Changes

:::"''For example, in the telelogical argument, an atheist could argue that the watch has evolved throughout time..."'' not only that, but one could argue that one would only think the watch was created if they have seen other objects ''known'' to be created by humans to compare it to. And that complexity has nothing to do with creation. Is God not complex? Wouldn't that mean he was created according to that logic?--[[User:Jasonb242|Jasonb242]] 14:41, 18 June 2011 (EDT)

:::"''For example, in the telelogical argument, an atheist could argue that the watch has evolved throughout time..."'' not only that, but one could argue that one would only think the watch was created if they have seen other objects ''known'' to be created by humans to compare it to. And that complexity has nothing to do with creation. Is God not complex? Wouldn't that mean he was created according to that logic?--[[User:Jasonb242|Jasonb242]] 14:41, 18 June 2011 (EDT)

::::""''an atheist could argue".  That's a good one."'' I don't see you trying to refute any of his points, or change the article to make up for these flaws in logic. Instead you just post links to conservapedia's latest featured articles and resort to ad hominem attacks on atheism. Wheres that spine God gave ''you''?

::::""''an atheist could argue".  That's a good one..."'' I don't see you trying to refute any of his points, or change the article to make up for these flaws in logic. Instead you just post links to conservapedia's latest featured articles and resort to ad hominem attacks on atheism. Wheres that spine God gave ''you''?--[[User:Jasonb242|Jasonb242]] 14:50, 18 June 2011 (EDT)