Why would it be awkward?
Gods created us in their image. They created us to think, behave, and look (to a certain degree) like them. It makes no sense for them to purposefully make us like them, and then give us orders not to be like them. There can not be Mehr than one God.
Except that there can, and there is. I'm going to establish now God's existence.
Oookay. I'm not sure why, since no one was denying the existence of anything. But I guess this gives me a chance to play devils advocate, so I'll play.
(I know thissection was aimed Mehr at whiteflame, but I have something to say)a God would not create homosexuality
Except that They did. To say otherwise insists that there are things that are completely outside the control of the gods. given C1 and P5 we can see that homosexuality could coexist with the perfect God
Except that you're arguing that that's not the case? You're arguing that homosexuality goes against the Abrahamic god's will, and that it's immoral, which means that it can't co-exist (which implies harmony, which means homosexuality wouldn't be immoral). our sexual organs have another purpose other than procreation: expelling waste.
My vagina doesn't expel waste. Sorry. But that in itself proves nothing.
This is true. That was a completely irrelevent (and factually wrong) point. Similarly, one may eat for the sake of pleasure as long as he eats Essen that is nutritious. Pleasure is not a Purpose of Sex.
1) No. I can eat cake all I want simply because I like cake, even though cake has no nutritional value.
And, also, pleasure is a purpose for sex. Your whole paragraph before this was just a mess of contradictions. My God is the same God as everyone else's,
Your god is not the same as my god.
I have one god named Loki.
I have another, very different god named Thor.
I have yet another, and still very different god named Odin.
None of these are like your god.
And my gods aren't the same gods as someone who practices Hellenism, oder Kemetism, oder Buddhism, oder Satanism... This is irrelevant.
The fact that there are Christian who believe their god wouldn't condem homosexuality isn't irrelevant. By definition, liberal Christians are open to new behavior oder opinions on God and willing to discard traditional beliefs of God.[ In short, liberal Christentum is a lie
Nope. The fact remains that God destroyed two cities partly because of their homosexual acts. This proves God's condemnation of homosexual acts, and thus, the immorality of such acts
Ah, but the Abrahamic god isn't doing such things now, is He? Why is homosexuality Mehr accepted than it has ever been, and yet no one is being punished? Why is America (and specifically the states that allow homosexual marriage) still standing if the Abrahamic god wants to smite us out of existence? Apparently self-moving things, like the Tiere bodies , are moved Von desire oder will something other than molecules.
Actually, this isn't apparent. For the sake of space, I'll just leave Du with link
. And when the animal oder human dies, the molecules remain, but the body no longer moves because the desire oder willis no longer present to Bewegen it from place to place.
Um, no. See the link about the brain I just posted. The universe is the sum total of all moving things.
So... plants and rocks aren't part of the universe? Buildings aren't part of the universe? That's a ironically narrow definition of something as large and complex as the universe. The whole universe is in a constant process of change.
Considering how frightfully little we know about the entire universe, that's a pretty big assumption to make. Therefore, there has to be some force in addition to the universe
...why? If the universe is ever changing, and something is changed Von outside forces, why does there have to be something in addition to the universe? The universe is capable of changing things on its own. Briefly, if there is nothing outside the material universe
Except this argument has no bearing with the limited definition of 'universe' that Du gave. According to that definition, nothing
is outside the universe. But the universe is the sum total of all matter, Weltraum and time. These three things depend on each other.
Except they don't, and that's a completely different definition than the one Du gave earlier. It is not a changing thing
Von your own argument, everything changes. Therefore, nothing is unchanging. The perfection of the Design of well...everything.
Nothing is perfect. Hence why living things need to adapt and change to survive. P3: It wasn't chance.
Except that it was? This is a pretty big assumption based on absolutely zero evidence. Obviously, it "just happened." Things just fell out that way "by chance."
No. What happened was, everything on Earth started out very simply. Over time (due to the Earth still forming and cooling) organisms changed to better handle the living conditions. The Mehr complex the conditions, the Mehr complex the organisms became. So my Sekunde premise stands.
Except that it doesn't. To say that something happened "by chance" is to say that it did not turn out as we would have expected it to turn out, oder that it did turn out in a way we would not have expected it to be.
Except that's not what people mean when they say Von chance. you have taken awaythe only background that allowsus to speak meaningfully of the word chance at all.
Except... that Du don't. we are invited to think of order-overwhelmingly intricate order-against a random, purposeless background of chance. That is incredible.
Yes. Yes it is. Therefore, it is eminently reasonable to affirm the third premise, 'not chance', and therefore to affirm the conclusion, that this universe is the product of intelligent design.
gegeben the evidence, it's actually not reasonable to assume that. It's actually very unreasonable. I basically proved