Intelligent design or evolution

Out of interest, on what grounds do you disagree.
I find opinions different to my own interesting.
N lol, you should use analogies as they are very useful in aiding your argument, but they must closely/obviously model the situation you are describing.

The big thing between creationalism and evolution is that people believe that the creator made us evolve. This, cannot be proven, but the theory of evolution and how the way the earth formed is.

"1. If we were created by an "intelligent designer" doesn't that make us science experiments?

2. If we were created, who created our creator?

3. Don't all things evolve?"


1. No!


2. God is eternal!

e·ter·nal (i-tûr'n?l)
adj.

Being without beginning or end; existing outside of time.

God exists outside of time and the universe.

We, our physical selves, exist within time and the universe and had a beginning and will have an end.

God is the Alpha and Omega of the universe.


3. Evolution applies to all things but that doesn't mean that all things evolve. There may be individuals of a species that evolve but that doesn't require every member of that species to evolve. And, that is what allows the diverse number of species that exist on earth to exist side by side.


Consider the possibility that:

1. There is a God!

2. That this God Inspired/Created the Reality that allows for the existence of the universe(s), and the relevant "laws" necessary thereto.

3. That this God Inspired/Caused the individual Spirits that exist and that those Spirits continue the effects of Creation just as a child continues to create after its parents have created it.

4. That the Reality of existence is really in a non-physical realm.

5. That the Spirits, while in the non-physical realm, devised/caused the existence of physical reality to come about and caused it to be advanced through the principles of evolution (simply a tool). And that evolution governs the progress of both animate and inanimate things.

6. That the Spirits Created the ability for themselves to "descend" into their physical creation from the non-physical realm (Incarnation and Reincarnation).

7. That Spirits, while in the non-physical realm, are able to know the problems, hurdles and potential outcomes that are going to befall the particular entity that they are going to inhabit, prior to inhabiting it, yet choose to inhabit anyway because of their own "growth" desires/needs.

8. That the events of the physical world (death, pain, suffering and "evil") are not significant to the Reality, which is the non-physical realm, wherein our Spirit's true existence is, and therefore requires no intervention by God.

9. Spirits in the Non-physical realm may, at times, offer suggestive guidance to entities in the physical realm in order to assist them along their chosen path or purpose but such guidance is usually through inspiration (hunches) and dreams.

10. That the purpose of it all is for the experience of God and that eventually all Spirits will gravitate back into the Oneness of God.


My rationale of and for God is explained in the document at the link below which i wrote several years ago:

A Search For Truth

(Click on the "www" link at the bottom of this reply.)

Consider the possibility that:

1. There is a Tooth Fairy!

2. ...

If there was a tooth fairy, Ethmer would more likely be known as Essmer.

Oookkkk then.
Whateva you reckon.

Well, I'm sold. Not.



What's that got to do with anything?



So what?



This means nothing. Even if there was a God, that still doesn't change the fact that evolution is more true than Creationism and that ID is not science.



None of the above points affect the validity of Evolution. None of those aspects affect the fact that you cannot prove anything within ID to be true.



Something you cannot prove or disprove. Hence it is not science.



Now you're just talking gobbledy-gook. In fact, the rest of your argument is complete utter codswallop that cannot be proven to be true or untrue and is wholly unscientific and unreal.

We deal with logic and rational thought here, not verbal diarrhoea.

Sorry it's been a while.
Just had to have a brief comment on the evolution bit.
Ethmer: ALL things evolve. everything changes based on environment and the environment constantly changes.

If God were a SUPREME being that would mean he'she/it would be incapable of creating flaw. Everything has a flaw and everything recycles ie is "created"/born-lives-dies. there are no exceptions. even rocks recycle themselves; it just takes a longer period for them to do it.

Now, show PROOF there is a "god" "supreme being" that can create and has created. I will then show you the best fairy tell in existance. It's called any bible.

ralpheb

"ALL things evolve. everything changes based on environment and the environment constantly changes."

All things do NOT evolve. They may mature but they don't evolve. SOME of their descendants MAY evolve (mutate) while others may remain the same as their ancestors.


"If God were a SUPREME being that would mean he'she/it would be incapable of creating flaw."

Granted!


"Everything has a flaw and everything recycles ie is "created"/born-lives-dies. there are no exceptions. even rocks recycle themselves; it just takes a longer period for them to do it."

It is your perception that states that therein is a "flaw". Maybe it is your perception that is the flaw! Maybe you can't perceive of a purpose and method of God that could allow for such circumstances.


"Now, show PROOF there is a "god" "supreme being" that can create and has created. I will then show you the best fairy tell in existance. It's called any bible."

First, i don't believe in the Bible or the Bible's God(s). The Bible is simply a book of history and myths of peoples of thousands of years ago.

Second, i can't show you proof there is a God because that proof exists outside of my limited knowledge and experience.


SPECULATIONS


Speculation: 1 Is God necessary?


Yes!

There has to be a Source from which the "big bang" sprang forth Creating the universe.


Speculation: 2 What is God?


God is the ultimate Cause.

God is the Creative Entity, Energy or Force from which all is derived.


Speculation: 3 Where is God?


God is in a state of awareness that is outside the universe.

God has morphed part of Itself into those entities (spirits) that inhabit the the universe and the physical bodies within.


Speculation: 4 Why is God?


God Is because God Is.

God is eternal, existing independent of time or the universe.


Speculation: 5 Is God concerned?


No!

God is not concerned with the daily functioning of the universe or matters within it. That is our domain and subject to our whim.


Speculation: 6 What are we?


We are the spirits (entities) of God.

God morphed into Us and we continue to create according to God's purpose.

Our physical bodies are simply the means we use to experience and function in the physical dimension.


Speculation: 7 Why are we?


We are for the purpose of gaining knowledge and experience.

In the end, we gravitate back into the Oneness of God allowing for the fulfillment of God.


Speculation: 8 Evolution


Evolution is simply a tool of Creation.

The entities often influence the direction of evolution along desired paths.

Interesting. I think you are the first spiritual deist I've seen on the boards who leans toward the God side of the fence rather than the Science side of the fence.

In item #3 above, what do you mean by "state of awareness" outside of the Universe. The arrow of time in which we exist, ends outside of our Universe. What form of awareness can exist without the passing of time?

"In item #3 above, what do you mean by "state of awareness" outside of the Universe. The arrow of time in which we exist, ends outside of our Universe. What form of awareness can exist without the passing of time?"

We are limited in our comprehension of anything outside of time or the universe. Accordingly, i use the phrase "state of awareness" in an attempt to convey a comprehension of where God's reality is.

IMHO,

God "created" us (the spirit/entity) possibly by morphing part of Itself into Its minor parts. Our purpose was to go forth and gain knowledge and experience then eventually gravitate back into the Oneness of God.

It is we (the spirits/entities) that caused the creation of the universe in order that we could fulfill our purpose. We continue to manipulate things to an extent through the use of evolution which is simply a tool.

While we are outside of our physical bodies (between incarnations) we decide what goals we want to accomplish in the physical existence then choose that physical body to incarnate into that will afford us the greatest likelihood of accomplishment. Circumstances aren't the result of certain destiny as much as because of probabilities.

gods only reality is within the imaginations of those prone to delusions and psychosis.

Now now Doctor S, dont deny him his dreams and delusions.

ralpheb said:


Absolutely false! I'm an ID supporter and I'm an evolutionist. ID disputes that the evolutionary process is entirely devoid of design. Things can be designed to evolve. Evolution can be designed. Evolution can be used by design.

Ray said:


Nonsense. Since blind watchmaking is being promoted as a scientific concept, and since all scientific concepts are tentative and falsifiable, then the disagreement with the blind watchmaker hypothesis is scientific. It simply reflects the alternative. In other words, if it is scientific to argue against design, it necessarily is scientific to disagree and argue for it.

Since you say there is no evidence for design I would be interested in what you would count as evidence for design.

Well tel, The strongest supports of ID are religious people who are trying to use that monocher in place of creationism ie. they still want us to believe that god created everything. nice try but I'm not believing.

I'm aware that many creationists are ID supporters but that doesn't make ID the same as creationism. All this tells me is that many creationists don't understand ID.

Tele, your only trick here is to decide there's a difference by applying your own definitions to the two.

All ID-ers are creationists by the broadest definition.

Pointing out that oranges and citrus fruit are different things doesn't mean that oranges are not citrus.

By the broadest definition who isn't a creationist?

Me. You're just playing word games.

How am I playing word games? I just asked you who isn't a creationist by your definition? Come on, let's cut to the chase here.