Thread: Religion
View Single Post
Old December 30th, 2014, 01:02 PM  
Nice Poster
Join Date: December 29, 2014
Gender: Male
Default Re: Religion

Originally Posted by Vlerchan View Post
There's no need for a set (the universe) to possess all the qualities that its items (all events) possess.

Even if we presume it does this at best concludes that it's possible for a god to exist.

Please see above.
And how does this relate to the argument in question?

It's working on it. Point is the fact that other possible drivers exist make it fallacious to conclude god.

The non-beings became beings through abiogenisis is the point I was making.
Abiogenesis did not create the universe, if you think it did, you don't know what the words mean.

I did. I see no reason to presume god is some ultimate maxim.
Why not?


All natural bodies in the world act towards ends.
These objects are in themselves unintelligent.
Acting towards an end is a characteristic of intelligence.
Therefore, there exists an intelligent being that guides all natural bodies towards their ends.
We call this being God.
It refutes this.
Where is the refutation?
Arkansasguy is offline   Reply With Quote