doesn't it contradict the story of creation? to say that god designed us all on a molecular level negates the idea that he formed us out of mud and breathed life into us. so if you're going to negate this part of the bible to say god exists, what else are you willing to negate? either god did just as it says in genesis. he took mud, formed it into man and breathed life into it. or, he designed us all one molecule at a time, which the bible never claims. so which is it? i've heard some defenders of intelligent design claim that the story of creation is not meant to be historically accurate. but then why would you list a bloodline that runs from adam and eve down to jesus, if it's not accurate? and if that part's not historically accurate, what else isn't?
2007-09-27 06:49:17 · 12 answers · asked by just curious (A.A.A.A.) 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
on a molecular level we look nothing like dirt. i'd sooner believe my ancestor were monkeys...
2007-09-27 06:55:07 · update #1
don s, intelligent design is not a scientific theory. at best it is a hypothesis.
2007-09-27 06:56:03 · update #2
azure z, i agree with you to a certain extent... but remember there were no dead skin cells to begin with if there were no people...
2007-09-27 07:10:15 · update #3
It's hardly a "theory", as scientists understand the term -- just unfounded, "ad hoc" speculation (that's "something pulled out of their @ss", for those of you in Rio Linda).
2007-09-27 06:51:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
There is a historical component to the creation account no doubt. I will not repeat my answer to your previous question and waste mine and your time. I love it though when people have to ask followup questions based upon my response. That means a discussion is going on. You could email if you like.
And the Bible is a historical document. We just have to understand that it is a theological document and the document presented in aesthetically pleasing manner. One does not negate the other but they interact with each other. This is especially true with Hebrew Literature. For more information read the writings of Thomas Long III.
2007-09-27 06:56:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
When you say "on a molecular level we look nothing like dirt", that's not necessarily entirely true. There are A LOT of different "types" of dirt. It would really depend on the exact make up of any given dirt sample.
If by dirt you mean sand, then it doesn't look like us, it is silicon, we are carbon-based.
However, a lot of dust in someone's house may actually look like the person on a molecular level. A surprisingly large amount of dust in a house is made up of sloughed off dead skin cells.
Having said that, I still believe that "Intelligent Design" is a massive load of bull and that its only creationism dressed up in a pathetic attempt at disguise.
2007-09-27 07:05:33 · answer #3 · answered by Azure Z 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If creationists subscribed to intelligent design, they wouldn't be creationists. That seems fairly self-evident.
So you're saying that there can't be any symbolism in the creation story of the Bible or else the whole thing is false? Give me a break. There is symbolism throughout the book. Jesus Himself taught mainly in parables.
2007-09-27 06:54:14 · answer #4 · answered by Open Heart Searchery 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I just believe the Bible. I think these theories (including evolution) contain accuracies and inaccuracies but the Bible is the authority. In the end, I don't care how I was made or how the earth was made... I'm a "today" kinda person who worries more about my current relationship with God. I think we put way too much importance on arguing about things we can't prove and have no bearing on our lives today. So I guess my answer is... kinda. Be blessed!
2007-09-27 06:57:48 · answer #5 · answered by Cool Dad 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is historically accurate if understood correctly. I am curious though if Pangaea the super continent existed 100 million years ago why does Moses talk about it and even describes it in detail. Then says it divided two generations after Peleg. Seems that would be difficult information for him to know.
2007-09-27 06:53:38 · answer #6 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Religion as a general rule of thumb has changed their belief structure thru the years to better fit the times. intelligent design is their counter argument to evolution. It makes them sound like they're coming close to science while still basing themselves in the magic man in the sky belief.
2007-09-27 06:56:06 · answer #7 · answered by moscow1677 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course we believe it, but you are going to far . The world evolved that way but not us. Intelligent design means there was an intelligent being who not only planned it all out but cause it to happen with his thought. GOD IN OTHER WORDS! sorry for yelling.
2007-09-27 06:55:31 · answer #8 · answered by Connie D 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the way I understand the term, intelligent design is merely suggesting that there was a method to creation and it wasnt some random accident.........I think opponents or just non-believers focus on accuracy of the Bible (or lack thereof) instead of doing the thing they accused believers to be the most guilty of.....not thinking for themselves
2007-09-27 07:02:37 · answer #9 · answered by Saiyanman3 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you look at dirt closely into a microscope, you'd see that it is composed of mini-people just waiting for a deity to breathe life into it.
2007-09-27 06:56:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋