I was given the opportunity to do a paper in my English class on Intelligent Design. I only had 2 1/2 hours to write it and this is what I came up with. I had very limited use of the internet and it was NOT a research paper. The professor is (I think) Christian and knows that I am an Atheist. She was very excited to read my paper. I am posting it here because I would like feed back on the arguments I presented. I told her without proper research my ideas might have a few holes in them and she understood completely, again this was for an English paper.
Any help on the ideas I presented would be greatly appreciated :) I hope this is in the right forum.....
Is Intelligent Design Really Intelligent?
Is life on earth the result of intelligent design or did it all happen by chance? Intelligent design (or ID) is the theory that a superior being put the universe into motion. The majority of people who believe in intelligent design also believe it goes further than that, that God has a hand in our every day life. A smaller percentage believe that we are here due to evolution, that everything happened by chance. From my point of view Chance seems more logical. The ideology of Intelligent design does not justify birth defects; it can not be proven in the science lab; and is not an adequate argument for “gaps” in science.
A disturbing problem with the theory of Intelligent design is the overwhelming amount of birth defects, both structural and functional/developmental. Birth defects are caused by defects in our genes as well as environmental hazards. Intelligent design, with the accompanying belief in God, is that humans should be perfect. We were made by God in his image. Perfect. If that were true then our genetic code would not mutate. Hence there would be no birth defects and/or genetic mutations/mishaps. This however is not the case. The Center for Disease Control states that 120,000 babies in the United States are born with birth defects each year. If you look at this situation through the scope of evolution you will see that mutations in genetic code fit very well into the science of evolution.
The way our species has evolved over time has brought us to become a science dependant race. Everything from understanding our place in the solar system, to the atoms and molecules that make up our bodies, to the types of foods we can safely ingest, we got from scientifically testing theories, which is the reason we have the answers to those questions. Intelligent design is not a probable or acceptable theory due to lack of being able to test it which is why the scientific community does not recognize it.
There are some who view science as a great tool of the human race, however they can not let go of the emotion that accompanies Intelligent Design. They see the gaps in science as unexplainable and therefore attribute these unexplainable instances to ID. This is called using the God of Gaps rationalization. Using this argument is not conducive to science because everyday science is understanding more and more about the universe and the world in which we live. At one point in time science thought the earth was flat, but due to exploration, we came to the conclusion that the earth was in fact round. This is the way that science works.
Intelligent design, as fascinating as it might seem to some, is not a theory of scientific measures at this point in time. It simply plays on the emotions, as opposed to the intellect, of humans. So in the words of Christopher Hitchens I leave you with this “Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.", and Intelligent Design does not give exceptional evidence.
If they were perfect then sinning was the PERFECT thing for them to have done. Therefore, they had no choice but to sin, no Free Will = no sin. Your entire concept is riddled with logical inconsistencies and is ridiculous.
We could move on to the idea that a god, was born as a human, but still God, who then had to die (Gods can't die can they?) so that the God that is man could take on our sins (in a bloody act of scapegoating and human sacrifice). God then goes to Hell (wouldn't God go to Heaven?) resurrects himself (only not physically, but poof, no body), and then disappears for just under 2000 years after promising he would be RIGHT back.
And if Gods cannot die then he didn't die, so what exactly was the sacrifice? Some horrible pain from the torture? ...which the followers of this Man-God then inflict on thousands of others in order to 'save their soul', and in the process, bring torture to heights (lows?) never before thought of for some 1600 YEARS - using their vile book as justification for genocide, murder, and torture while hiding behind their robes.
But at least your Jesus left you a nice celebration where you eat his flesh and drink his blood so you remember the human sacrifice that was performed. But as the bible says, "Suffer not a witch to live", you know... those witches that eat human flesh and drink blood - right?
Oh PLEASE, do tell me WHERE I can sign up! :)
Tell you what, find me a living Jebusite and I'll reconsider -- oh wait, they were murdered, every man, woman, child, and SUCKLING INFANT, ox, and sheep. But that's OK because hey, they were performing child sacrifices right (but not like God did with Jesus, or commanded Abraham to do -- that was ok because he stopped Abraham... but not himself)? So to rectify that horror obviously we need to murder all the children by hacking them to pieces with a sword. I call this GHLF -- GOAT HERDER LOGIC FAIL.
The natural explanation not only makes sense, it is well supported by evidence. The goat-herding, made up nonsense is just vile. And if you honestly cannot see how evil, vile, and disgusting this stuff is then you have a mental problem. But please, post here and justify these atrocities for us. Tell us how murdering suckling infants with a sword is A-OKAY if God commands it, it shall be done! Post Haste! And then tell us what YOU would do you if you honestly believed that God was commanding you to sacrifice your child. People do you know, hear God telling them to murder their children and then they do it, like good little sheep.
THANKFULLY most of the nonsense written in that book is, by all indications, a pack of lies. I can at least HOPE that these horrible people didn't actually murder as many people as they claim to have.
So that's the true story of your 'Loving God' of genocide, infanticide, infant genital mutilation, and 'witch' murdering. And if YOU think any of this sounds 'angry' that is just you pushing your own insecurities on to me. I've known this stuff for 30 years, and I'm well aware that people like you have a flat out mental block against seeing what is staring them right in the face. You are just one more faceless person who is going to ignore it all out of so many people I cannot count.
You NEED to believe it, I get that. You have my sympathy because I've been there myself. I used to believe it, but I haven't regretted giving it up for a single moment.
Because, if "evil is the absence of God",
The existence of the absence of God is why you don't believe in God?
Liz, here's the main problem: you accept God's goodness and humanity's guilt. You reject the idea that God should, or could, be judged (if there is a god).
But try to look at this from another perspective, as opposed to just the Christian perspective. It is not humanity's fault that they (we) are not perfect. We could not have been perfect in the beginning if we were capable of sin at all, even if in just the moment Eve ate that "fruit". The fruit held the knowledge of good and evil, so how could she have even known the difference? She knew God told her not to, but she was innocent... even more so than a child. She could not have been anything but innocent because evil had not come into the world, had it?
The fact that God lays the blame on humans for this is preposterous and twisted. She didn't know better and couldn't have known better because that fruit was "knowledge". God set that tree in the Garden as a temptation he knew they couldn't resist. Is that really their fault, or is it his for baiting them?
I'm going to repeat this: they were innocent. If you say they were anything but innocent, you are contradicting what you claim about the world before The Fall. At least we have the advantage of learning from the mistakes of others that have come before us, but they didn't have that. They were given ONE chance, and how could they even fathom their "loving" God and Father would throw them out of the only home they'd ever known because he tempted them? Would you leave your dog alone in the house with a bowl of food in the middle of the floor and expect him not to eat it? Could you justify punishing him if he did (and he would)? NO! Because it would be YOUR fault. The dog is innocent. It's just doing what dogs do.
I would argue that, if such beings existed as Adam and Eve, that they were acting according to their God-given inclinations: curiosity. They could not have been rebelling since such a characteristic did not yet exist in humans. And if it did, that's a DESIGN FLAW. If God truly exists, it is ALL his fault... because he is the Creator of everything, including evil ("I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and *create evil*: I the LORD do all these things."
You should not be so quick to justify the god you worship because he is guilty of atrocities. I refuse to shoulder the blame when I am not an all-powerful being who could stop all the suffering in the world with a Word. You should not be so quick to believe you're evil and guilty of EXISTING. We're not perfect because we were never perfect, even according to the tale you tell.
By justifying Yahweh's heinous acts, you are justifying evil... and tyrannical cowardice, because He cannot even accept the responsibility that belongs to him and ONLY him. If he exists, which he doesn't. Which much better explains imperfection. And we can all be okay with that fact and not spend our entire lives begging for forgiveness for things we cannot control, and never could.
|“We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes”|
- Gene Roddenberry
However, I pulled a similar argument in front of a priest in religion class when I was around 13 and was promptly asked to leave the class. Never got a good answer tho.. ;)