intelligent design, right and wrong

And a society which doesn't get it "right" will eventually fail. There are selection processes going on there too. And like individuals and species they all eventually fail.

quote:

---

"I want to have a positive effect while I'm here."

​

who decides if its positive or not?

---

The community does.

quote:

---

with no god, or higher power that leaves us to set our own standards.

---

You are not paying attention to what I am writing.We set our own standards regardless of belief in a higher power.

quote:

---

you can solve world hunger, and make the world a peaceful place, but with everyone setting there own standards, they can decide its the worst thing ever done.

---

I don't quite understand what you are trying to get at here.How about replying to the rest of the points I made in my message?In addition, please answer the following;If God declared it to be good and moral to rape and kill and pilliage at will, would it therefore be moral to rape and pilliage and kill?

quote:

---

with no god, or higher power that leaves us to set our own standards.

---

What standards are God's standards, according to you?

"If God declared it to be good and moral to rape and kill and pilliage at will, would it therefore be moral to rape and pilliage and kill?"
our god is a just god, so, he would not declare that moral. but since he is god and created us in the first place, if he did, it would be more, however that is totally beside the point becuase he would not. and as far as people fighting over religon, that will always happen becuase there will always be people who are in my opinion, under the influence of the devil. then thy get there revelations they believe are from god, and proceed to go on murder charges. luckily, we believe that is WRONG. so someone eventually stops them. "We set our own standards regardless of belief in a higher power." if you would study history america was founded on a strong belief in god. our laws and standard were founded on Christian/Judeo principles. and, basically all laws, all over the world, have been founded on some sort of "religous" standards."How do we tell the difference between an Intelligently designed system and a natural one which we1) don't understand yet, or2) don't have the ability to understand?"sorry, but could reword that question, for some reason i'm not following you here.------------------

quote:

---

our god is a just god, so, he would not declare that moral. but since he is god and created us in the first place, if he did, it would be more, however that is totally beside the point becuase he would not.

---

But he has done exactly this. Read your OT. You'll find tale after tale of rape and pillaging on God's orders via men who supposedly had God's ear.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

as i said in earlier post. god has not demanded people to rape, murder,etc. this is simply a case of an evil power controling them and they believe it is god.

Or it's a case of God controlling them & making them do evil.

The founding fathers were not Christians in the sense that you think they were; they believed in a god that set the universe in motion and no longer needs to intervene in it. In a sense, the founding principles of America that they set up were held to be based on natural law (as created by God), not on God's law as revealed through the bible. A slight distinction, but one nonetheless.As for "Judeo-Christian" principles, can you show me where democracy is mentioned in the bible? Or perhaps you can tell me why, out of the ten commandments, only three or so have been made into American law? Heck, "thou shall covent" is the foundation of your consumer economy.Honestly, your "Judeo-Chrstian principles" fail to explain why we severed ties (through rebellion, which is contrary to the bible) with a nation whose monarchy regularly brought out the bible to justify its rule. How can "Judeo-Chritian principles" be used to defend two totally different froms of government?Also, perhaps you've heard of the First Amendment? Perhaps you could explain how that's a "Juedo-Christian principle"?

Sorry, forgot to address this in my last post: Hrm, maybe I can give some context.In the past, people did not know what caused the sun to rise and set. Or rather, they thought they knew - the sun rose and fell because of the actions of a powerful god who made sure that happened, every day - and could suspend the process whenever he/she wanted to. In other words "god does it" was the explanation for the motion of the sun.Now, with our greater knowledge, we know that "God does it" isn't really accurate. We know that the sun doesn't rise and set at all; rather the Earth rotates so that the stationary sun appears to rise and fall to our perspective.Basically the arguments for a lot of intelligent design, creationism, etc. comes down to "scientists don't know how this could happen naturally so obviously god must have done it." But throughout history, the explanation "God did it" has always been replaced with a natural mechanism. How do you know that this is not the case for intelligent design?All ID arguments rely on a lack of scientific knowledge. But we know that knowledge increases, so isn't it reasonable to assume that scientists will eventually be able to explain whatever "evidence" exists for ID?Basically what I'm saying is that a failure by science to have explained something, so far, is no evidence for ID because, eventually, science will have a natural explanation.ID is basically an explanation from ignorance. The flaw in such an explanation is that it inevitably gives way to naturalist explanations supported by data. So what's the point of intelligent design if it's not an enduring explanation?Maybe that explains my question. I'll ask it again: What's the difference between something we don't yet have a naturalist explanation for, and something we'll never be able to explain naturally? How do we tell the difference?

You can indeed do whatever you want ... that doesn't make it
right if there is no right/wrong. It makes it
behaviour.We govern ourselves based upon how we were socialised as
children and adolescents.Personally I would be a little scared of someone whose only
reason for not killing out-of-hand was the belief that some
diety would punish them after death.I'm an atheist, yet my personal view of right-wrong (shaped
by my parents and the society in which I was raised) tend to
lead me in a 'christian-compatible' path. That's because I
was rasied in a society that has been influenced by christianity
for the last thousand years or so.

of course the sun rises and sets according to the rotation of the sun, however, this fact does not make it impossible for god to be involved. god simply was smart enough to figure out how to make the sun rise and set without having to control it every day. and, i believe, if god wanted the earth to stop rotating, it would stop. if you want to look at the sun as an example, have you ever wondered how the sun, "just happened" to be in the right place so we would neither freeze to death nor burn to death? further science does nothing to diminish the image of god. it simply shows more of how god does things."We govern ourselves based upon how we were socialised as
children and adolescents"let me ask you this, was salvery right? thats how the people in the south were brought up, and thats how the society believed. but i still doubt many people believe slavery to be ok under these circumstances.[This message has been edited by biglfty, 05-20-2003]

No, not really. If the earth were closer or farther away (outside of the so-called "Cinderella zone") life either would have evolved differently, or not at all. If the sun were in a different place we'd either say "how come the sun is in the right place for our kind of life?" or we wouldn't be here to say anything at all.What I want to know is, why can't the sun be a little closer to Minnesota? It's freezing today! Sure. What if god accomplished life on earth through evolution as scientists have hypothesised? Could you live with that? What if it appeared that god never had to intervene in evolution at all? it certainly looks that way.I guess my point now is, if you're willing to accept the scientific story of how god gave rise to the universe we percieve today, why bother with anti-evolutionism and so-called "Intelligent design" theory? You misunderstand what moral relativism means. It doesn't mean I accpet all behaviors as right and proper. It means that I don't believe in an absolute soruce of moral codes. Human beings are left on their own to agree on moral principles that work for all persons in their society. Clearly, slavery as a moral principle doesn't work so well for the slaves. Ergo, slavery is bad.I would point out that in many societies that allowed slavery (including ours) they used the bible to justify it. The most barbaric societies today, the ones with the worst morals, appear to be the ones whose laws are held to be universal morals handed down from their god. That's why we have a separation of church and state in this country.[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 05-20-2003]

It's "Goldilocks" not "Cinderella" isn't it?Damm, I'm in a crowd of PhD's and all I can contribute is a comment on fairly tales. But then, one whole side of this discussion is based on fairly tales.

But, then, you aren't much of a Bible reader.Isaiah 13:16-- God threatens some folk with the raping of wives and the dashing to bits of childrenZechariah 14:2-- same threat, different time and with the child bashing2 Samuel 12:11-- God yet again feels that rape is fine way to settle things.As for murder, have you forgotten the many campaigns of conquest in the OT. And the events preceeding the exodus? Remember the bit about killing the firstborn...? How about, "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live?" ( Exodus 22:18 ) Is this not an injunction to kill?You can, of course, argue that this is 'punishment' or warfare or what-have-you but the remains that it is God's will. Your statement is just plain false.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Arg, I'm an idiot. Of course, you're right - it's the "Goldilocks zone". Don't know what I was thinking.