• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A complex case against intelligent design

dfnj

Well-Known Member
My basic premise is our design doesn't appear to be intelligent as much as it could be. There are so many problems with the human body. The fact that disease exists at all is an indication of imperfections in the design. For example, take DNA and cancer. The DNA mechanism certainly could be more corrective to make cancer impossible. Another example, is limb regeneration or regeneration in general. We have to many organs and body parts that are not capable of regeneration. Yet cuts in skin can regenerate and heal.

I'm sure there are hundreds more I could cite. But my basic premise is a truly intelligent design, and assuming it was God doing the design, there is so much room for improvements it just doesn't seem an intelligent agent was consciously involved. You would think with God's infinite capacity for intelligence if God were the agent our bodies would be more tightly organized and self-correcting.

It seems to me evolution and adaptation is better explanation for what we experience in our lives. Say you have a million apes running around and one get's a gene upgrade or improvement. It takes hundreds of generations before the change migrates throughout the entire species if it migrates at all. There are so many differences and quirks in human genes it seems to me migratory adaptation is the only explanation to explain all the inconsistencies across the entire population.
 

Axe Elf

Prophet
While I do believe that evolution is the mechanism of creation, I think this argument fails for the same reason as the arguments that God is not benevolent because there are so many bad things in the world.

An omnibenevolent God would WANT to create the best of all possible universes. An omniscient God would know HOW to create the best of all possible universes. And an omnipotent God would have the POWER to create the best of all possible universes. Therefore, if an omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent God exists, then we are forced to conclude that we live in the best of all possible universes.

Anything that we think could be "better" is just a manifestation of our own profoundly limited (in time and space) perspective, as it would require something like omniscience on our own part to say definitively that the chain of events resulting from ANY change in the universe as it is would make the universe better overall.

We really don't know if the human body is as perfect as it can possibly be for this time and place or not, so assuming that it is not is an unwarranted assumption.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
My basic premise is our design doesn't appear to be intelligent as much as it could be. There are so many problems with the human body. The fact that disease exists at all is an indication of imperfections in the design. For example, take DNA and cancer. The DNA mechanism certainly could be more corrective to make cancer impossible. Another example, is limb regeneration or regeneration in general. We have to many organs and body parts that are not capable of regeneration. Yet cuts in skin can regenerate and heal.

I'm sure there are hundreds more I could cite. But my basic premise is a truly intelligent design, and assuming it was God doing the design, there is so much room for improvements it just doesn't seem an intelligent agent was consciously involved. You would think with God's infinite capacity for intelligence if God were the agent our bodies would be more tightly organized and self-correcting.

It seems to me evolution and adaptation is better explanation for what we experience in our lives. Say you have a million apes running around and one get's a gene upgrade or improvement. It takes hundreds of generations before the change migrates throughout the entire species if it migrates at all. There are so many differences and quirks in human genes it seems to me migratory adaptation is the only explanation to explain all the inconsistencies across the entire population.
ID is just a social engineering project, started by a US lawyer, to try to get God into school science teaching. It never was science in the first place and is in fact anti-science, as it argues we should all stop researching, fold our arms and say "Goddidit". :D

As you point out the problem with creation, however it was brought about, remains that it contains a lot of pain, suffering and death. However this is a fundamental issue in Christianity, for which I have never heard a compelling explanation. I expect a cdesign proponentsist will argue that the Creator introduced these defects deliberately for whatever purpose they serve.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
While I do believe that evolution is the mechanism of creation, I think this argument fails for the same reason as the arguments that God is not benevolent because there are so many bad things in the world.

An omnibenevolent God would WANT to create the best of all possible universes. An omniscient God would know HOW to create the best of all possible universes. And an omnipotent God would have the POWER to create the best of all possible universes. Therefore, if an omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent God exists, then we are forced to conclude that we live in the best of all possible universes.

Anything that we think could be "better" is just a manifestation of our own profoundly limited (in time and space) perspective, as it would require something like omniscience on our own part to say definitively that the chain of events resulting from ANY change in the universe as it is would make the universe better overall.

We really don't know if the human body is as perfect as it can possibly be for this time and place or not, so assuming that it is not is an unwarranted assumption.

With all due respect, this attitude of yours in Italian would be called "to want to have 2 feet in 1 shoe"

That is, you cannot accept that God has never controlled the biochemical mechanisms of evolution...also because it would contradicts some Protestant principles you believe in.
 
Last edited:

Axe Elf

Prophet
With all due respect, this attitude of yours in Italian would be called "to want to have 2 shoes in 1 foot"

That is, you cannot accept that God has never controlled the biochemical mechanisms of evolution...also because it would contradicts some Protestant principles you believe in.

The "2 shoes in 1 foot" thing doesn't make any sense, but your statement of my position is too limiting. I cannot accept that God does not control EVERYTHING, period. Since we know that time and space are but two aspects of the same thing, I believe that God created all of time when He created all of space--every moment just as purposefully structured as every millimeter.

So I believe that the patterns of smoke rising from the California wildfires are just as structured by God as the mechanisms of evolution. But that's just speculation; it changes nothing about the observable biochemical mechanisms of evolution, nor the observable patterns of wind and heat that determine smoke patterns.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
The "2 shoes in 1 foot" thing doesn't make any sense, but your statement of my position is too limiting. I cannot accept that God does not control EVERYTHING, period. Since we know that time and space are but two aspects of the same thing, I believe that God created all of time when He created all of space--every moment just as purposefully structured as every millimeter.

So I believe that the patterns of smoke rising from the California wildfires are just as structured by God as the mechanisms of evolution. But that's just speculation; it changes nothing about the observable biochemical mechanisms of evolution, nor the observable patterns of wind and heat that determine smoke patterns.

That's too abstract. I am a materialist...I believe in matter first. I believe God has never designed the giraffe also because no god would project a ridiculous neck like that.

Not to mention the smoke patterns...just casual combinations of visual and olfactory effects
 

dfnj

Well-Known Member
While I do believe that evolution is the mechanism of creation, I think this argument fails for the same reason as the arguments that God is not benevolent because there are so many bad things in the world.

An omnibenevolent God would WANT to create the best of all possible universes.

I've heard it argued God has created the best possible Universe by us having our imperfections. There are trade-offs in every design decision. By having imperfections we have disease and suffering. But our imperfections are also possible our greatest source of creativity as we try to overcome our own weaknesses with our own devices.
 

Axe Elf

Prophet
That's too abstract. I am a materialist...I believe in matter first. I believe God has never designed the giraffe also because no god would project a ridiculous neck like that.

Not to mention the smoke patterns...just casual combinations of visual and olfactory effects

I am also a scientist, so I understand your position as well. Science has to do only with the material world, though, and has little to say about spirituality--other than that for the purposes of science, it is irrelevant.

But God did give me a thumbs-up emoji in the clouds once...

upload_2018-11-26_11-17-12.png


36899267_1592770634185260_5478084177339351040_n.jpg
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
My basic premise is our design doesn't appear to be intelligent as much as it could be. There are so many problems with the human body. The fact that disease exists at all is an indication of imperfections in the design. For example, take DNA and cancer. The DNA mechanism certainly could be more corrective to make cancer impossible. Another example, is limb regeneration or regeneration in general. We have to many organs and body parts that are not capable of regeneration. Yet cuts in skin can regenerate and heal.

I'm sure there are hundreds more I could cite. But my basic premise is a truly intelligent design, and assuming it was God doing the design, there is so much room for improvements it just doesn't seem an intelligent agent was consciously involved. You would think with God's infinite capacity for intelligence if God were the agent our bodies would be more tightly organized and self-correcting.

It seems to me evolution and adaptation is better explanation for what we experience in our lives. Say you have a million apes running around and one get's a gene upgrade or improvement. It takes hundreds of generations before the change migrates throughout the entire species if it migrates at all. There are so many differences and quirks in human genes it seems to me migratory adaptation is the only explanation to explain all the inconsistencies across the entire population.
God made Adam perfect but he sinned. So his descendants are not perfect. Death has a grip on everyone now. Along with his buddy decay.
 

Axe Elf

Prophet
I've heard it argued God has created the best possible Universe by us having our imperfections. There are trade-offs in every design decision. By having imperfections we have disease and suffering. But our imperfections are also possible our greatest source of creativity as we try to overcome our own weaknesses with our own devices.

That's one way of looking at it. The bottom line is that we just don't KNOW that things would be better if anything were different--and that if we believe that the omni-God exists, then we are logically forced to conclude that nothing COULD be any better.

I've always kind of seen it as a yin-yang kind of a thing. We can't know what pleasure is unless we can contrast it to pain. We can't know what "good" is without contrasting it to "evil." Even an omnipotent God can't do anything whatsoever (like make a four-sided triangle or a one-sided coin); so God created good AND evil because He couldn't create a one-sided coin, and having the coin is better than not having the coin (thereby not being able to know goodness at all).
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
I am also a scientist, so I understand your position as well. Science has to do only with the material world, though, and has little to say about spirituality--other than that for the purposes of science, it is irrelevant.

But God did give me a thumbs-up emoji in the clouds once...

View attachment 25647

36899267_1592770634185260_5478084177339351040_n.jpg
I respect and admire your big faith...it's precious.
it would be great if such a God existed:)
 

dfnj

Well-Known Member
That's too abstract. I am a materialist...I believe in matter first. I believe God has never designed the giraffe also because no god would project a ridiculous neck like that.

Not to mention the smoke patterns...just casual combinations of visual and olfactory effects

Good video on the problems with materialism:


Of course, every materialist I have given this video to has disagreed with every subjective judgment presented even if the evidence clearly contradicts their dogma.

Even though I think being a materialist is a philosophical position with many problems, I do see your point about giraffe's having long necks could be evidence for non-intelligent design.
 

dfnj

Well-Known Member
I am also a scientist, so I understand your position as well. Science has to do only with the material world, though, and has little to say about spirituality--other than that for the purposes of science, it is irrelevant.
But God did give me a thumbs-up emoji in the clouds once...

Those don't look like thumbs to me!
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
While I do believe that evolution is the mechanism of creation, I think this argument fails for the same reason as the arguments that God is not benevolent because there are so many bad things in the world.

An omnibenevolent God would WANT to create the best of all possible universes. An omniscient God would know HOW to create the best of all possible universes. And an omnipotent God would have the POWER to create the best of all possible universes. Therefore, if an omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent God exists, then we are forced to conclude that we live in the best of all possible universes.

Anything that we think could be "better" is just a manifestation of our own profoundly limited (in time and space) perspective, as it would require something like omniscience on our own part to say definitively that the chain of events resulting from ANY change in the universe as it is would make the universe better overall.

We really don't know if the human body is as perfect as it can possibly be for this time and place or not, so assuming that it is not is an unwarranted assumption.

So, if I pick up a gun and shoot the first child I see, the end result will not be a worse world than if I did not do that?

Is that so?

Ciao

- viole
 

dfnj

Well-Known Member
God made Adam perfect but he sinned. So his descendants are not perfect. Death has a grip on everyone now. Along with his buddy decay.

I'm pretty sure our omnipotent God knew exactly what was going to happen to the apple in the garden with a naked woman prancing about!

I still stand by my original post. The way our body works does not seem to me to be the best possible intelligent design, and therefore, our bodies were not designed but are the result of random chaotic adaptations from the environment which explains all our inconsistent imperfections we all have.
 

Axe Elf

Prophet
So, if I pick up a gun and shoot the first child I see, the end result will not be a worse world than if I did not do that?

Is that so?

Ciao

- viole

In my belief, that is so. It would take something like omniscience on our part to say definitively one way or another, though; otherwise, all we are left with is our faith.
 

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
My basic premise is our design doesn't appear to be intelligent as much as it could be. There are so many problems with the human body. The fact that disease exists at all is an indication of imperfections in the design. For example, take DNA and cancer. The DNA mechanism certainly could be more corrective to make cancer impossible. Another example, is limb regeneration or regeneration in general. We have to many organs and body parts that are not capable of regeneration. Yet cuts in skin can regenerate and heal.

I'm sure there are hundreds more I could cite. But my basic premise is a truly intelligent design, and assuming it was God doing the design, there is so much room for improvements it just doesn't seem an intelligent agent was consciously involved. You would think with God's infinite capacity for intelligence if God were the agent our bodies would be more tightly organized and self-correcting.

It seems to me evolution and adaptation is better explanation for what we experience in our lives. Say you have a million apes running around and one get's a gene upgrade or improvement. It takes hundreds of generations before the change migrates throughout the entire species if it migrates at all. There are so many differences and quirks in human genes it seems to me migratory adaptation is the only explanation to explain all the inconsistencies across the entire population.
You're forgetting the creationists' "out". Pretty things, things that work well, and things that help us are all evidence of God's wonderful design. Ugly things, things that are inefficient or useless, and nasty things that haunt our existence are because of "the fall" and satan.

See how easy it is? :p
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
In my belief, that is so. It would take something like omniscience on our part to say definitively one way or another, though; otherwise, all we are left with is our faith.

That's why Catholics and Protestants are like two worlds apart. You guys believe in a God that loves those who believe in Him.
We Catholics are raised with the obsession of guilt, derived from a distant, cold God who gave us free will...and after that he abandoned us
 
Top