Ah, my misunderstanding. Not entirely sure what your point is then, everything follows the laws because they are the laws. It would be impossible to not follow them.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I am not talking about mans attempt to understand the laws contained within the universe. I am talking about the actual laws that we can only begin to understand. Why does everything follow the Golden ratio?
Everything is in Thor's plan; Thor controls your life even if you don't realize it. Thor is always with you, on earth and in heaven, that is. But what is Thor's creation is alive, such as us, and what is man's creation are dead objects like money and cell phones.
Which is why Thor doesn't like when you take life for something that doesn't even matter..
Thor bless.
Cwhatididthere?
You could argue that it is impossible not to follow evolution but that does not stop us from trying to figure out how evolution works.It would be impossible to not follow them.
I believe in Thor."Blahblah, doesn't count because you don't really believe in Thor, etc"
Can you point out where the OP said that?So, God can't exist because something in nature may not look designed...great.
Where does oil paint come from? Answer that first and then we can move on to discussing how it ended up in patterns like this.Where did all matter come from? Answer that first then we can move on to what designs came out of that matter and how it ended up in the current design it's in.
"Everything" is a bit of an overstatement, dontcha think?I am not talking about mans attempt to understand the laws contained within the universe. I am talking about the actual laws that we can only begin to understand. Why does everything follow the Golden ratio?
You could argue that it is impossible not to follow evolution but that does not stop us from trying to figure out how evolution works.
You did not spell out the whole sentence: Everything is designed "by God".
So your design is NOT designed by God.
Very easy.
Again, whenever I see your post, I couldn't help to have a feeling: here comes another dumb question.
Sorry.
You skip the all important question with this silly little strawman. Shame shame...
You did not spell out the whole sentence: Everything is designed "by God".
So your design is NOT designed by God.
Very easy.
Again, whenever I see your post, I couldn't help to have a feeling: here comes another dumb question.
Sorry.
Belk said:And that changes the nature of the question not one whit. If everything is designed by God there is nothing we can use as a gauge between designed and not designed.
Err, where did he say that?So, God can't exist because something in nature may not look designed...great.
A singularity, approximately 13.5 billion years ago. Where the singularity came from is anyone's guess - I don't have the answer, and neither do you.Where did all matter come from?
Your point is moot. The nature of the origin of matter is irrelevant to the question of whether or not the universe displays hallmarks of design. Yes, you can certainly make a cosmological argument, but that is different to the teleological argument - the veracity of one is unrelated to the veracity of the other. Even if we somehow proved that Brahman did indeed create the original singularity as an act of divine will, that doesn't answer the question, "Is everything designed?". Maybe Brahman left everything to operate under its own devices, maybe he didn't.Answer that first then we can move on to what designs came out of that matter and how it ended up in the current design it's in.
What strawman? The extent of the OP's characterisation of the ID movement was, "...creationists and ID supporters purport that everything is designed...", no more, no less. Unless you're asserting that this is an incorrect statement regarding Intelligent Design, I don't think you really know what the word 'strawman' means (ironically, your attempt to divert focus away from teleology and onto cosmogony could well be a strawman itself).You skip the all important question with this silly little strawman. Shame shame...
And that changes the nature of the question not one whit. If everything is designed by God there is nothing we can use as a gauge between designed and not designed.
As I said, just take a look on one of your best "design". That is NOT designed by God.
After that, take a look of any thing which is called "natural". That IS designed by God.
A dumber can tell the differences.
So, you're saying that if something looks designed, it's not designed by God? And if it doesn't look designed, it's designed by God?As I said, just take a look on one of your best "design". That is NOT designed by God.
After that, take a look of any thing which is called "natural". That IS designed by God.
A dumber can tell the differences.
So, you're saying that if something looks designed, it's not designed by God? And if it doesn't look designed, it's designed by God?
Evolution has been called an explanation of the appearance of design. The eye certainly looks designed (superficially, that is; evolution explains its origins naturally, without a designer needed), so, according to your logic, the eye wasn't design.
Hey, juvenissun, congratulations on finally believing in evolution!
As I said, just take a look on one of your best "design". That is NOT designed by God.
After that, take a look of any thing which is called "natural". That IS designed by God.
A dumber can tell the differences.
You make a huge assumption that "natural" things are designed by God.
The point here is that biological evolution is a design process in its own right, but one that differs fundamentally from man-made designs. That's because man-made objects all have a function, even if this is to amuse or decorate (arts and crafts) or change man's mental state (painting, music, drugs). A can-opener satisfies these criteria. As pointed out by Darwin, no organism can develop traits that are solely of benefit to another organism, yet the can-opener benefits us without benefiting itself.
Creationists tell us that God created the Earth and designed it to be a good place for man to live. Then he gave man dominion over it all. Man was to be a good steward of the Earth and its resources. So the creation of man is his purpose, his redemption his purpose and his destiny his purpose. God wants some obedient righteous people so that they can live with him forever... But isn't the Earth then just temporary accommodation?
Is that it? I personally cannot accept this gross expression of anthropocentrism, so I'm left thinking, from the point of view of the 'intelligent designer', what the objective of all his hard work is? What is the point of the objects (billions of living organisms) that he has designed? What are their functions. For example, what is the function of a rabbit — is it to feed the foxes or keep the grass short? What is the purpose of the Universe? What function does the Earth play in the Universe? Is it really only to show man the power and majesty of God?
I am not making any assumption. It is a contrast of two systems.
For two designed systems, just look at their complexity. The one designed by God is far far far far superior than the one designed by man. The simplest thing designed by God (e.g. rock, soil, leaf, water etc.) is far far better than the best and the most complicated thing designed by man.
That is how you tell. Very easy.
Even if an intelligent being created the original common ancestor, that wouldn't change the veracity of the theory of common descent (i.e., we'd still be descended from that common ancestor, biological diversity would still be a result of inheritable mutation, environmental attrition, etc). So, on the contrary, the origin of life is itself irrelevant to evolution.But it does not matter if evolution explains it or notIt is still Intelligent design since Evolution cannot explain the origin of life anyhow
Why the 'sorry' emoticon?It is still Intelligent design since Evolution cannot explain the origin of life anyhow
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?