A few questions for Intelligent Design

quote:

---

Originally posted by Legend:
Could a few posters well versed in Intelligent Design Theory please respond to a few questions I have?

​

1. I assume that you consider your theory falsifiable. What evidence would you say could possibly be discovered that would support an non designed Universe?
2. I assume also that you consider your Designer omnipotent. Since that means there is nothing He could not design, why do you consider the above (if you even think evidence agaist Intelligent Design could ever be found) to be evidence against Intelligent Design?
3. Your hypothesis states that we live in a Universe where everything is designed. How can you differentiate between a designed and not-designed Universe if a designed universe model can literally look like anything, assuming an omnipotent Designer?
4. How would a person living in a Universe of either type (designed/not-designed) tell what the other would be like?

---

I am not very well versed in the Intelligent Design theory, but I would like to make a few comments regarding your posts.It seems to me that the four questions which you presented in your first post are all derivatives of the same question. Is intelligent design falsifiable? In response to which let me say that falsifiability is not synonymous with provability. Having said this, let me answer the above question with a no. To the best of my knowledge the theory of intelligent design cannot be falsified.In your second post you stated:

quote:

---

Besides, the Bible prooves that God is NOT omnipotent, if he
were he could have snapped mankind out of existence without the
need for a Great Flood.

---

The Bible does not in any way prove that God is not omnipotent. Let us take your own choice of examples. The mere statement that God used a flood to inflict punishment does not in any way prove that He had to use that flood because of a lack of omnipotence. It simply states that, though omnipotent and entirely capable of accomplishing His purpose in any manner, God chose to use a Great Flood.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter:
But in the Bible God only operates within the governing
rules of his creation ... there is nowhere in the Bible
(with the possible exception of the creation itself) that
this is not the case.

---

Please allow me to mention just a few.The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19The increase of Jacobs flock in Genesis 30-31The burning bush in Exodus 3The signs of Aaaron and Moses and the Plagues of Egypt in Exodus 4-12The crossing of the Red Sea in Exodus 14Water from the rock in Exodus 17 and 20The brazen serpent in Numbers 21Aaron's rod that budded in Numbers 17The Jordan divided in Joshua 3The walls of Jericho in Joshua 6The sun stands still in Joshua 10The withered hand of Jeroboam in I Kings 13The meal and oil multiplied in I Kings 17The resurrection of the widows son in I Kings 17The sacrifice consumed by fire in I Kings 18Armies destroyed by fire in II Kings 1The Jordan divided in II Kings 2Water supplied in II Kings 3
("And this is but a light thing in the sight of the LORD")Widows oil multiplied in II Kings 4Loaves multiplied in II Kings 4The resurrection of the Shunammite's son in II Kings 4The healing of Naaman in II Kings 5The floating axe head in II Kings 6The Syrians defeated in II Kings 6The reversal of the Sun's motion in II Kings 20 and Isaiah 38The water changed to wine in John 2The nobleman's son healed in John 4The cleansing of the leper in Matthew 8The man with the palsy healed in Matthew 9The impotent man healed in John 5The withered hand made whole in Luke 6The centurion's servant healed in Luke 7The resurrection of the widows son in Luke 7The stilling of the storm in Mark 4The resurrection of Jairus' daughter in Luke 8The healing of the blind in Matthew 9Feeding the five thousand in Matthew 14Walking on the water in Matthew 14Feeding the four thousand in Matthew 15The cleansing of the lepers in Luke 17The ressurection of Lazarus in John 11The healing of Malchus in Luke 22The resurrection of Christ in Luke 24The Lame man healed in Acts 3The healing of Aeneas in Acts 9The resurrection of Tabitha in Acts 9The resurrection of Eutychus in Acts 20And many more

quote:

---

Originally posted by John:
This reply completely sidesteps the point made by Peter.

​

---

Please explai

quote:

---

Originally posted by John:

It doesn't seem to avoid Peter's option #3. All of what you mentioned is well within misinterpretted phenomena, especially after a few generation have passed.

​

---

Please review Peter's post. His main premise was that "in the Bible God only operates within the governing rules of his creation." My reply was a refutation of this premise.

quote:

---

Originally posted by John:

I see your point.

​

I'm not sure how strict Peter intended 'within the laws of his creation' to be, so I should just phrase what I am thinking. Everything mentioned in your refutation is within a very narrow range of human experience. Its easy to add a detail and call it supernatural. Such is the hallmark of mytholgy worldwide. I just don't see the significance I guess.

---

Could you please explain what you mean by "a very narrow range of human experience?"Perhaps you could also provide a few examples of how the events mentioned could have had details added to them to make them seem supernatural.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter:
God does nothing that cannot be explained by natural means, albeit
at a level unprecedented in the supposed time of the Bible.

​

He doesn't make the walls of Jericho dissappear, nor Sodom
and Gomorrah.

​

That's what I was getting at ... I hope some of my flippancy
hasn't offended anyone ... I'll try to restrain myself in
future.

---

I must have misunderstood the criteria. My apologies.Nevertheless, some of the events mentioned can not possibly be explained by natural means.The increase of Jacobs flock in Genesis 30-31
Aaron’s rod that budded in Numbers 17
The thrice dividing of the Jordan in Joshua 3 and II Kings 2
- The Jordan is not subject to tides
The sun stands still in Joshua 10
The meal and oil multiplied in I Kings 17
Water supplied in II Kings 3
-Water from nowhere would be against the rules of His creation.
The floating axe head in II Kings 6
The reversal of the Sun's motion in II Kings 20 and Isaiah 38
The water changed to wine in John 2
- Your suggestion of watered down wine is not consistent with the passage
Walking on the water in Matthew 14
-Matthew was written in Greek not Hebrew. The word used is peripateo and has no connotation of swimming.By the way, these would be examples of the chaotic elements we would expect to find if an omnipotent designer exists who remains in contact with his creation. In that sense this diversion may be very applicable to the topic.On a side note, three of your responses in particular reveal a lack of familiarity with the Bible. I have found that even when debating against a work it is best to be as familiar with that work as possible. For example, I can successfully argue that Tolkien’s works contain contradictions because I have read his works many times and have personally noted the presence of those contradictions. However, I did not notice many of them until after my fifth reading, and many of those that I at first thought to be contradictions proved not to be so after subsequent readings. Likewise I would suggest that while debating against the Bible you should read it as much as possible, thus equipping yourself to better defend your position. After all, is not knowledge half the battle?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter:
I must confess I haven't read the bible of a regular basis for
many years ... so you are right to suggest I'm rusty.

​

I'll have a check before I make any particular responses, but would
be interested in the three particular lacks of familiarity.

---

The first was your question regarding the Arc of the Covenant, the second your comment about the watered down wine, the third your question regarding the language in Matthew. There is also your silence on several of the topics.

quote:

---

With regard the 'walking on water', I know that Mathew was written
in Greek, but that's not what's relevent. The story was handed
by word of mouth for sometime first, and was originally told in
(I guess admittedly) either Hebrew or some form of arabic. Hence
my question. What I was really asking is, even amongst fishermen,
was swimming known and was there a word in the language to
express swimming at that time ?

---

Actually the book of Matthew was written by Matthew. Thus the writer would have had first hand knowledge of this particular event.There are words in both Hebrew and Greek for swimming. The Hebrew word is transliterated sachah and can be found in Psalm 6:6, Isaiah 25:11, and Ezekiel 47:5. The Greek word is kolumbao and can be found twice in Acts 27:42-43.

quote:

---

Again, with watering of wine, the idea may not be consistent with
the passage ... that's the crux of my argument ... that passages
in the bible express to the best of the ability of the chronicler
(original not necessarily the one who wrote it down) the events.
Those events, if mis-understood would be mis-recorded.

---

I was trying to point out that, the passage claims that the governor who drank the water turned to wine praised it for its taste.

quote:

---

I'll look up the other verses though, and see if they satisfy
my 'within the rules' argument ... the sun stopping one could
be a clincher there

---

I look forward to your conclusions [QUOTE][B][Added by edit:: couldn't peripateo just mean 'go' also ?]
[B][/QUOTE]No, it couldn't.