Posted on 07/04/2009 3:39:53 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Thanks for the ping!
It's about God designing laws of nature that are inadequate for life to form naturally and then violating those laws selectively to create life. And then dishonestly blowing smoke about what they are really claiming.
Thomas Jefferson re-wrote the New Testament to leave out the miracles:
The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth
Yes Jefferson believed in "nature and nature's God" and Christian morality as he understood it. But if he lived today he would not be considered a Christian by fundamentalists.
>>Not so. When an archaeologist finds a piece of fire baked clay how does he decide whether it is simply some wet clay that had a fire built over it or that it is a piece of pottery?<<
He studies it and applies scientific principles in his analysis. I am not sure how that makes any particular point since people aren’t artifacts.
“1. In a more relevant example of ID than that which you presented, who IS the designer?”
I bet it’s Bobby. Hint: read the post to which you responded.
“2. What do you do with the answer to question 1.?”
I would walk around the markings on the beach so as not to disturb it. But if I had a crush on Sue, I might might erase Bobby’s declaration of love.
“I don’t think the designer is God.”
“I do not believe you.”
If you had read the post, you would know that the designer is Bobby. But you didn’t bother to read my post before calling me a liar. Unfortunately, your attitude is typical of many who share your views.
“I think that every Christian sect gives a great handle to atheism by their general dogma, that, without revelation, there would not be sufficient proof of the being of a God.”
I agree.
Some people today say that it is all about faith. But I agree with Pope John Paul II, who said that man ascends to heaven on wings of faith and reason.
Wikipedia (and others) has a write-up on general and special revelation. General revelation is available to all who examines God's world and sees his hand within it. Special revelation includes the Bible and all miracles that have been observed.
I think some religious people simplify it to a matter of faith so as to avoid controversy. However, that is like giving away half of your best arguments. Jefferson also used a subset of the evidence by redacting his Bible to remove miracles.
If I were God, then I could have created a “perfect” creation that included perfect human robots that never did wrong. But that would be pretty pointless. Almost like creating a universe without life, with everything proceeding by my laws of nature, everything determined by chance and necessity.
On my second universe, I would introduce free will. You might consider that imperfect, but it is really a improvement over universe 1.0.
Who is Schickelgruber?
The Bible agrees with idea that God was too stupid design the laws or nature so flawed that life could not form naturally and that he is dishonest. The Bible says that man was created in God's image and likeness. It is very man like to be stupid enough not to get things right the first time. It is very man like be dishonest about our mistakes. It is also very man like to write a Bible, fill it flawed ideas and then say that God wrote it.
Der Führer.
many man made creations are made pure only to become impure from contamination.
I have noticed that a current DI propaganda technique, echoed by some here, is to blur the distinction between intelligent design and "Intelligent Design" and pretend that they always meant the same thing.
Well don’t keep us in suspense, tell us the differences, Intelligent Design vs, intelligent design.
“Who is Schickelgruber?”
Answer my original 2-part question to you and I’ll tell you!
“many man made creations are made pure only to become impure from contamination.”
Doesn’t the inability to repel contamination argue against perfection? I’m only trying to understand what you mean by “perfect” creation—it seems to me that there are numerous inperfections in creation, man-caused and otherwise.
I answered your two questions in post 45. Why are you asking again?
Jefferson clearly thought that natural law was INDICATIVE of God's creative power. IDers, OTOH, distinguish BETWEEN natural law and "design," explicitly arguing that the former is inadequate to generate the latter.
Ironically, therefore, the deist Jefferson, is here more theistic than the IDers, who are comparably deistic, seeing God's (pardon!, the unspecified "Intelligent Designer's") creationistic activities only in some things rather than in all things.
Not exactly—reread question 1. I specifically asked about a more relevant example, not the heart in the sand. Pick any example that actually has an ID component to it, and answer questions 1 and 2.
Exactly. And the phrase in its entirety is from a Firesign Theatre album.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.