On 4-2-2009 6:45, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> On 3-2-2009 23:07, Darren New wrote:
>>> andrel wrote:
>>>> We know that God did survive,
>>>
>>> Do we?
>> well 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.' implies 
>> that He was there before the big bang. He is still here, so He 
>> survived. (All from the perspective of someone that believes God 
>> exists of course).
> Interestingly, as someone pointed out, there is never any mention of God 
> "making" the sea, just breathing on one that was already there, as a 
> means of "starting" the whole mess... So, not much of a "all powerful" 
> god, if he had to start with something that was already there...
> 
>>>
>>>> so why not another form of life?
>>>
>>> Because God isn't a form of life?
>>
>> That is an interesting position.
>>
> Technically true though. Life implies certain properties. With the 
> possible exception of "reproduction", which even crystals can manage.., 
> its a bit unclear what "life processes" he has, which qualifies him as a 
> "life form". But, maybe that is being a bit too nit picky. We are 
> talking about something you can't provide non-self referencing evidence 
> for "reproducing" either.

I think that according to the bible he made adam and eve in his own 
image (from which we can e.g. infer that God has nipples). You can 
easily argue that that is 'reproduction'. Genesis 6 starts with: "1 When 
men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to 
them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, 
and they married any of them they chose." I don't know what the 
canonical interpretation is but it seems that either he had actual 
children or he considers men close enough to count as his sons.

Post a reply to this message