How does Intelligent creation stand up to rational argument? (part1)?

Question

To the discussion on creation, I keep getting the answer :

There must be a greater intelligence to create our complex universe.

I propose that this theory does not stand up (and we'll just forget Occam's razor for now) - the thesis is that to create something, and something so complex - something greater must be out there to create it. So an obvious question - what created the creator?

I suggest that if you are limited by normal temporal rules, ie man follows God, but before God there was nothing, then this contradicts the original thesis.

So I can only deduce that normal temporal thinking does not work here - something else (i leave that for anothe question) must exist.

Therefore the founding tennet of the original theory theory is wrong therefore the thesis is now irrelevant.

So what I am proposing is, not that God does not exist, but that the argument 'There must be a greater intelligence to create our complex universe' is redundant and should be put to bed.

Answer 1

ID falls over before it has a chance to "stand up".

Answer 2

I believe in creationism, and I'm more thanwilling to defend creation.
Firstly, concerning temporal rule, there must be a start and a finish to any creative process, and the sheer complexity of the world, means there must be some infinite power controlling the whole thing. For example, the structure and grouping of atoms controlls the structure of chemicals, and of biological chemical structures such as humans.
There are also certain mechanisms which would not work if any simpler- a process known as the irreducibility complex by creationists. For example structures such as the human brain and the photosynthetic system of plants could not work unless in their present form. Even the most advanced human technology has created anything like it.
Also, there is no strict evidence to suggest a higher deity works like a human does- what form they may take, or the very substance they are composed from.
Why can't we accept that there must be a higher power- we cannot be it, and the chance of a creation by chance is astronomical.
Until we can prove otherwise, we can't write off a higher deity.

Answer 3

I think that in balance, the evidence weighs in most heavily on the side of naturalistic explanations for the existence of the universe and life... and I think that that Creationists have introduced a fatal flaw in their 'Intelligent Design' arguments, by asserting that the 'complexity' of creation demands a 'creator'.

The main argument for a creator seems to be 'complexity'; i.e., something as complex as the universe and the earth and life must have a creator... it is the only thing that makes sense. But, if you think about it (Christians are not renowned for their critical thinking ability), it makes no sense at all.

The argument implies that a complex creation requires that the creator must be more complex than the creation... otherwise, the creator would have been unable to create it. But IF complexity requires a more complex creator, THEN the fact of the creator's complexity means that it must also have been created. Remember, according to this argument, complexity cannot arise by itself. That being the case, then, we end up with an infinite regression... creation... creator... creation... creator... creation... creator... creation... creator... creation... creator... etc... ad infinitum... ad nauseum.

That, of course, is impossible... and thus, so is the concept of a creator... IF the argument for a creator is predicated on 'complexity'.

The simple observable fact, though, is that complexity arises from simplicity, in accordance with elementary natural rules.

Interested parties should look up "self-organizing complex systems".

Answer 4

There is a fatal flaw in the non-creationist view they want us to believe "something can come from nothing." They refuse to see the flaws and/or total lack of logic.

You cannot have something created unless you have time. And God created time. Time is a construct like every other dimension. Asking what happened before time was created is like asking what is north of the North Pole. So to argue that God had to be created is redundant. God exists outside of our terms of reference.

The fact that we find these things so hard to grasp is an illustration of how monumentally inferior our intellects are compared to God's.

Answer 5

Agreed, unfortunately they will continue to argue that there was no need to create their creator because it already existed. All the while arguing that "something can come from nothing". They refuse to see the flaws and/or total lack of logic.

Answer 6

Go ahead and propose what you like, becuase in my opinion all the arguments of who created who and who craled out of the muck are just wastes of time. Who cares? I don't I am having to much fun in the here and now.

Answer 7

Thank you. The whole ID was always self-contradictory and ridiculous.

Anyone who thought about it for 2 seconds saw that obvious flaw.

Answer 8

I agree with you except for one thing: the folks who hold that view are not rational, neither are they impressed by rationality in others. Therefore, the thesis can not be put to bed -- it will have to die a long slow painful 2,000 year death.

Answer 9

Yes matey, God created the world in 6 days.

Answer 10

God is the beginning and the end. nothing had to create Him because he created us, think about that for awhile and maybe u will understand