A Belief Question

More? I doubt that.
I just wish that people would leave those of us who do not believe in God alone. The evangelical idea has been warped beyond recognition.
Also, it is none of anyone's damn business how I raise my child. This nation is not, nor has never been based on any religion... it needs to stay that way, in all forms and forums.
I respect those who have religious beliefs, as long as they do not feel that they have a right to impose them on others, ever.

[Pie]

I have no faith. I want to take the word "believe", tie a cinderblock to it and toss it in the East River.

[Cicero]

Yes I would have to say that my beliefs coincide with modern science...but then again, I am naturally practical. Kind of a bore. And before any one jumps to conclusions, I am not a christian.
Now I'm going to just ask before I google. Hopefully I won't get anything thrown at me.
What in the hell is "intellegent design?" What is that all about?

If anyone can describe this to me I'd be grateful. Obviously I was not intellegently designed.

Originally Posted by Cicero

What in the hell is "intellegent design?" What is that all about?

If anyone can describe this to me I'd be grateful. Obviously I was not intellegently designed.

ID (short for idiot design) takes a look around at the complex world of living things that man is eradicating as quickly as possible, and says God did it. When I studied evolution and environmental biology in college,I was awed not by the hand of God, but by the life force in all beings which cause them to compete for food, make use of any helpful mutation that comes along (most mutations are lethal}, raise viable progeny, co-evolve with other creatures - flowers and their pollinators are execellent examples of this. On and on. In your spare time grab a book by Gregory Bateson or someone like that. You'll be stunned.

And come to think of it, why aren't the fundies upset by all the extinctions going on that are caused by man? Shouldn't that be a sin or something?

[Happy Monkey]

"Intelligent Design" is the idea that life is too complicated for evolution to be responsible without some sort of oustide intelligence guiding it.

[Cicero]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

"Intelligent Design" is the idea that life is too complicated for evolution to be responsible without some sort of oustide intelligence guiding it.

Thanks.
I'll agree with that- life is complicated but, who said that something intelligent did this? Yeah. Bright fellow.
Oh no, here comes Zeus now.........

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by Cicero

Thanks.
I'll agree with that- life is complicated but, who said that something intelligent did this? Yeah. Bright fellow.
Oh no, here comes Zeus now.........

[Elspode]

I've always been stunned by the lack of capacity of people to imagine that perhaps Evolution is *how* their God created things. I mean, believers in ID (the new more politically correct version of Creation) are always making comparisons like "you can't take a bunch of watch parts in a box, shake them up, and get a watch." No, watches are made in watch factories...there's a frigging *process*.

Why should creating something as exotic and unlikely as the vast panoply of Life be any different, damn it? And why is it an insult to God to think that he didn't just will Everything into existence from scratch, but rather had a *process*, perhaps even one that still continues today? Doh!

[Flint]

It's a debate of semantics. I'll go one step further and ask: why can't the Laws of Nature themsleves be thought of as God? Since any descriptive system, be it scientific or spiritual, is merely an approximation of reality, I find it helpful to think of them as attempting to describe the same thing. There is, after all, only one universe to be described, and since we are a part of that universe, we cannot make an objective observation of it. Every descriptive system we have is flawed, inevitably, by this fact. You could say God created evolution, or you could say Evolution is God, or whatever. These are just words.

[DanaC]

More scientists are advocating the Intelligent design idea rather then the Big Bang theory nowadays.

I'd like to know where you pulled that little gimlet from.

[DanaC]

It's a debate of semantics. I'll go one step further and ask: why can't the Laws of Nature themsleves be thought of as God? Since any descriptive system, be it scientific or spiritual, is merely an approximation of reality, I find it helpful to think of them as attempting to describe the same thing. There is, after all, only one universe to be described, and since we are a part of that universe, we cannot make an objective observation of it. Every descriptive system we have is flawed, inevitably, by this fact. You could say God created evolution, or you could say Evolution is God, or whatever. These are just words.

Absolutely, they're just words. But, words are multilayered, we take different layers of information from the words we hear, some obvious, some less so. The word 'God' is not used in isolation from the cultures in which it is used; it therefore carries certain implicit meanings, which we with our cultural understanding, take on at a conscious and unconscious level.

If we want to talk about evolution, why not just call it evolution? Why take a word already well-laden with meanings which do not apply to the concept of evolution and use that instead, just because a couple of its meanings correspond.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Absolutely, they're just words. But, words are multilayered, we take different layers of information from the words we hear, some obvious, some less so. The word 'God' is not used in isolation from the cultures in which it is used; it therefore carries certain implicit meanings, which we with our cultural understanding, take on at a conscious and unconscious level.

If we want to talk about evolution, why not just call it evolution? Why take a word already well-laden with meanings which do not apply to the concept of evolution and use that instead, just because a couple of its meanings correspond.

I wouldn't use a word outside of it's cultural associations without explaining why, and on what basis. I'm not switching words willy-nilly because of scant similarities, I'm describing my personal, unconventional idea that diverse disciplines, imperfect as incomplete, compartmentalized concepts, can be hashed together to form a more complete, "bigger" picture.

[Elspode]

The point that is being missed in these rather rational notions is this: True Believers *need* their God to be a conscious entity, one which apparently thinks like a human being, but has awesome super powers - an entity above and apart from The All.

Doesn't make a lot of sense, but it does explain how The Almighty likes all that attention and praise. Probably gets kinda lonely being separate and apart from Everything Else.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Elspode

True Believers *need* their God to be a conscious entity, one which apparently thinks like a human being, but has awesome super powers - an entity above and apart from The All.

Doesn't make a lot of sense,

There's no point in worshiping something that isn't conscious. Why offer thanks and praise to something that had no intent to do what you're thanking and praising it for, and doesn't hear your thanks and praise anyway?

[Flint]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

There's no point in worshiping something that isn't conscious.

To you. That you know of.