27 Nov 08
2 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThere are a lot of issues with just the word design.
Intelligent Design has as a basic assumption that people can intuitively tell whether something has been designed. Can God design something and people would not be able to tell it had been designed? If so, ID is wrong...which it is!
I can throw coins on my desk, they are there by design because I
threw them there, but the exact placement of the coins not so much;
however, I can also take each coin turn them so that heads are facing
up and all of the heads pointing a certain direction in a pattern to my
choosing. Design can be vague or not, but intent is the thing that
we need to concern ourselves with, can we see this pattern without
intent of purpose behind it, or can chance under the laws of the
universe just give us these things we see today?
Kelly
27 Nov 08
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayNobody -and that is not what he said nor implied -read his post again -it is perfectly logical -his argument is very implicitly of the “IF X then Y but IF not X then not Y” kind (even though he didn’t explicitly use the “IF” word) but he doesn’t say whether X is true or false.
Who told you God was designed, or had a beginning?
Kelly
27 Nov 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonIt is an apples and oranges debate again, the universe by everyone's
Nobody -and that is not what he said nor implied -read his post again -it is perfectly logical -his argument is very implicitly of the “IF X then Y but IF not X then not Y” kind (even though he didn’t explicitly use the “IF” word) but he doesn’t say whether X is true or false.
reckoning has a beginning, while God does not. So the truth about
something that has a start and one that does not, puts them into
different categories altogether so the comparisons are meaningless.
Kelly
28 Nov 08
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJay…the universe by everyone's
It is an apples and oranges debate again, the universe by everyone's
reckoning has a beginning, while God does not. So the truth about
something that has a start and one that does not, puts them into
different categories altogether so the comparisons are meaningless.
Kelly
reckoning has a beginning, while God does not.......
What “reasoning” leads you to believe that “God” cannot have a beginning?
-answer: no “reasoning” -just blind faith in what the Bible says.
Thus your assertion that only one but not the other must have a beginning has no rational bases.
28 Nov 08
Originally posted by KellyJayNot everybody reckons that the universe has a beginning, and it has already been shown in other threads that what such a beginning constitutes if it existed is under dispute.
It is an apples and oranges debate again, the universe by everyone's
reckoning has a beginning,
If it was shown that the universe did not have a beginning, would you concede that the argument that the complexity of the universe implies design would then have no merit?
28 Nov 08
Originally posted by KellyJayAre you able to give a definition for 'intent'. For example if a pattern is formed due to a simple rule being followed such a is the case in the formation of crystals (snow flakes), or the Mandel bro set, then do we call the rule 'intent'? Or is there more to it? What more?
There are a lot of issues with just the word design.
I can throw coins on my desk, they are there by design because I
threw them there, but the exact placement of the coins not so much;
however, I can also take each coin turn them so that heads are facing
up and all of the heads pointing a certain direction in a pattern to my
choosing. Design can be va ...[text shortened]... t, or can chance under the laws of the
universe just give us these things we see today?
Kelly
02 Dec 08
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonScripture
[b]…the universe by everyone's
reckoning has a beginning, while God does not.......
What “reasoning” leads you to believe that “God” cannot have a beginning?
-answer: no “reasoning” -just blind faith in what the Bible says.
Thus your assertion that only one but not the other must have a beginning has no rational bases.[/b]
Kelly
02 Dec 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadThey were put forward as an statements of how things could be..."shown" is quite another thing altogether, you are quite the
Not everybody reckons that the universe has a beginning, and it has already been shown in other threads that what such a beginning constitutes if it existed is under dispute.
If it was shown that the universe did not have a beginning, would you concede that the argument that the complexity of the universe implies design would then have no merit?
person of faith. Do you really think that when you explain your side of
an issue that just ends the debate and everyone who then disagree is
either then a liar or plain stupid?
Kelly
02 Dec 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadDo yourself a favor, I know you are so use to using non=standard
Are you able to give a definition for 'intent'. For example if a pattern is formed due to a simple rule being followed such a is the case in the formation of crystals (snow flakes), or the Mandel bro set, then do we call the rule 'intent'? Or is there more to it? What more?
uses of words, but try looking up regular standard uses of words so
that you have a clue what other people are saying to you. Than you
may not be so apt to call people liars like you seem to do.
Kelly
15 Dec 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonActually, not true, I had to reason it out, I'm still reasoning it out.
-exactly! -no “reasoning” nor rational bases -just blind faith in what the Bible says.
Simply because I questioned what people told me was true, and
came to realize they were just assuming they had their ducks in
a row does not mean I didn't or don't spend time thinking these
things through. It isn't blind faith, it is no more blind faith than
what you have when you tell me you know what happened billions
of years ago by looking at a light beam.
Kelly
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by KellyJayExactly what is your line of “reasoning” that has lead you to conclude that the literal interpretation of everything Bible says is true if it isn’t just faith?
Actually, not true, I had to reason it out, I'm still reasoning it out.
Simply because I questioned what people told me was true, and
came to realize they were just assuming they had their ducks in
a row does not mean I didn't or don't spend time thinking these
things through. It isn't blind faith, it is no more blind faith than
what you have when you tell me you know what happened billions
of years ago by looking at a light beam.
Kelly
And exactly what is your line of “reasoning” that has lead you to conclude that the belief in any scientific facts that contradicts your interpretation of the Bible is just “blind faith”? (such as the logical conclusions from observing such things as the Doppler effect etc).
15 Dec 08
Originally posted by Diodorus SiculusThere is defiantly some trolls on these forums.
http://web.archive.org/web/20060428091222/http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm
Some employ the tactic of trying to piss everybody off by either not answering questions or not giving a straight answers to questions put to them usually by pretending the question put to them is a question that is actually different from the actual question put to them but sounds vaguely like the same question -in other words, they put words into other people’s mouths.