It would be easy to confuse ID with inevitable consequences of what the universe provides in order to develop or not. There is an idea that there are more forces that just those we know about. Scientists have been studying the quantum world for a relatively few years and it is showing enormous holes in our traditional assumptions. I'll stick with mankind and his capacity to explore and discover the nature of creation, just as he always did.
Replacing the word God with that of the "universe" doesn't resolve the issue. How can the universe "provide(s)" anything when its consists of that which it provides? The word "creation" is an ID term. I'm not sure what you're arguing here.
Science is not equipped to explain it...YET. You still are like those people sitting in caves creating gods out of imaginary designs in the sky and then deciding that they really did exist ( because you can see them) and it must be they who designed the world. Later mankind realised there are no gods living in the sky...that the designs are stars and "poofff"...the gods disappeared. The eternal story of the need to describe some god because so far mankind doesn't have the answers. Yet. God has dismissed hugely over time. Unfortunately he still causes huge animosity exercised by those who are convinced he exists. If everyone agreed he doesn't exist what a glorious peace there would be! God has done nothing but start wars, divide peoples and waste money. This is not the loving god of peace. This is tribal dancing round a fire with a mask on in order to show your prowess and frighten everyone else. His strength lies in there being no obvious explanation for some magic trick or advanced science unknown to the masses. And then we get that those who say they are chosen to speak for god are somehow special and must be obeyed. It is the longest and most pointless, dangerous con in existence.
ID is intelligent design. The word "creation" is certainly not resigned to the concept of ID. The formervdescribes how. The latter describes what. Of course creation is an integral part of discussing ID but one can discuss creation without discussing ID too.
I didnt replace the word god with that of the universe. I do refer to the universe as "creation" when I want to ulindicate that there is probably more to creation than our universe. Creation provides us with the materials we need to discover it. Because it contains everything that "is".
Science will never explain the creation of the universe and creation of life without recognizing there is a creator. We know that creator as God.
Whatever. I note you are now claiming one of the characteristics of the godhead...everlasting foresight. Careful of that sin called pride. It can take you by surprise.
And why not? Seems a perfectly acceptable position to take. We don't know yet. One day we will figure it out and then we can give God a good burial and never kill each other about him again. I look forward to that.
You're the one claiming science will be able to explain creation. Is that the arrogance of YOUR faith?
The question for me, at least, is the worship of God and/or the Big Bang feasible? EDIT: Why can't we just say, " I don't know?"
That would be too reasonable. I accept the role of science as well as faith in understanding our world. It's the hardcore science only crowd that insists there is only one way, and they're very antagonistic about it.
I dont worry about arrogance/pride. I don't think anyone "up there" cares either. I do however have faith in mankind's eternal quest for the truth and if he doesn't destroy himself before he finds it, we can indeed regain that paradise...by using that which we gained by that apple. Wisdom and self awareness. Eve may well have been right to have disobeyed a god who didn't want to be known, so as to retain his power over them in their naive childish ignorance, happy to run around a garden like two lobotomised children.
It seems to bother you a lot that there are people who disagree with you. You might want to seek professional help for that.
Oh give it a miss. Now you are pretending to be a psychologist. I don't care if you disagree with me. What disappoints me is that people like you have no answer other than replying with some ad hom. You have contributed nothing to this discussion about the nature of faith and reason, while maintaining an unexplained hard line position. Have you really ever thought about this stuff or just swallowed the message whole and spit it out in holier than thou condemnation? In fact I doubt if you even understand much of it. Such superficial grasp of what you think gives you power over others irritates me intensely.
That's not me. I have great respect for science and would consider it a scientific accomplishment if they decide eventually that there is an intelligence responsible for creation. That would recognize the value of both science and faith.
Who keep insisting mankind will never understand the facts and nature of creation. What a feeble cheer for one of gods important creations...man.
Ah you like science as long as it fulfills your position. And if it rules against the big man in the sky?
Maybe you need a scientist to explain it to you. https://sygarte.com/ The Works of His Hands: A Scientist’s Journey from Atheism to Faith
Maybe you need to start thinking for yourself and about how close to oppressive Islamic doctrine you are you could start by taking part in a relatively challenging discussion about your favourite subject instead of popping in with mere insults and book titles. I have met those like you who would prefer it if women stayed at home, gave you a good shagging when you wanted it, cleaned your toilets and by preference, wore skirts below the knee. The taliban has just ordered all women to wear a full burka. There is very little between them. They all hate women and love slaves who have no will or intelligence. Fundies aren't far behind.
LOL, you certainly have a way of making a lot .of bad assumptions. Your comments show a nearly rabid hostility to Christianity, that must be where it comes from.
Pixie you either failed to address my first question here (and actually my first entry in this thread) or I missed your response.
