Surely there is a huge way between saying 'things are so intricate they must've been designed' and 'they must've been designed by this certain G-d who is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient and who has taught His word through the Bible'?
There may or may not be proof of design, I'm sure that is up to people's views on whether it is a logical belief, but even if there is, there is no proof that it has to be the Biblical G-d who designed things.
2006-12-04 06:55:42 · 12 answers · asked by lady_s_hazy 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Logic design requires a designer.
God is the designer.
I guess much the same way as a pocket watch...someone did not take all the metals, glass, springs, widgets, etc. toss them in the air, and when it hit the ground, voila, there was a watch.
Even if someone did that, would then he not be the intelligent designer for that intelligent design?
2006-12-04 07:00:05 · answer #1 · answered by Paul J 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, you're absolutely right. A Muslim advocate of Intelligent Design could look at that "design" and say it's proof of Allah. Someone worshipping the Greek gods could look at that same evidence and say it's proof of Zeus. ID in no way proves Christianity and it CERTAINLY doesn't prove the Bible.
2006-12-04 14:59:03 · answer #2 · answered by . 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's not the direction these things generally go.
People who believe in Intelligent design don't expand their belief system to include God. Rather, many people who believe in God find that the concept of Intelligent Design falls within their existing belief system.
2006-12-04 15:02:09 · answer #3 · answered by Teekno 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While I agree with you in principal (that intelligent design does not imply Christian God) -- the fact remains that the people who are pushing for the teaching of intelligent design in schools are the same small group of Christian Extremists who are want creationism taught.
Most religious people believe in intelligent design and also believe in evolution. That is the Catholic position. However, even at Catholic schools, evolution is taught in Biology classes, and intelligent design is taught in religion classes.
2006-12-04 15:01:55 · answer #4 · answered by Ranto 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This has been questioned in court. The judges inevitably ask, "Well, if it was designed, who designed it?" And the witness usually says, "Well, we don't know or it might have been aliens or..."
The question then becomes, "Well, who designed the aliens then...? Why don't you get to the source of it -- who do you believe did the design?"
Why is it that every single time the straight answer is given its... "God."
ID is Creationism in disguise, and a very poorly disguised one at that.
2006-12-04 14:59:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually it's the opposite. They want to show that Darwin is wrong and the bible is right. So they invented intelligent design to convince people the bible is right. So god comes first THEN intelligent design.
2006-12-04 15:00:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There's nothing intelligent about designing chaos, frustration, pain, suffering, grief, and global sorrows thereof sin and death.
The biblical objective is compare (not mix) Law <-vs-> Grace.
For a mixture of "contrary things" only makes an oxy-MORON.
Such oxymoron made has a BAD end: Life + Death = DEAD.
The end of the God Shew is notably already written:
The GRACE of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen.
2006-12-04 15:04:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Actually, so-called "Intelligent Design" can just as easily be reconciled with not just one, but a committee of gods or designers.
2006-12-04 15:01:54 · answer #8 · answered by JAT 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So if there is an other "thing" that design us what is it? Why can it be the God that is in the bible? Why do you not what to have God in your life?
2006-12-04 15:05:18 · answer #9 · answered by s_uperdave 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some things are just better left alone.
in order to have an intellectual exchange, there has to be some sign of intellect to begin with.
So I guess pursuing this is futile.
2006-12-04 15:00:29 · answer #10 · answered by writersbIock2006 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋