stryper Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I friended an old high school friend on FB. She confirmed, so I was checking out her profile. On one of her status updates it said (paraphased): Question to atheist, cook him a wonderful dinner, then ask if there is a cook. I get the analogy. You wouldn't have this wonderful dinner without a cook, therefore god exsists. My instant thought was the analogy is just wrong, but I can't put my finger on why instinct says that. My guess is something like: The cook took what was already in exsistance and made it into something else. Therefore, God had to have something to work with first. Thus, according to christian theolgy, the analogy is incorrect. Additionally, That which was in exsistance was derived by natural process which are well understood. Additionally there are very few plants humans can actually eat straight off the vine, bush, tree, or whole. Thirdly, many of those that we can were selectively breed by humans (forced evolution) over time into the forms we now know them. If left alone in the wild they would revert to a form that is benefical to the plant and not humans, provided they survived past the first wild generation without human interferance. Therefore, the analogy is incorrect. Thoughts? Ponderings? critics? Better analogy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted March 3, 2011 Super Moderator Share Posted March 3, 2011 Question to theist: Cook her a dinner and then ask her to ask a starving child if there's a cook. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryper Posted March 3, 2011 Author Share Posted March 3, 2011 Question to theist: Cook her a dinner and then ask her to ask a starving child if there's a cook. Good Answer. I'm totaly stealing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMJ Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I can't see or physically feel god. I can see and touch the cook. That, to me, is a big difference. I hate these types of analogies by Christians. It seems that a lot of them don't want an intelligent conversation, they just want a gotcha moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrotherJosh Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Argument from Design, based on our inherent need to see an intent behind things. Primitive man needed to see an intent such as, "that bush is rattling and growling, there may be a saber toothed tiger in there that wants to eat me." Here's an analogy for her: Cook a Christian a wonderful dinner, fill it with poisonous mushrooms and plants, but don't tell them which ones. Then ask them if the cook did a good job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Margee Posted March 3, 2011 Moderator Share Posted March 3, 2011 It's like the queen of England - most of us have never met the queen - but we know she exists. We See her in magazines, she visits our cities, she's on the news - we can see her waving from her royal balcony on our television sets............................ .......Same thing with the cook - we can meet the cook - talk to the cook - touch the cook - cook with the cook......................Jeez........... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foolish girl Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Ask her why she's a bitch. No! Ahahahahah! Just kidding! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pratt Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 hate lousy analogies that i have difficulty spotting whats wrong with it. i would probably reply. Look into the mirror, it shows no god. A perfect god will not have any idea even to produce an imperfect man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overcame Faith Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Question to atheist, cook him a wonderful dinner, then ask if there is a cook. This analogy is no different than countless others. It's like, "The chances that the universe came into existence without a creator is about like a tornado hitting a junk yard and putting together a Boeing 747." It's like, "If we found a watch lying on the ground in the middle of the woods and we had never seen one before, we would undoubtedly come to the conclusion that there had to be a watchmaker." All of these analogies, including the one about the cook, suffer from the same problem. They assume that everything had a cause. But making this assumption does not solve any problems because we just go back forever with various causes and never come to the beginning point. Christians claim to have come to a beginning point by postulating a god which had no cause. But this claim that god had no cause means that their underlying assumption that everything has a cause is a false assumption and, therefore, the analogies stated above are false. So they try to come back and state their assumption differently. They say that all material things, all matter, everything subject to time and space must have a cause because nothing can come from nothing. Then they define god as not being material, not being matter, and being outside of time and space and therefore he did not have to have a cause. The problem with this is that it is based on unfounded assumptions which cannot be proven. They have not studied the characteristics of this postulated being and they cannot because, by their own definition, he is outside of time and space. Therefore, they are incapable of expressing this being's qualities, yet they do anyway. And the qualities they state, like not needing a cause, are pure speculation used for the sole purpose of bootstrapping their own argument. Therefore, their assumption of this divine creator being outside of time and space and not subject to being created is baseless, rendering their argument similarly baseless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagan Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 These bullshit analogies all fail because they take a manufactured product (a dinner, a watch, an airplane). Of course they all look designed and all have a purpose. It's up for debate if our world looks designed, or if it has a purpose. It does not follow to compare chaotic, violent organic life with a designed, tooled machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LivingLife Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 At least you can have a real relationship (wink wink) with the cook 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Valk0010 Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Hopefully it would be like just salad greens or something like that. Because if something is created by a creator, its normally simpler then natural design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzy Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Why do they assume the cook is called Mr. God and not Mr. Evolution? Especially when the dinner has all the markings of Mr. Evolution on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Question to atheist, cook him a wonderful dinner, then ask if there is a cook. Lots of good answers. I'm thinking something like "Sit down with theist for dinner, wait for dinner to come, ask theist where is the cook?" mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts