Intelligent design

[pschy_leprae]

Originally Posted by scarface101

^What?


And what exactly is wrong with not having a problem gays?

ahh right thnx scar i've wasn't thinking or talking about gays I was referring to male reproductive organs and your lack knowledge in physiology , but thx for reminding . If there was intelligent design would God create something so abominably flawed as gays ...... unless God is taking revenge that is.....

[Apoo]

Originally Posted by penguinsoldier

Ya I believe that God created everything. The fact that the notion of "God" exists may well be a proof in itself. If everything came from dust by random chance, how could we even think up of something outside the realm of physical manifestation. Why would the notion of a greater being that we can't even see even enter into our consciousness in the first place?

let's disregard your blatant use of flawed creationist rhetoric to describe natural process such as evolution, and address the crux of your argument. I hope you realize that what you say can apply to anything 'outside of the ream of physical manifestation'. So for you to even begin to argue this point, you have to accept the fact that using your argument, everything outside the ream of physical manifestation has to exist as well. Do you believe in unicorns, elves and fairies?

[penguinsoldier]

Originally Posted by Tony

let's disregard your blatant use of flawed creationist rhetoric to describe natural process such as evolution, and address the crux of your argument. I hope you realize that what you say can apply to anything 'outside of the ream of physical manifestation'. So for you to even begin to argue this point, you have to accept the fact that using your argument, everything outside the ream of physical manifestation has to exist as well. Do you believe in unicorns, elves and fairies?

Unicorns, elves, dragons, etc. are constructs of different items in physical manifestation. For instance, a unicorn is a horse with a horn. These make poor counter-examples. Better example might have been something like love, but that's simply a word to describe how we feel. Every imaginative thing that I can think of right now comes from what's already existing in some form or another. The idea of "God" is quite different. If there is no God as some claim, this is a concept that we cannot see, touch, hear, taste, smell, or feel since it doesn't exist. Then where did it come from?

guess what I'm saying is that if there's no God and we're nothing but evolved animals that originated from random space dust, the very idea should be beyond the scope of our imagination

[Apoo]

So essentially you are saying that if god doesn't exist, the idea of perfection (as god is perfect) shouldn't exist in our mind? Yes, I've seen the ontological argument plenty of times, and its flawed.

the premise of your argument is this:

1) We have an idea of the perfect being in our minds (god)
2) For something to be perfect it must exist
-----------------------
Therefore: God exists.

The problem with this argument is easy to spot, check it out:

1) I have the idea of the perfect Island in my mind
2) For something to be perfect, it must exist.
----------------
Therefore: The perfect Island exists.

1) I have the idea of the perfect girl in my mind
2) for something to be perfect, it must exist
------------
Therefore: The perfect girl exists.

This is obviously flawed, as is your argument that god must exist because we have can conceive the idea of god. You try to rationalize this by separating the idea of god from everything else, but I don't see how they are different states of physical manifestation as you've said. They are all ideas, of which we can conceive. We can conceive the idea of many things that don't exist, it's stupid to try an prove something a priory.


Secondly,another objection to your argument is that, since we are imperfect beings, who is to say that our idea of perfection is actually is not flawed? If we are truly imperfect, we could never make sure that something is actually perfect, our idea of God as a perfect being could easily be mistaken.

[penguinsoldier]

The perfection that you speak of is simply the ideal vision of certain objects. This is the same type of thing as imagining the unicorn. You would not be able to even have the idea of the perfect girl unless you have at least some knowledge of what a girl is. You have this knowledge because you came in contact with a girl in some way, direct or indirect. For this to happen, the girl must exist. Now if God never existed, the idea could never materialize. Try to imagine something that's totally out of our realm of possibility, I dunno, maybe something of a color that does not exist in our world.. we can't.

edit:not sure if that last sentence is relevant, but it's interesting

[Rafcio]

Your idea of god is just perfect parent/human figure. It is the life giver, caretaker, provider, , law giver... All existent concepts. God's mercy, love, sacrifice etc. are all concepts based on human emotions.

You essentially strip human of physical body, leave emotions, add perfection and magic powers, and you have a god.
Yah, my brain couldn't create such concept. /Sarcasm

In fact idea of gods pretty much evolved from ancestral worship. Just add more and more magic powers to your ancestors over time and somewhere along the line start calling it god.

[Apoo]

I can imagine multiple gods, all of which are perfect. Does this mean all of them have to exist because I can imagine them? I bet you wouldn't agree.

As to your rebuttal, you really didn't really solve the problem. I'm not talking about a girl, I'm talking about the perfect girl. Yes, in this particular case, I have to have knowledge of what a girl is beforehand, but for your argument that for something to be perfect, it has to exist--it has to be consistent in where it applies to everything which you put the label of 'perfect' on. I can imagine the perfect girl, but does that mean that she exists? I can imagine god, but just the fact that I can come up with this idea doesn't prove it actually exists.

You also failed to touch upon the second problem. Since we are imperfect, who is to say our idea of perfect is right? For all you know, your idea of perfection is not what perfection really is, so your idea of god as perfect could be mistaken.

[Insin]

The interesting thing is that the whole "God is perfect and he couldn't be perfect if he didn't exist" argument came from Descartes. I think he actually ripped it off from another person. Either way, I'm pretty sure he just wrote that to appease his readers at the time, who included clergymen.

Just simple logic would seem to suggest that if it were indeed a complete proof, that it would be used today. But the fact is that it just assumes things without any real evidence, so it has to be dismissed as not a solid explanation or proof.

[penguinsoldier]

well no i never said that for something to be perfect, it has to exist. I don't even know why you brought up the idea of 'perfection' into this because i don't feel that it's relevant. Anyway, you guys keep believing whatever you want, i have no motivation to try to convince anyone. It was an interesting discussion though.

[Apoo]

The argument requires the idea of perfection. Just saying that something as complex as god couldn't exists in our minds if he didn't physically exist makes absolutely no sense when you don't structure it around a concept like the classic ontological argument.

All you are saying is

-God is too complex of an idea
-For this idea to exists in our minds it must exist outside of it

This very incoherent, both premises are totally unrelated. I had to interpret as you meaning Descartes's ontological argument to make any sense of it.

[rising crescent]

The argument requires the idea of perfection. Just saying that something as complex as god couldn't exists in our minds if he didn't physically exist makes absolutely no sense when you don't structure it around a concept like the classic ontological argument.

The Descriptions of God in minds are limited in boundaries attributes of God.We Learn attributes of God by Learn and Read the the Nature...of course, there are BIG Differences between attributes of God compared attribute of His Creations/Beings

[PC Chris]

Originally Posted by rising crescent

The Descriptions of God in minds are limited in boundaries attributes of God.We Learn attributes of God by Learn and Read the the Nature...of course, there are BIG Differences between attributes of God compared attribute of His Creations/Beings

Originally Posted by Apoo

I did not understand a word you wrote.

Translation:

God is to be big for the human mind to comprehend.

Thus questioning it is futile.

[Yedi]

Originally Posted by PC Chris

Translation:

God is to be big for the human mind to comprehend.

Thus questioning it is futile.

God is too big for the human mind to comprehend.

Thus using him to get what you want will be a success.

Don't you see? God is born from something you call greed, greed for power. It was well used concept which the antique governments used to be able to control the people.

[FūtonoKyūbi]

Originally Posted by Yedi

God is too big for the human mind to comprehend.

Thus using him to get what you want will be a success.

Don't you see? God is born from something you call greed, greed for power. It was well used concept which the antique governments used to be able to control the people.

Hmmm Pay Ceasar what's his. No sex until marriage. Don't defile the temple(human body) of god. Don't covet another mans property wife etc.

How are those examples of greed?

Another thing unless you have a control group (taking a scientific approach). An test things out for yourself this is all just a bunch of over bloated egos posting on a page.

Guess what theory unless tested is just hearsay. You want proof of gods power talk to the millions of Christians. Instead of burying your head in a science book set out to prove what you know.

One thing I can see from human society at large is that without control there is complete and utter chaos. Everything in life has some means of control. To thing otherwise is naive.

[Keerua]

How about you prove God, or am I misunderstanding and you are not religious?

[Yedi]

Originally Posted by FūtonoKyūbi

Hmmm Pay Ceasar what's his. No sex until marriage. Don't defile the temple(human body) of god. Don't covet another mans property wife etc.

How are those examples of greed?

Another thing unless you have a control group (taking a scientific approach). An test things out for yourself this is all just a bunch of over bloated egos posting on a page.

Guess what theory unless tested is just hearsay. You want proof of gods power talk to the millions of Christians. Instead of burying your head in a science book set out to prove what you know.

One thing I can see from human society at large is that without control there is complete and utter chaos. Everything in life has some means of control. To thing otherwise is naive.

Learn history. Ceasar was a dictator, and he probably had a reign of terror.

So you want statistic to finish of this discussion? Don't make me laugh. A debate is as much of a scientific approach as statistic is, or it might even be better then statistic.

Have you ever studied ancient politics? then you should know that the ancient politic matched the bible exactly, in other words they used religion as a mean to get power. An example of this is: Why is the pope called king of kings? Since he was the one whom ruled over all the kings, hence religion = power over politics ...

What is that you want to prove with the last statement? I don't get it.

[Annihilation]

Originally Posted by FūtonoKyūbi

Hmmm Pay Ceasar what's his. No sex until marriage. Don't defile the temple(human body) of god. Don't covet another mans property wife etc.

How are those examples of greed?

Another thing unless you have a control group (taking a scientific approach). An test things out for yourself this is all just a bunch of over bloated egos posting on a page.

Guess what theory unless tested is just hearsay. You want proof of gods power talk to the millions of Christians. Instead of burying your head in a science book set out to prove what you know.

One thing I can see from human society at large is that without control there is complete and utter chaos. Everything in life has some means of control. To thing otherwise is naive.

Greed to control, Ceaser wanted power, and he used god to get it as well as many leaders before and after him.

You say talk to the millions of christians, what about the millions of egyptians that believed in sun gods and seasonal gods. *The millions of greeks that believed in their gods. *There is millions of people that believe in many forms of greater beigns, but yet they all assume their's is the only true one. *Christians say the bible is written "through the power of god."

What about hyrogliphics(sorry for spelling, its late i'm tired), muslim documents, egyptian writings in their pyramids, and the many other pre-bible documents that are written through the power of their gods. *What makes yours any more correct than theirs other than your own ignorance. *It is one thing to be religious and believe in a greater beign that you want to please, it is another thing to be so close minded and foolish to feel that your god is the only possibly god and that all other religions are false and are of satin and sin. *That is simply being ignorant of possibilities when you have no poof overshadowing the other religions proofs.*


You are the one who needs to unburry your head.

[Rafcio]

Guys can you elaborate on how:

Originally Posted by Matthew 22:16-22

16They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. "Teacher," they said, "we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. 17Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"

18But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, 20and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"

21"Caesar's," they replied.
Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

22When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.

supports your side of the argument?

[Project #22329]

Aliens have created us to seek the solution of gayness and retardation that they have at their planet...
Also issue of greed, jealousy, betrayal, so on... We never changed, but got more advanced and our organisms became more complex, we became greedier, hungrier...etc
They failed, now our world is slowly falling apart.

Ok anyway,
Religion is founded by men
Science is founded by men
Life is not founded by men

I doubt that there another being or "heavenly power" that created all the complexities of this world, such as energy laws, chemical reactions, all of the mathematical equations, possibilities, compounds, molecules etc....It's impossible, let me rephrase it's HIGHLY UNLIKELY that this could occur...

I believe there was some kind of power that started everything off, call it big bang or the breathing, or gods will, whatever it you want to call it. I call it the "shart"....