LEGO,

<<Oh, everything needs a designer, does it? Who designed God?>>

Everything created needs a creator. God was not created, so he doesn't need a Creator.

Or, if you don't like that example, let's start with you and me. We began when a male and a female got together sexually or via IVF. Those parents were a male and female who joined sexually. Then we go back infinitely and we still have to come to an Uncreated Being.

He is God and He describes His self-existence, not needing a Creator, as:

+ The Hebrew meaning of YHWH (Yahweh) is: 'I am' (Ex 3:14). God is the only One who can accurately describe Himself as 'I AM'. Jesus claimed the designation I AM for Himself in John 8:58.

'I am' is the self-existent God who did not have a beginning. He exists eternally (Psalm 90:2; Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13).

'God has no beginning, end, or succession of moments in his own being, and he sees all time equally vividly, yet God sees events in time and acts in time' (Wayne Grudem 1994:168).

Lego
If God does not need a designer, runner, why would the universe need a designer?

So your alternative Lego? order from chaos, chance. Come on you are good at mocking but like all pseudo scientist expect people to keep a straight face and nod with the big bang fantasy. Hilarous how the warmist are now using same tactics as you. You would never do an honest study of evolutionary frauds and the number of times the text books have been changed with no apologies. No the science is settled eh Lego just like every warmist bigot says often explaining what the climate was 50000 years ago.

You ask

'What was God doing before he created everything?'

why on earth would he tell you. Are you arrogant enough to demand the Potter explain everything to the clay? Obviously you are but you are happy to accept the utterly ridiculous odds from the god of chance. You are happy to accept ridiculous lies when design and creation screams in your face everytime you open your eyes.

All I did, Mr runner, was once again point out your logical fallacy. If the universe needs a designer, then God needs a designer too. If God does not need a designer, then why should the universe?

Look, this is my last post because amusing as it has been, it is just tiresome trying to make people with absolutist personalities see the plain illogicality of their bizarre position.

If you want to pray to the sun, the sky, or a telegraph pole, because it somehow gives you some sort of consolation, and you think it will somehow make you live forever, then go right ahead. But I prefer to use science, reason,and logic.

'But I prefer to use science, reason,and logic.'
choose to remain delusional you mean Lego.

To LEGO.

If you're still reading this there is one more thing I'd like to add. I googled "absolutist" to gather a better understanding from the psychological point of view. But in that search I did not find it as a personality type. Only as a description of those who would not let go of their view, regardless of the circumstances that come up. And in the articles they all seem to agree that "absolutist" is a bad thing and a bad and unhealthy trait. However, all that is really is is sticking to your guns, and not being persuaded, or changing. As far as I can tell that is the only real element that is true of the term "absolutist." The term is used as a means to make a stubborn point of view in a bad light, but there is no real criticism against it except that it is an unmoving philosophy.

With this in mind, I would counter the term absolutist to be a useless term that only has one purpose. To be an accusation towards those who refuse to change their position to the position of the person making the accusation. The term can therefore be used against anyone, even you for not seeing the errors of your view or confronting them when challenged. While talking with OzSpen and Runner, the term "absolutist" was only used as an accusation of their not changing their view. It held no grounds on finding the truth or even discussing what is true.

(Continued)

(Continued)

Therefore I maintain that the term is useless. An accusation of any kind should not be wishy washy that can be applied to anyone and holds no meaning or merit to it. Instead an accusation should be an active criticism. A thief is a person who steals, a lier is a person who lies. Both terms are fitted to those who do a certain action, and can be a criticism to those who partake in those actions. But an absolutist is anyone who stubbornly doesn't change. A wonderful quality when they stand by the truth, stand by doing things right, or by holding true to certain principles. In the work place safety should be a matter of absolutist standing. There should be no risk an employer puts their employees through that could kill them or maim them. Such a unyielding position is a good thing. Even though it is technically a absolutist position if it is challenged by too many other factors.

Put it another way. If OzSpen and Runner are absolutist in regards to their belief in God, or their trust in the bible, then I would count that as a good thing. If only more Christians could hold such a title, and be an accurate description.