Creationism vs Intelligent Design?

[JakeStarkey]

You are looking in the mirror when you say that.

 

[Douger]

If'n what we have is "intelligent" design............. The designer is/was a fucking idiot.
Understand ?

 

[Gadawg73]

mani, go take a class in logic, please. Sheesh, you have got me laughing.

The atheists state proudly they believe that God does not exist. Since they can't prove it, then it is only faith based belief.

Nice try, guys. You are a hoot.

NO one can disprove my religous faith or beliefs. A man down the road is not a Christian as he is a member of another religous faith. NO one can disprove his faith or beliefs.
Accordingly, since all they are is beliefs, no one can prove their religous beliefs either.
Beliefs are not science. You can not prove ordisprove any belief.

Atheism is not a religous belief. You have beliefs confused with science and the scientific method. ID is a belief and never science. Evolution is science.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Thank you for proving my point. You can't prove that God doesn't exist, so don't worry about burden of proof. The IDers can't prove that God does exist. Thus you all, Proletarian, operate in the world of faith.

Wow...

I didn't think you would go full retard.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svwGRJA28lY]YouTube - Full Retard[/ame]

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I know the terms. Scientifically prove that God does not exist. Try it, then go argue with Thomas Aquinas. Logical positivism, my butt.

You can't scientifically prove Bigfoot or aliens don't exist. So I guess under your definitions not believing in them is a faith.

Can you imagine Jake trying to address whether or not he and his surroundings exist.

Logical Positivism would probably make his brain explode.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

OK, now prove they don't exist.

Prove there's not an invisible, undetectable cock cock resting on your head, causing your invisible, undetectable second cock to become aroused because you're a faggot.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

If'n what we have is "intelligent" design............. The designer is/was a fucking idiot.
Understand ?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnWEKi2faRo&feature=channel]YouTube - Stupid Design[/ame]

 

[JakeStarkey]

You guys are fun, and I enjoy reading your posts.

Thanks. Manifold, of course I am looking in that mirror, as well. I am a believer in God, and, no, I cannot prove it. Therefore, creationism/ID should never be taught in a science classroom. That makes reason boggle! But it should be taught in humanities or liberal arts classes, perhaps in philosophy or religion or etc.

 

[THE LIGHT]

I know the terms. Scientifically prove that God does not exist. Try it, then go argue with Thomas Aquinas. Logical positivism, my butt.

You can't scientifically prove Bigfoot or aliens don't exist. So I guess under your definitions not believing in them is a faith.

The absence of proof is not the proof of absence.

It is very simple. I don't believe that the tooth fairy exists, however, I cannot prove or disprove his non existance. Therefore I cannot claim that he does not exist, rather, it is a matter of choice for me to believe that he does not exist.

 

[Foxfyre]

I know the terms. Scientifically prove that God does not exist. Try it, then go argue with Thomas Aquinas. Logical positivism, my butt.

You can't scientifically prove Bigfoot or aliens don't exist. So I guess under your definitions not believing in them is a faith.

The absence of proof is not the proof of absence.

It is very simple. I don't believe that the tooth fairy exists, however, I cannot prove or disprove his non existance. Therefore I cannot claim that he does not exist, rather, it is a matter of choice for me to believe that he does not exist.

However, it is logical to believe that he (or she) does not exist as 1) it is widely accepted that the character was fictional as are all other fairy story characters; 2) no credible person has ever claimed to have evidenced the existence of a tooth fairy or encountered one; 3) no credible people believe in a tooth fairy.

On the other hand there are numerous writings of eye witness accounts of people who believe they have encountered/experienced God or evidence of His works, and there are billions of people on Earth who claim experience of some sort of deity in their lives.

It would therefore not be illiogical to not wonder if something exists that so far nobody believes exist.

It would not be logical to automatically dismiss the testimony and eye witness accounts of billions of people who report an experience with or evidence of the existence of God.

If even one person, not given to tall tales or practical jokes, tells you there is a strange animal on the other side of the hill, most reasonable people would at least wonder what sort of creature the person saw. They would not likely shrug it off as impossible.

And yet people claiming to be reasonable have no problem shrugging off the experience of a deity claimed by billions.

Now tell me it does not require faith to disbelieve the testimony of billions.

 

[THE LIGHT]

You can't scientifically prove Bigfoot or aliens don't exist. So I guess under your definitions not believing in them is a faith.

The absence of proof is not the proof of absence.

It is very simple. I don't believe that the tooth fairy exists, however, I cannot prove or disprove his non existence. Therefore I cannot claim that he does not exist, rather, it is a matter of choice for me to believe that he does not exist.

However, it is logical to believe that he (or she) does not exist as 1) it is widely accepted that the character was fictional as are all other fairy story characters; 2) no credible person has ever claimed to have evidenced the existence of a tooth fairy or encountered one; 3) no credible people believe in a tooth fairy.

On the other hand there are numerous writings of eye witness accounts of people who believe they have encountered/experienced God or evidence of His works, and there are billions of people on Earth who claim experience of some sort of deity in their lives.

It would therefore not be illiogical to not wonder if something exists that so far nobody believes exist.

It would not be logical to automatically dismiss the testimony and eye witness accounts of billions of people who report an experience with or evidence of the existence of God.

If even one person, not given to tall tales or practical jokes, tells you there is a strange animal on the other side of the hill, most reasonable people would at least wonder what sort of creature the person saw. They would not likely shrug it off as impossible.

And yet people claiming to be reasonable have no problem shrugging off the experience of a deity claimed by billions.

Now tell me it does not require faith to disbelieve the testimony of billions.

I want to agree with you because we both believe in God, but I have to say that it sounds like you are putting the cart before the horse. It doesn't matter how many people believe in something; that something is not true or false based on how many people believe it to be true. Your and my belief in a creator doesn't make the creator exist, but rather we believe in a creator because his existence is evidenced by his creation. Evidence is what lends credibility to a creator over a tooth fairy or easter bunny.

That said, it CAN be proved that the easter bunny cannot exist on this earth but that is not to say that one the existence of Mr. Rabbit is impossible throughout all time space and matter. I just happen to believe in the Bible which is what leads me to believe that there is no such thing.

It is all a matter of Faith and belief. Each one of us is lead by his or her own world view. Those who deny the basis of belief as the background of their suppositions are... (I speak of others not you Foxfyre )

 

[Dr Grump]

Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, Father Christmas, God(s) - they are all beliefs....

IMO, none exist, but good luck to those who do believe...

 

[Father Time]

You can't scientifically prove Bigfoot or aliens don't exist. So I guess under your definitions not believing in them is a faith.

The absence of proof is not the proof of absence.

It is very simple. I don't believe that the tooth fairy exists, however, I cannot prove or disprove his non existance. Therefore I cannot claim that he does not exist, rather, it is a matter of choice for me to believe that he does not exist.

However, it is logical to believe that he (or she) does not exist as 1) it is widely accepted that the character was fictional as are all other fairy story characters; 2) no credible person has ever claimed to have evidenced the existence of a tooth fairy or encountered one; 3) no credible people believe in a tooth fairy.

On the other hand there are numerous writings of eye witness accounts of people who believe they have encountered/experienced God or evidence of His works, and there are billions of people on Earth who claim experience of some sort of deity in their lives.

It would therefore not be illiogical to not wonder if something exists that so far nobody believes exist.

It would not be logical to automatically dismiss the testimony and eye witness accounts of billions of people who report an experience with or evidence of the existence of God.

If even one person, not given to tall tales or practical jokes, tells you there is a strange animal on the other side of the hill, most reasonable people would at least wonder what sort of creature the person saw. They would not likely shrug it off as impossible.

And yet people claiming to be reasonable have no problem shrugging off the experience of a deity claimed by billions.

Now tell me it does not require faith to disbelieve the testimony of billions.

Lots of people claim to be abducted by aliens, lots of people claim to have seen bigfoot or Nessie or ghosts or Elvis after he was dead. People can believe all sorts of stuff or be mistaken.

Also I really doubt the testimonies reach billions considering the world population is only 6.7 billion.

 

[manifold]

You guys are fun, and I enjoy reading your posts.

Thanks. Manifold, of course I am looking in that mirror, as well. I am a believer in God, and, no, I cannot prove it. Therefore, creationism/ID should never be taught in a science classroom. That makes reason boggle! But it should be taught in humanities or liberal arts classes, perhaps in philosophy or religion or etc.

I too am a believer in God. I also understand and embrace the faith that it requires.

So tell me, if I were completely absent of faith, what would I be if not an atheist?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

You guys are fun, and I enjoy reading your posts.

Thanks. Manifold, of course I am looking in that mirror, as well. I am a believer in God, and, no, I cannot prove it. Therefore, creationism/ID should never be taught in a science classroom. That makes reason boggle! But it should be taught in humanities or liberal arts classes, perhaps in philosophy or religion or etc.

I too am a believer in God. I also understand and embrace the faith that it requires.

So tell me, if I were completely absent of faith, what would I be if not an atheist?

An anti-faithist

I'm a faithist. What is a faithist? One who believes in god but not religions surrounding a belief in god .

 

[Douger]

ID came about because some scientists realized that Darwin can't explain everything. They want to find out the scientific answers to explain the gaps.

Honest question: Are you retarded?

'It must be fucking magic! All hail the god-er, the magician!' ias not science. It's religion, stupidity, mythology, fables, folklore- whatever terminology makes you feel a little bit better about clinging to a childish assertion lacking any supporting evidence whatsoever.

Then you have flat-earthers who try to tear down these people who want to do research because they are closed minded flat-earther types.

Who was it who killed people for questioning whether the Earth was flat? Oh yeah, the church!

Was or is ?
The Flat Earth Society

 

[Father Time]

You guys are fun, and I enjoy reading your posts.

Thanks. Manifold, of course I am looking in that mirror, as well. I am a believer in God, and, no, I cannot prove it. Therefore, creationism/ID should never be taught in a science classroom. That makes reason boggle! But it should be taught in humanities or liberal arts classes, perhaps in philosophy or religion or etc.

I too am a believer in God. I also understand and embrace the faith that it requires.

So tell me, if I were completely absent of faith, what would I be if not an atheist?

An agnostic I guess.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

You guys are fun, and I enjoy reading your posts.

Thanks. Manifold, of course I am looking in that mirror, as well. I am a believer in God, and, no, I cannot prove it. Therefore, creationism/ID should never be taught in a science classroom. That makes reason boggle! But it should be taught in humanities or liberal arts classes, perhaps in philosophy or religion or etc.

I too am a believer in God. I also understand and embrace the faith that it requires.

So tell me, if I were completely absent of faith, what would I be if not an atheist?

An agnostic I guess.

Fail.

He'd be an atheist, by definition. Gnosticism/agnosticism has nothing to do with whether one believes deity exists.

Get a fucking dictionary, people, this has all been explained numerous times.

 

[manifold]

I too am a believer in God. I also understand and embrace the faith that it requires.

So tell me, if I were completely absent of faith, what would I be if not an atheist?

An agnostic I guess.

Fail.

He'd be an atheist, by definition. Gnosticism/agnosticism has nothing to do with whether one believes deity exists.

Get a fucking dictionary, people, this has all been explained numerous times.

I dunno, he might have a point.

Here is what Merriam Webster has to say about Agnostic

a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

 

[manifold]

And this is what Merriam Webster says about atheism.

a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity


Now I'm totally confused. Perhaps atheism is a faith based belief afterall.