The bible is not proof it is just a book.
2007-04-26 18:08:47 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
One strong argument is the Anthropic Principle. Specifically, not just earth, but the whole universe seems to have been fashioned in just such a way to allow life. If that gravitational constant were just a little different, or if the weak nuclear force were balanced just a little different, and so on. There are innumerable variables that affect the existence of life as we conceive of it, and they are all fine-tuned to give life.
Then there's the fact that the universe is built around an abstraction. There is no such thing as a number, never has been and never will be. It exists *only* in the mind and has no independent existence. And yet, math is so universal in the universe's structure that it is the most basic and efficient technique we have to model it. What's more, "normal" numbers don't work. We have to invent decimals (which we can observe). Then we have to invent negative integers. If you can drive your car a -3 miles, you'll be doing something you can make a lot of money doing (and put your name in history for). There is no abstract correlative in reality to negative numbers...but we need them. Then we discover that we need the number i (the square root of -1) to explain some aspects of reality. It, also, has no correlary in reality. The so-called "real" integers do. I can show two oranges and infer the concept of "two," but I can show neither -2 nor 2i oranges.
If the universe is built so around an abstract philosophy, then it must be built around a mind. Since math has no existence outside the mind, it is indeed such an abstract philosophy. Since the universe is ordered in such a way as to draw our minds to it and since some of its functions in the world are not at all apparent, but still consistent, then we also know that the universe is so designed. Consequently, we know that it was built by an intellect, for only an intellectual entity can reason so.
I can supply more arguments of several varieties, but that's enough. I have supplied one deductive and one inductive argument, and there are numerous others.
Still, lest the argument be incomplete and someone say "That applies to the cosmos, but not to life," I also posit that if the fundamental laws of the universe were designed by an unfathomable intellect, we have no reason at all to assume life was not. Indeed, it follows from the logic that it must be unless it is of a different nature than the surrounding universe (a concept that has been forcefully discarded).
2007-04-26 18:40:16 · answer #1 · answered by Innokent 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Intelligence design of what? Is it the dessign of your picture? or design of something? or a building design?,house design? What design are you stating?
The bible is not proof of what? If the bible is not a proof of reading, why is it that we hve been reading it? Can you not read the bible as your proff of your studies?
Have you gone to school. ? In your school are you not using books? If you don't believe the books, how come you have studied things what you have known from the books?
You complete what you mean so that we could aswer you on the correct answer.
jtm
2007-04-27 01:21:35 · answer #2 · answered by Jesus M 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i will try to lay out the objective truth about a very fascinating debate.
All the "evidence" of ID is just things evolution hasn't neccessarily explained yet. This doesn't mean it never will. Think about what ID looked like years ago (it did exist, it just wasn't named so clevely, like that other guy said.) It is a foundationally unscientific idea, equivalent to just giving up on how far back we can take things. That's why educated people dislike it. Plus you can't ever prove who, so it wouldn't advance us as a society any further.
2007-04-27 01:31:25 · answer #3 · answered by ajj085 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Scientists take many things quite seriously that have not yet been proven. Just because something hasn't been proven yet doesn't mean it's not so.
The problem with intelligent design isn't that it hasn't been proven. The problem with intelligent design is that there is absolutely no evidence for it.
2007-04-27 01:26:19 · answer #4 · answered by dharmabum2 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
oh man, that was hilarious. i'm referring to one under god's explanation of science. are there really people who think like that? what the hell are you doing on the computer. don't you know the computer and the internet are the devil's tools? the only thing intelligent about intelligent design is the wording of it. those simple enough to barely read will see the words and assume there is intelligence to it.
2007-04-27 01:17:59 · answer #5 · answered by just curious (A.A.A.A.) 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
fine, don't look at the bible. just look at the world around you. The forces of the weather and the food chain work perfectly. And the human body, every cell knows where to go and what to do, we have coherent thoughts, and our hearts beat without us telling them to. Are you telling me that's just by accident? a coincidence or mere luck? Someone had to design all that, God.
2007-04-27 01:30:14 · answer #6 · answered by mexico13 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. Intelligent Design begins with the assumption that there is a god then tries to find evidence to support it. In other words they are working backwards.
2007-04-27 01:19:09 · answer #7 · answered by Armand Steel 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The answer has to be found by experience and not by thoughts and discussions. Does the question bother you at thought level? If this is so, it is not worth answering as at thought level, everything is a mere concept and many concepts are possible. All mental concepts are delusions. In order to experience the truth, one must go beyond thought and that is possible only in a thought-free state as thoughts are barriers for true perception. Only in a state of 'no-mind' can one realize or have a glimpse of truth. First I must know myself, my true nature without forming a concept about me. In the state of unconditioned consciousness, I can realize that I am intelligence!
2007-04-27 01:33:52 · answer #8 · answered by peacebliss 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If there was proof in Intelligent Design, it would be taken seriously by scientists and it would be taught in the schools.
Since it doesn't have real proof it isn't taught in schools and used in science.
2007-04-27 01:13:08 · answer #9 · answered by kaltharion 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
To One Under God...
If science is such an evil thing, them please switch of your computer, take off you clothes, leave your house (but don't take your car), go live in the bush, but you can't build a shelter of any sort (architecture and construction), farm food (agriculture), cook, (home economics).
The world is what it is because of science, not a cloud in the sky.
2007-04-27 01:43:02 · answer #10 · answered by Sarcasma 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋