Journey Inside The Cell

Originally posted by RBHILL
To not believe in intelligent design you are Ignorant, Stupid, Insane, and Wicked.[/b]

I read on this forum time after time how this god of yours made everything and has an active hand in all things which happen on this planet. But your god seems to go AWOL when it comes to the suffering and abject misery that are caused by your god's creation. It may be some type of universal design but to dare to call it "intelligent" is a sick joke. And if we, as a species, are even remotely similar to your god then we and your god are just a bunch of lemmings. If there is wickedness or evil in this world it was deliberately placed here by your god.
To believe in intelligent design is Ignorant.

Originally posted by RBHILL
I was just mocking what Carl Sagan said about Creationists.

Evolution might be real because Carls hair is from the stone age. 🙄

I understand that you think Sagan is a joke. Granted, no rebuttal for that one 🙂

Can you briefly elucidate me on what you are trying to get at with your thread title? Its not exactly clear to me what your posts have to do with a " Journey Inside The Cell" (?)

Originally posted by caissad4
I read on this forum time after time how this god of yours made everything and has an active hand in all things which happen on this planet. But your god seems to go AWOL when it comes to the suffering and abject misery that are caused by your god's creation. It may be some type of universal design but to dare to call it "intelligent" is a sick joke. And if ...[text shortened]... it was deliberately placed here by your god.
To believe in intelligent design is Ignorant.

To believe in a christians notion of "intelligent design" is ignorant indeeed.

My take on "intelligent design" does not conflict with scientific discoveries over the centuries. Also it doesn't conflict with the Big Bang Theory either.
Charles Darwin has thrown a spanner into the works of many (christian) theists, but upon closer examination, Darwin himself admits that his theory is far from exlaining the whole history of physical evolution on this planet.
He says that that there are many unknowns and that his basic theory us just part of the "puzzle" , and not a full explanation og the origin of species.

(If I have this wrong, feel free to correct me. Not just you, sweet Caissa, but anyone. Cheers everyone)

Originally posted by karoly aczel
To believe in a christians notion of "intelligent design" is ignorant indeeed.

My take on "intelligent design" does not conflict with scientific discoveries over the centuries. Also it doesn't conflict with the Big Bang Theory either.
Charles Darwin has thrown a spanner into the works of many (christian) theists, but upon closer examination, Darwin wrong, feel free to correct me. Not just you, sweet Caissa, but anyone. Cheers everyone)

You dont actually state why its any less ignorant than being unable to reconcile a loving and benevolent God with the existence of evil, as rather bitterly remonstrated by Caissad4 nor of why Christians should not claim that there is inherent design in living things, all you have in fact done is state the usual platitudes that perfectly illustrate RBHills point, that materialists really are inexcusably ignorant of what intelligent design actually is, that being the very antithesis of Darwinian evolutionary theory.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You dont actually state why its any less ignorant than being unable to reconcile a loving and benevolent God with the existence of evil, as rather bitterly remonstrated by Caissad4 nor of why Christians should not claim that there is inherent design in living things, all you have in fact done is state the usual platitudes that perfectly illustrate RB ...[text shortened]... intelligent design actually is, that being the very antithesis of Darwinian evolutionary theory.

I dont know how you extrlapolated that from my post.

Like I said, I have my own take on intelligent design.

I just think RBHILL's version is simplistic.
There is much more to intelligent design than just saying something like "God created us in his own image".

We get fed childrens versions of spirituality/scripture. Some take these simplistic explanations as gospel, where it is clear to me that it is not quite as simple as people would have make out.

Imo we are supposed to take these childlike explanations and use our own intelligence to intergrate these childish stories and use our own intuition/enhanced knowledge to make a more complete, mature/"insightful" picture of what is really going on.

The fact that we need to make our own interpretations of scriptures is COMPLETELY integral to furthuring our understanding of spirtuality.
Our "creative input" is a neccesary ingredient to move forward.
(OUR CREATIVE INPUT IS NECCESARY TO MOVE FORWARD)

If we dont make this "leap of calculated faith based on our own understanding" related to these teachings, then we cannot move forward, as we will always be stuck in our circular reasonings, with nowhere to go.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You dont actually state why its any less ignorant than being unable to reconcile a loving and benevolent God with the existence of evil, as rather bitterly remonstrated by Caissad4 nor of why Christians should not claim that there is inherent design in living things, all you have in fact done is state the usual platitudes that perfectly illustrate RB ...[text shortened]... intelligent design actually is, that being the very antithesis of Darwinian evolutionary theory.

"Intelligent Design" was a created phrase by creationists to promote the heinous "agenda" of forcing theist beliefs into the public school system. Having failed using the word creationism this was their political counterattack to the perceived attack by non-theists. Political propaganda to promote religious "ideals" is the theme.

Originally posted by caissad4
"Intelligent Design" was a created phrase by creationists to promote the heinous "agenda" of forcing theist beliefs into the public school system. Having failed using the word creationism this was their political counterattack to the perceived attack by non-theists. Political propaganda to promote religious "ideals" is the theme.

yeah,thay get hell nervous if you even hint at upsetting their belief systems .Lol🙂

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I dont know how you extrlapolated that from my post.

Like I said, I have my own take on intelligent design.

I just think RBHILL's version is simplistic.
There is much more to intelligent design than just saying something like "God created us in his own image".

We get fed childrens versions of spirituality/scripture. Some take these simplistic ove forward, as we will always be stuck in our circular reasonings, with nowhere to go.

look at the replys, not one of them actually addresses what intelligent design actually is, not not one! You have Whitey whinging about RBhills insults even though its plain to see its a parody, Caissad4 whinning about the existence of evil, you fabricating theories and speculating what your version of intelligent design could be. RBhill doesn't actually state anything other than materialists are inexcusably thick as mince for not accepting it.

Christ himself states to Christians, 'if your eye is simple, your whole body shall be bright', what do you think that means? Any ideas?

Originally posted by caissad4
"Intelligent Design" was a created phrase by creationists to promote the heinous "agenda" of forcing theist beliefs into the public school system. Having failed using the word creationism this was their political counterattack to the perceived attack by non-theists. Political propaganda to promote religious "ideals" is the theme.

So it promotes religious ideas, big deal! Darwinism promotes pure materialism which is practically useless, empty and deviod and forced upon those of a religious disposition which they may find equally as ludicrous and heinous.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
yeah,thay get hell nervous if you even hint at upsetting their belief systems .Lol🙂

no, you are talking pants, all creationists want to do is present an alternative interpretation of the SAME scientific data. There you were one minute ago espousing your interpretation, all bohemian with tambourine and incense sticks, yeah lets be creative, lets interpret, and you deny it to others, hypocrite!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
look at the replys, not one of them actually addresses what intelligent design actually is, not not one! You have Whitey whinging about RBhills insults even though its plain to see its a parody, Caissad4 whinning about the existence of evil, you fabricating theories and speculating what your version of intelligent design could be. RBhill doesn't ac ...[text shortened]... ur eye is simple, your whole body shall be bright', what do you think that means? Any ideas?

If you want my exptrapolations on my ideas of intelligent design, feel free to PM me if you are really interested.

I didn't interpret Casisad4 as "whining", nor did I think Whitey was "whinging".
Funny how you interpret these responses.
I can see why Caissad4 orTwitehead may not want to reply to your posts, especially given the disdain that you've shown for their obviously heart-felt posts.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no, you are talking pants, all creationists want to do is present an alternative interpretation of the SAME scientific data. There you were one minute ago espousing your interpretation, all bohemian with tambourine and incense sticks, yeah lets be creative, lets interpret, and you deny it to others, hypocrite!

I'm a hypocrite now. How so again?

Who have I denied a sound interpretation to?

(If I have, I apologize. Clearly everyone should have the same rights to expouse thier views without being hounded or ridiculed for them)

Originally posted by karoly aczel
If you want my exptrapolations on my ideas of intelligent design, feel free to PM me if you are really interested.

I didn't interpret Casisad4 as "whining", nor did I think Whitey was "whinging".
Funny how you interpret these responses.
I can see why Caissad4 orTwitehead may not want to reply to your posts, especially given the disdain that you've shown for their obviously heart-felt posts.

Why dont you espouse them publically?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
look at the replys, not one of them actually addresses what intelligent design actually is, not not one! You have Whitey whinging about RBhills insults even though its plain to see its a parody,

How was I to know it was a parody? It certainly was not 'plain to see' to me. I also do not see why I should even begin to address what intelligent design really is, when the thread doesn't seem to be about intelligent design, but rather appeared to be about insulting those who don't believe it, though now it appears it is about Carl Sagan.

Originally posted by RBHILL
I am only repeating what Carl Sagan said about creationists.

Can you give me a link so I can understand the context?

If you believe he was wrong, does repeating what he said make it right, or doesnt that just make you as rude as him?