Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Who designed the ID designer(s)?
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 310 of 396 (621453)
06-26-2011 2:16 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
08-28-2004 4:38 PM


Re: A form of faith
RAZD writes:
I would like to address the problem of "who designed the designer(s)" -- even though ID proponents adamantly argue that the question is not relevant to the science involved, because I feel it is very relevant to the issue of whether ID is a faith or not. As such, I suggest that it be put in the {Faith and Belief} forum rather than the ID forum.
I would like to discuss who the common ancestors are/is/were?
I would also like to know how we got here? You know, our origins. Oh, you don't know. You say "the TOE only deals with existing life, go look up Abiogenesis".
Abiogensis is far from being in agreement on most things. As for the TOE it doesn't deal with origins. Well neither does ID. Do you know what ID is? Why would you be so concerned about who designed the designer if you couldn't care less about how you got here? It's a hypocritical question. Once you've figured out your origins and the buck hasn't been passed to abiogenesis then you can ask who designed the designer.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 08-28-2004 4:38 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 311 by RAZD, posted 06-26-2011 9:31 PM Chuck77 has replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 312 of 396 (621811)
06-29-2011 3:25 AM
Reply to: Message 311 by RAZD
06-26-2011 9:31 PM


Re: A form of faith
RAZD, your far to superior for me to debate with as i'll end up looking foolish (i've read a lot of your posts) so i'll keep it simple for mysake.
So what if it takes faith to agree with ID, when we look at the complexity of things I suppose we are choosing between only two things, to design or not to design. Being that im a Christian I choose to believe we were designed. Maybe it depends on what backround we come from, that determines out beliefs. The heart, eye, eardrum etc are all there, that's the proof. I choose to believe that they were designed. Some might argue the design of these things is "flimsy", like the eye for example OR God chose to do it that way. So yes, I agree that ID is a form of faith. Maybe if one were to accept it as such, down the road they would appreciate it as the handiwork of a Creator.
So, to choose one of your staments I would choose #2 as having always existed, and with that conclude (based on your assertion) that it's a form of faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 311 by RAZD, posted 06-26-2011 9:31 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 313 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 3:41 AM Chuck77 has replied
 Message 316 by Larni, posted 06-29-2011 5:44 AM Chuck77 has replied
 Message 346 by RAZD, posted 07-05-2011 8:35 PM Chuck77 has replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 314 of 396 (621815)
06-29-2011 3:56 AM
Reply to: Message 313 by Nuggin
06-29-2011 3:41 AM


Re: A form of faith
Nuggin writes:
Then, if you want to talk about what you believe, go share it with someone from your church. No one else cares. If your beliefs are unchanging and based solely on what your mother told you as a child, there's no reason to share them with us.
Well, RAZD cares, that's why I was responding to HIM. Im sorry that my opinion to RAZD has come as offending to you, maybe you should have just skipped over it and saved yourself the time.
Incidently, when I said the ears, eye etc. is proof I WASNT saying it's PROOF of a Creater I was saying it's ALL our proof to do with it as we wish, weather we want to believe it was designed or not.
BTW, I answered RAZD's question in my post that he asked me to do. You did not, your way off topic, are you new here? I think a big ole OFF TOPIC BANNER should be PLASTERED TO YOUR POST. You seem incapable of following a specific topic. I can't stand posters who go off topic. You owe RAZD an apology for being a dimwit and putting your nose where it doesnt belong. Believe me RAZD is smart enough to handle his own and doesnt need YOUR help defending him. Somehow you took offence to me simply explaining myself to RAZD so he knew where I was coming from. WHY? Don't answer, I don't care. You seem like a real D**K to attack me like that. You get off on it? Maybe you should learn how to conduct yourself in public. Im sure you don't get involved in many debates so you take what you can get. No suprise there. Good luck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 313 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 3:41 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 315 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 5:29 AM Chuck77 has replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 317 of 396 (621828)
06-29-2011 6:51 AM
Reply to: Message 316 by Larni
06-29-2011 5:44 AM


Re: A form of faith
Larni writes:
If it takes faith then it is not science. This is a science thread (as Percy pointed out up thread).
Im sorry Larni, I think you're confused. Read the OP before you comment. This isn't MY thread topic, it's RAZD's. HIS OP is what I was reponding to, AS he asked me to do. Maybe you should take it up with RAZD as to WHY this topic is in the SCIENCE section.
Make sense?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 316 by Larni, posted 06-29-2011 5:44 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 322 by Larni, posted 06-29-2011 10:49 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 318 of 396 (621829)
06-29-2011 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 315 by Nuggin
06-29-2011 5:29 AM


Re: More Creationist idiocy
Nuggin writes:
And you seem like a moron, but I was willing to keep it civil until you spouted off.
The fact of the matter is this, the "V" in EVC is "versus".
If you don't want to have your beliefs confronted, DON'T POST THEM.
It's really simple. It's PAINFULLY simple.
If you shut up and go away, you'll never hear from anyone who disagrees with you. If you want to stick around, then you are going to have to put up with people who are unwilling to let you say stupid things without calling you on it.
It's your choice.
PAINFULLY OFF TOPIC-YET AGAIN-PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS GIBBERISH AS IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OP, AS OPPOSED TO MY COMMENT WHICH ACTUALLY DID.
SINCERLY, COMMON SENSE

This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by Nuggin, posted 06-29-2011 5:29 AM Nuggin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 320 by Percy, posted 06-29-2011 8:49 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 351 of 396 (623068)
07-08-2011 1:26 AM
Reply to: Message 346 by RAZD
07-05-2011 8:35 PM


Re: A form of faith
RAZD writes:
Now here is where I have trouble with the average argument from design approach -- the assumption (faith) that it supports (only?) one specific faith. Please see Is ID properly pursued? for my discussion of this aspect and the potential pitfalls of an incomplete commitment to the design argument.
RAZD, that did sound bias, what I mean is, as a person of "faith" being a Christian, i'ts my opinion based on observation, that a designer is responsible for Creation.
A buddist or a pantheist could both look at the Mona Lisa and decide the painting was a deliberate act, minus the evidence one would need for (ID) to be a Scientific theory. You can make simple observations and conclude design is a worthy option.
I guess it lines up with your post on ID/Deism which I have a few thoughts on, i'll comment over there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 346 by RAZD, posted 07-05-2011 8:35 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 352 by Taq, posted 07-08-2011 1:49 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024