't surprising since I'm poking fun at your topic.
|
1) Then I am interested to know in what way you think God created man on His image.
2) Then you assumed beforehand that you would shatter my reality without having certainty that you could actually be able to accomplish such a thing. :P
3) So you think that English is the only language people are "supposed to know properly". That is a very limited way of looking at things. I am not lacking appreciation for your argument, I think you fail to see the seriousness behind my OP to begin with.
