Science Vs. Atheism (ritual, Creator, Darwin, Moses, Deist)

[Mr Spinkles]

Originally Posted by kbc

intelligent design is easily provable because order and high complexity cannot be generated by chance.

Just had one quick comment here: this is a strawman, kbc. No one is saying that order and complexity is generated by "chance" just as no one used to say lightning occurs by "chance". By your reasoning we could infer the existence of Thor since the odds of a bunch of electrons randomly forming a bolt of lightning are tiny.

The universe is orderly and complex. You are the one claiming to know from where and how this order and complexity is generated. Can I see the evidence?

[anders]

Intelligent design is easily disproved. Any kind of intelligent creator, powerful enough to create life, would have done a better job than what we now see around us. Some of the more bizarre stupidities in the design of living creatures are listed on http://www.freewebs.com/oolon/SMOGGM.htm.

[Orthodox]

Hey Everyone,

I am right in the middle of Mid-semester exams (australian university year). I can't reply to anything right now. However, just a suggestion for Deut. Take a chill pill. You seem to be getting really worked up. Just raise your contentions and wait for an answer. I do my best to be logical and unprejudiced, I will review your post in a few days.

Orthodox

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Orthodox

However, just a suggestion for Deut. Take a chill pill. You seem to be getting really worked up.

You couldn't be more wrong - well, actually, you could and you have, but that's a different topic. Good luck on your exams.

[Engyo]

I know I got here late, but there really should have been a fifth category. Buddhism actually fits none of the above categories; according to the Buddha, gods and demons are just two more classes of unenlightened beings which occupy different realms than humans do. Both are capable of attaining enlightenment, just as humans are, if they choose to follow the Path.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Engyo

I know I got here late, but there really should have been a fifth category. Buddhism actually fits none of the above categories; according to the Buddha, gods and demons are just two more classes of unenlightened beings which occupy different realms than humans do. Both are capable of attaining enlightenment, just as humans are, if they choose to follow the Path.

Why would not Buddhism be viewed as a telelogical pantheism (or, perhaps better, panentheism)?

[Engyo]

Originally Posted by Deut. 32.8

Why would not Buddhism be viewed as a telelogical pantheism (or, perhaps better, panentheism)?

My answer here is that Buddhism doesn't look to any of the gods or demons to provide any answers or interventions in the human world/realm. The responsibility, and the authority, for changing what is belongs to us alone; each of us for our own individual lives, and all of us together for our collective future (or lack thereof). Gods or demons have the same opportunity; they have no more or less power than we do, and they have no responsibility nor authority for outcomes here in the human world/realm.

The Buddha is not a supernatural being who saves people; he is only a guide, a teacher and an example of what we ourselves can become. There are multitudes of Buddhas throughout the universe and time. Anyone can become a Buddha. Do any of the other systems allow humans to achieve equal status with the Teacher/Sovereign/One?

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Engyo

My answer here is ...

It is an interesting commentary to be sure, but it is not an answer to my question.

Originally Posted by Engyo

The Buddha is not a supernatural being who saves people; ...

Again, this is irrelevant to the question posed.

Parenthetically, whether or not the Buddha is a supernatural being, Buddhism is pervasively supernatural and teleological and, as such, no less at odds with naturalism than are its competitors.

[Engyo]

OK, then lump Buddhism in wherever you like. I personally feel that none of the four categories fit, but it's not my poll......