Do you know any building that did not have a builder?

Published April 11th, 2008 by Bobby Henderson

1. Do you know any building that did not have a builder? Yes? No?
2. Do you know any painting that did not have a painter? Yes? No?
3. Do you know any car that did not have a maker? Yes? No?
If you answered “Yes” to any of those statements… please give details:______________________…



171 Responses to “Do you know any building that did not have a builder?”

1 19 20 21
  1. theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

    What if there were advantages in “being a brick”? And further advantages in bricks combining to form walls? Sooner or later, given these advantages, buildings would form. Straw man arguments like these always assume a giant leap from one stage to another – eg. lumps of clay becoming a skyscraper. Instead, consider the slow progression from a lump to a brick to a wall to a room, etc…as shown in fossil records.

  2. Sauce of Life says:

    Yes, it’s called Earth. The Earth did not have a builder, unless you are referring to His noodly appendage.

  3. Richard says:

    I suppose that they have a legitimate point. My reasoning:
    No god can be “created” (I use the term loosely, as it can be argued that an idea cannot be created) without people to believe in them. The FSM is just as real as Jesus Christ and God, simply because there are those who believe. Without the ability to observe the absence of such beings (and rock solid proof at that), you cannot say that anyone is wrong OR right. The question you have to ask yourself, “author” (pseudo-name not given?), is that: “The world was created, but by what?”. Give me 100%, rock solid evidence to the contrary of the FSM, then I will be inclined to agree with logic. Keep in mind this “proof” cannot be a book written by a man; Greeks have vast temples build to a dude who pulled the sun across the sky with a cart; that’s considered bullshit now since we understand the universe better, but to tell them that and they’ll put you to death for herecy.

    I hope you get my point in this; ask yourself the same question you ask us, and please for the love of all that is Noodly, use logic when answering them. Thank you.

    • Keith says:

      To me the biggest flaw in his/her argument is that he/she is citing man made constructs in a bid to argue in favour of a supernatural force (at least, I gather that is the purpose of his/her post) . That’s like showing someone a topiary and saying “there: prove that fairies don’t exist”.

      • TheFewTheProudTheMarinara says:

        I wonder why no examples were given of living things. Yes, my children had makers, but they are different from them, as I am from my makers.

        If the argument is to prove that all complex things have an even more complex creator, it stands to reason that – if there is a god – HE has a god.

        • Alphy says:

          Religious people tend to anthropomorphize their gods. In other words they assign to him or her human traits. You find this in scripture too. “God stretched for his hand…” etc. And; before “he” even create human kind or any other species, we read such things as – “God said let there be light…” I think that was before he create the sun too. Here God has the trait of human language before he created the human species. I wonder who was the ‘inspired’ person that heard God speak before God created the human species? What language did God speak then? This is just a couple of the absurd unreconcilable inconsistancies of religion. Not just Christianity. But creationist and fundamentalists have litanies of excuses to explain away these inconsistancies. It’s all part of the delusional aspects of religion. And; you simply can not reason with these people. They are always ‘right’ and the rest of us have been “fooled by Satan, the great deceiver” or have been “duped into “secular humanism”. I believe it is as has been said before – “man created god(s) in his (man’s) image. I believe it is as Keith put it. “… he/she is citing man made constructs in a bid to argue in favour of a supernatural force…” It is delusional circular reasoning. Note also that in the Bible there are two creation stories each being inconsistant with the others. Also, historical critical (higher criticizism which fundys reject) biblical scholars realize from textual study and crtique that there are three separate and distinct traditions from which scripture came. Yawist, Elohist and the Priestly. In other words, the Bible does NOT have a single source as fundamentalist would like for us to believe.

        • Inge says:

          Put very well.
          Or – as Celsius in his “Discurso verídico II, 26″ put it in a nutshell in the years 176 – 180 a. C. (so quite near the original texts, which did only appear almost a century after “the Event”) –

          “Not even lying you [Christians] are able to cover your inventions in a way so that they are coherent”

          I beg your pardon if this sentence sounds a little rocky in English as neither it nor the Spanish book I am translating from are in my home language.

          By the way: Does anybody know any religious person that occupies him/herself as much with scriptures AND all texts concerning them as we do? Must bring real joy to the un-noodly higher creatures….

  4. Geri says:

    Hi there to every body, it’s my first pay a quick visit of this website; this website contains awesome and in fact good data in favor of readers.

1 19 20 21

Leave a Reply