C.S. Lewis, The Case for Christianity

@fmf said
What is the title of the thread? What was C.S. Lewis' religion? Who wrote the quote you were responding to? What religion was he making the case for in that quote? What is your religion? Which religion's God are you referring to when you talk about creation and the creator and God?

What? Is it that obvious? I'm surprised you caught that!

Still, you deny the existence of a creator by denying the obvious fact that creation is the evidence for a creator.

@secondson said
All you've really done so far is deny the obvious fact that creation is the evidence for a creator irrespective of your attempts to side-rail the discussion with your "breaking it down into components" rhetoric.

I think creation could well be evidence of a creator being but it certainly isn't something that makes the "truth" of C.S. Lewis's "case for Christianity" [the thread topic] "obvious".

@secondson said
Still, you deny the existence of a creator by denying the obvious fact that creation is the evidence for a creator.

Actually, while I don't find it "obvious", I accept the possibility that there is or was a creator being and I also accept the possibility that the most plausible evidence of it is the universe [which you call "creation"]; what I don't find credible is the notion that Christian, Jewish or Islamic scripture are credible evidence for the existence of the Abrahamic God depicted by those three traditions.

@secondson said
What? Is it that obvious? I'm surprised you caught that!

You claimed that you "...didn't mention any particular religion." But it wasn't true. You had quoted the scripture of your particular religion repeatedly. Perhaps you'd forgotten that you did that and rather than just acknowledge it, you've now chosen to be facetious instead and pretend that It was me who was mistaken and not you.

@secondson said
Itdoes not "require" "supernatural intervention" for a man to know, as evidenced by creation, that there is a creator.

So what? Secular people also believe in intelligent design.

Feel free to dodge the scripture demonstrating to you that no matter what is or isn’t self evident regarding the origins of the earth and cosmos, man must be supernaturally drawn to recognise WHO that creator was.

@secondson said
I didn't mention any particular religion. You did.

In your first post you quoted from the book of Romans at least three times.

@secondson said
All you've really done so far is deny the obvious fact that creation is the evidence for a creator irrespective of your attempts to side-rail the discussion with your "breaking it down into components" rhetoric.

Many secular or even atheist people will sometimes point to there being evidence of intelligent design.

@secondson said
What? Is it that obvious? I'm surprised you caught that!

Still, you deny the existence of a creator by denying the obvious fact that creation is the evidence for a creator.

Creation is only evidence for a creator if 'creation' was created. If it wasn't created then there is no evidence for a creator. All you have is your inherited belief, nothing more, nothing less. Don't confuse your belief with 'obvious fact', it makes you look intellectually inept.

@indonesia-phil said
Creation is only evidence for a creator if 'creation' was created. If it wasn't created then there is no evidence for a creator. All you have is your inherited belief, nothing more, nothing less. Don't confuse your belief with 'obvious fact', it makes you look intellectually inept.

The word ‘creation’ by definition implies it was created. If you stumble upon a ‘creation’ of a rocket ship could you assume this ‘creation‘ was not ‘created?

@dj2becker said
The word ‘creation’ by definition implies it was created. If you stumble upon a ‘creation’ of a rocket ship could you assume this ‘creation‘ was not ‘created?

Did you create the account called "mariekeXIV"?

Why did you log on to this website and then post on this thread ~ in reply to me ~ using the mariekeXIV account?

@fmf said
Did you create the account called "mariekeXIV"?

Why did you log on to this website and then post on this thread ~ in reply to me ~ using the mariekeXIV account?

Why are you asking me if you’ve already made up your mind?

@dj2becker said
Why are you asking me if you’ve already made up your mind?

I am asking you in order to find out how you explain what you did.

@dj2becker said
The word ‘creation’ by definition implies it was created. If you stumble upon a ‘creation’ of a rocket ship could you assume this ‘creation‘ was not ‘created?

A rocket ship is hardly the same thing as the natural universe, is it? A rocket ship has records of its' manufacture, drawings, calculations, invoices for materials purchased and so on. As far as I'm aware, no such records exist for the making of the natural universe.

What it comes down to is this; some people believe that the universe and everything therein came to be by intelligent design and manufacture, some people don't. People are free to believe whatever they want, but to present their beliefs as 'fact' is spurious and intellectually inept.

@indonesia-phil said
A rocket ship is hardly the same thing as the natural universe, is it? A rocket ship has records of its' manufacture, drawings, calculations, invoices for materials purchased and so on. As far as I'm aware, no such records exist for the making of the natural universe.

What it comes down to is this; some people believe that the universe and everything therein came to ...[text shortened]... ve whatever they want, but to present their beliefs as 'fact' is spurious and intellectually inept.

Some people may argue that a fine tuned rocket is evidence enough of some intelligent intervention and that the fact that it is fine tuned is evidence of a creator. Other people may believe that a hurricane could probably sweep through a junk yard and assemble a fine tuned rocket by random chance and rule out the necessity of a creator.

@dj2becker said
Other people may believe that a hurricane could probably sweep through a junk yard and assemble a fine tuned rocket by random chance and rule out the necessity of a creator.

Literally, nobody on the planet believes that. Removing a creator from the equation doesn't result in that daft scenario.