I recently heard an argument against the existence of my God: that dolphins and wolves share some genes, therefore the one caused the other. A simplistic counter-argument could be: "Is not my God omnipotent?" I will be more detailed in the following paragraphs.
The fallacy of the argument is that correlation equals causation. For example, at the time of writing someone on this planet most likely died. The fallacy would say that I killed him. A more relevant example to the Creationist can be drawn from manufacturing: A Ford car and a Ford truck are certainly related, and I won't deny they had a common manufacturer, but I deny that one caused the other. Correlation does not equal causation.
Against arguments of this type God's omnipotence can always be used in the same way Evolutionists use Evolution: "I don't know how it was made, but it's there, so the object of my theory must have made it." The Evolutionists I speak of never consider switching theories, they only attribute more power to Evolution as the Creator. Why should I not do the same if I believe in an omnipotent God.
YOU ARE READING
God's Nature
Non-FictionCan God make a rock so big He can't lift it? Why does He allow pain? How can He forgive sins without breaking the Law. Why is polytheism impossible but how can the Holy Trinity exist? How is faith logical? Why can we see stars billions of lightyears...
