For example, when you look at a beautiful tropical sunset with palm trees, different colored plants, birds, and animals?
This is a three dimensional "painting", sorta speak. How much more should we recognize the reality of a creator?!
2006-09-06 04:18:36 · 12 answers · asked by curious_inquisitor 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Kathryn B - Isn't this more rational than believing that nothing + nothing = a beautiful universe?
2006-09-06 04:24:52 · update #1
Zhimbo - Thats my whole point! Its way more! Of course it has a designer. Lets be reasonable.
2006-09-06 04:28:02 · update #2
Rob - Then you believe that a person can put different colors of paint in separate containers, then slop it all on a canvas, and if they repeat this enough, at some point they will get the Mona Lisa?
You want to tell me again who is being silly?
2006-09-06 04:33:26 · update #3
Elizabeth - Since there must be a Creator, there must be explanatons for your complaints.
2006-09-06 04:38:03 · update #4
Lucky - I'm sorry, but this is the achilles heel of the skeptics perspective.
2006-09-06 04:42:50 · update #5
Chaillech W - Let me know when you get a Mona Lisa as a result. You know that will not happen. That takes special talent by an artist.
2006-09-06 04:46:08 · update #6
Hans B - Thats a cop out. You just don't like the FACT that the most reasonable explanaton for the orgin of things is God's creative power.
2006-09-06 04:49:48 · update #7
There are rational natural explanations for the beauty we see around us. There are also horrible things in the world like natural disasters, creatures that inject venom into their prey causing them to dissolve from the inside out, horrible disease, etc... Are these wonderful proofs of a loving creator as well? Or are they in your mind the result of Satan or man's folly? I think the naturalist explanations make more sense and the other sounds like a series of rationalizations that people have come up with to continue to believe what they wish.
2006-09-06 04:28:32 · answer #1 · answered by Zen Pirate 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Stop with this pseudo logic crap. A sunset, while beautiful is just the result of the earth spinning and the sun going down, it happens on trillions of other planets, many of which may be more beautiful than here, yet no one sees them because there's no life there.
When you ask this type of question you also open yourself to real logic, which means taking the next step, which you never do. If this is so grand that it needs a creator then the creator must have an even greater creator.
2006-09-06 11:28:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think I first heard this question posited by Voltaire, you should read some of his works and then follow it up with Nietsche who eventually came to the conclusion that god is dead because we killed him.
Personally though I think that its just as easy from an intelectual stand point to argue by the same reasoning that there is no creator. Your logic is basically that since there are things that are so beautiful all around us, someone must have created it. You can turn that around and say that since there are also so many ugly and painful things around us, the world is simply chaotic. From a spiritual stand point though, it doesn't matter, because rationality doesn't enter into the equation. It's all a matter of susceptibility to different theories that explain things too complex to understand.
2006-09-06 11:33:12 · answer #3 · answered by Hans B 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can't believe something that I don't believe. It's just not possible. Just because something is beautiful does not mean that there was a creator. Science may answer these questions eventually, and yes, one possibility may be that there is a creator. I am just not able to rule out all of the other possibilities.
2006-09-06 11:20:40 · answer #4 · answered by Kathryn™ 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do what I call chaos paintings. I paint random designs, swirls, wavy lines etc. Out of that chaos often emerges faces, animals and other recognizable but not planned objects. My point being that order can come out of chaos. Which means there doesn't have to be a painter for the universe.
2006-09-06 11:31:02 · answer #5 · answered by Caillech W 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's not man-made, it's natrual forces that "paint" it.
You can attribute it to a creator, but you can't demonstrate that a creator even exists, nor can you demonstrate the it's the creator in which you happen to believe and not someone else's creator.
You may have faith, be there's no way to be rational about it.
2006-09-06 11:22:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The universe isn't a painting. That's just a metaphor and a false analogy.
If the universe was literally made of oil paints with brush strokes, I'd start looking for a painter. But it isn't.
2006-09-06 11:23:33 · answer #7 · answered by Zhimbo 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Or its just that our minds cannot comprehend this happening without the need for a intelligent sky fairy to create it.
2006-09-06 11:25:33 · answer #8 · answered by Rob 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Thats true.
And I do recognise the Creator.
2006-09-06 11:26:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
So you are a three-dimensional painting too.
I hope you are made of odourless paint.
.
2006-09-06 11:28:49 · answer #10 · answered by Axel ∇ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋