Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image...

[Derideo_Te]

If God created man in his own image then what are we to conclude from that?

That a perfect creator could not create a perfect man or woman for that matter?

Or is it that our imperfections are the mirror of the imperfections of God?

The universe as it exists today would not exist if it was perfect because every atom would exert an equal force on every other atom and thus we would have stasis instead of the dynamic universe in which we evolved.

A perfect creator would be incapable of creating an imperfect universe just as he would be incapable of creating an imperfect man of woman because to do so would be a sign of imperfection in the creator himself.

So logically we have to deduce that if there is a creator he is not perfect.

Alternatively we can examine the available evidence and the laws of physics and deduce that we live in an eternal universe.

This does not eliminate the possibility of the existence of creatures with "godlike powers". Mankind has already developed "godlike powers" to destroy life on this planet. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that there are other beings with greater powers out there. But none of them would be the "creator of the universe" any more than we are.

We are left with few logical alternatives. We live in an imperfect universe and we are ourselves are imperfect. If we project this upon a mythical creator then he cannot be perfect by any measure.

I have no doubt whatsoever that it is this knowledge and reasoning that lies behind the regressive attempts to usurp the science curriculum in schools and replace it with biblical mythology instead.

 

[Avatar4321]

The we are the children of God. That as man now is, God once was; as God now is, man can become.

That the destiny of man is greater than we can comprehend. That the natural man is nothing.

That the Lord can make us, who are unholy and imperfect, holy and perfect.

 

[boedicca]

All the OP is doing is the inverse of Descartes' Meditations V:


God is defined as an infinitely perfect being.
Perfection includes existence.
So God exists.


Meditations on First Philosophy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Gadawg73]

If God created man in his own image then what are we to conclude from that?

That a perfect creator could not create a perfect man or woman for that matter?

Or is it that our imperfections are the mirror of the imperfections of God?

The universe as it exists today would not exist if it was perfect because every atom would exert an equal force on every other atom and thus we would have stasis instead of the dynamic universe in which we evolved.

A perfect creator would be incapable of creating an imperfect universe just as he would be incapable of creating an imperfect man of woman because to do so would be a sign of imperfection in the creator himself.

So logically we have to deduce that if there is a creator he is not perfect.

Alternatively we can examine the available evidence and the laws of physics and deduce that we live in an eternal universe.

This does not eliminate the possibility of the existence of creatures with "godlike powers". Mankind has already developed "godlike powers" to destroy life on this planet. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that there are other beings with greater powers out there. But none of them would be the "creator of the universe" any more than we are.

We are left with few logical alternatives. We live in an imperfect universe and we are ourselves are imperfect. If we project this upon a mythical creator then he cannot be perfect by any measure.

I have no doubt whatsoever that it is this knowledge and reasoning that lies behind the regressive attempts to usurp the science curriculum in schools and replace it with biblical mythology instead.

Shut up dude, you are speaking science.
Next thing you know they will accuse you of "attacking" religion.

 

[Montrovant]

I'm not a believer, but.....

Define a perfect being. Unless everyone agrees with said definition, pretty much everything you wrote is meaningless.

 

[Derideo_Te]

All the OP is doing is the inverse of Descartes' Meditations V:


God is defined as an infinitely perfect being.
Perfection includes existence.
So God exists.

What I am posting is more akin to paraphrasing Immanuel Kant's rebuttal of Descartes.

In essence the assigned attribute (perfection) does not prove the existence of a creator. You could just as easily make the argument that the biblical God is a bloodthirsty being and that killing is part of existence so therefore the biblical God exists. There is no evidence to establish that any of the biblical deaths were as a direct result of the biblical God.

Logic alone cannot prove the existence of a creator however logic does go a long way towards establishing that the alleged attributes are contradictory and therefore refute the existence rather than establish it.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Define a perfect being. Unless everyone agrees with said definition, pretty much everything you wrote is meaningless.

Perfection defined as being flawless, absolute and unequivocal in all aspects.

 

[Sunni Man]

The attributes of God are perfect.

But our limited subjective logic does not have the ability to process divine perfection.

 

[boedicca]

All the OP is doing is the inverse of Descartes' Meditations V:


God is defined as an infinitely perfect being.
Perfection includes existence.
So God exists.

What I am posting is more akin to paraphrasing Immanuel Kant's rebuttal of Descartes.

In essence the assigned attribute (perfection) does not prove the existence of a creator. You could just as easily make the argument that the biblical God is a bloodthirsty being and that killing is part of existence so therefore the biblical God exists. There is no evidence to establish that any of the biblical deaths were as a direct result of the biblical God.

Logic alone cannot prove the existence of a creator however logic does go a long way towards establishing that the alleged attributes are contradictory and therefore refute the existence rather than establish it.

Kant was an awful influence on philosophy. If you are a Kantian, my condolences.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I am probably no more of a Kantian that you are a Descartian. The fact that you feel it necessary to denigrate Kant rather than refute his logic weakens your position and does nothing to alter mine.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The attributes of God are perfect.

You are entitled to your opinion in that regard.

But our limited subjective logic does not have the ability to process divine perfection.

Please expound on what is "subjective" and "limited" with respect to your logic.

 

[Politico]

If God created man in his own image then what are we to conclude from that?

That God is pretty fucked up.

 

[blackcherry]

Are there any adults in this thread?

 

[PratchettFan]

The we are the children of God. That as man now is, God once was; as God now is, man can become.

That the destiny of man is greater than we can comprehend. That the natural man is nothing.

That the Lord can make us, who are unholy and imperfect, holy and perfect.

Now this is an interesting idea. You are saying that God is not unchanging, but evolved (for want of a better word) to its current status. Further, that man has the capacity to become God.

 

[jwoodie]

Ever hear of the Big Bang theory? Who/what started that?

 

[there4eyeM]

'Perfect' is a totally human concept and only exists in relation to 'imperfect'.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Ever hear of the Big Bang theory? Who/what started that?

The assumption that there was only a single big bang event is now being reconsidered. An eternal universe would have multiple such events. Multiple big bangs mean that the law of conservation of energy is not violated.

 

[Derideo_Te]

'Perfect' is a totally human concept and only exists in relation to 'imperfect'.

Ergo a "perfect" deity is also a totally human concept and only exists in relation to "imperfect" humanity.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Ever hear of the Big Bang theory? Who/what started that?

The Law of the Conservation of Energy is more in line with a Cyclical Universe with Multiple Big Bangs. Since matter can neither be created nor destroyed an eternal universe means that there is no need for a "creator".

Scientists glimpse universe before the Big Bang

"The discovery doesn't suggest that there wasn't a Big Bang - rather, it supports the idea that there could have been many of them. The scientists explain that the CMB [Cosmic Microwave Background] circles support the possibility that we live in a cyclic universe, in which the end of one “aeon” or universe triggers another Big Bang that starts another aeon, and the process repeats indefinitely.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2010-11-scientists-glimpse-universe-big.html#jCp"

 

[onecut39]

Man was created in god's image? Before creation there was nothing, right?

So apparently god had arms, but nothing to grasp.
God had legs but nowhere to stand
God had an ass with nowhere to sit
God had eyes but there was nothing to see

No wonder he did such a cruddy job with our bodies, he had no experience at all with it.