So your an Athiest

[AAA]

Well I don't think that it is an argument form ignorance or a God of the gaps way of thinking. I think there is positive evidence for design, not just the absence of evidence for a naturalistic explanation. If you saw a stone with carvings on it and someone offered that the carvings were produced by intelligence, it is illogical to tell them "you're wrong, we just have to figure out how they got there by natural means."

In that analogy, the carvings are the product of an intelligent creature, in this case, a higher primate, a multi cellular organism, a product of nature. 


 

I think intelligent design is evident in the many examples of complex molecular interactions in the cell. We have many complex structures that we cannot live without. They had to appear in fully functional form at one time in order to be selected for, yet mutation is incapable of producing such rapid changes. In other words, we cannot trace our evolution backwards because we run into problems when we have incomplete molecular structures that would keep the population from surviving and reproducing.

The only reasonable conclusion is that it's all the work of a giant wizard.

I would definitely agree that the universe is an inhospitable place in general. That is one of the reasons that our planet is so unique. This is just a thought, but maybe the universe was created this way so that we would realize how uncommon our planet is.

The cosmos does indeed provide an object lesson in just how amazingly unlikely my own existence is, however when you put forward the idea that it was all done on purpose, the wonder totally vanishes. I'm left to question why an intelligent creator would fill the universe with water just so he could watch the thirsty not drink it.

As for defining God, I told you right off the bat that I just think evidence points to an intelligent mind. I said that we have no way of knowing if this is "God". I happen to believe that this intelligence cause is God, so I guess I would define it as the force of intelligence that is not governed by the laws of our universe that caused our universe to come into existence.

The following is a c/p of a post I made a while ago, the questions were never addressed so I feel I may ask them again:

Concerning the Intelligent Designer: What does "planning" entail when making a cosmos? Did the designer draw up a blueprint? Or did the designer just do it all in their head? If this being is both powerful enough and intelligent enough to create the universe, did it really need to plan anything? If it's omniscient, shouldn't it already know what to do? Assuming it's a God did it, would it not have done everything instantly? What was the designer doing with itself before the space time continuum? If it was indeed planning the universe prior to the creation, how did it go about doing that without time or cause and effect? How do you proceed through the cosmos-making process (or literally any process) before cause and effect? It doesn't make sense, God would need to create time before proceeding with temporal activities. Wouldn't God have done everything right at the very first instant of time? Wouldn't that be the only TIME God could do it? At the first instant of time? Wouldn't the universe have begun at the same moment as God? Otherwise, how did God exist before it had made existence?

Ok, lets see if I can get to all the points. You say that the multicellular organism that made the carving is a product of nature. That is just an assertion, and I think the theory of evolution has a lot of issues and I think that life was created by intelligence directly (I'm not saying it was 6000 years ago in a garden, I just think that is what biological evidence shows).

You calling the intelligent force a giant wizard is an oversimplification. The argument is that when we see complex information systems, the default conclusion should be that intelligence played a role in its origin.

I'm not sure if you're wondering why people are suffering from thirst? Environments aren't perfect, but evidence shows that dry areas were typically more lush in the past. The fossil record even shows trees and other plant life in Antarctica. The idea that things were better in the past and are slowly degrading is more consistent with the idea of intelligent design than it is with the theory of evolution.

Your last paragraph asks a lot of good questions. I don't know the answer to most of those question, and I don't know how I could find out. The time issue is interesting, but not new. It could be that time is simply not required to do things as we think it does. Or perhaps the intelligent force resides in a place that operates under different conditions.

---

Sorry, I just didn't see your response. And I know it seems strange, but nothing bringing everything into existence also sounds strange. No matter what answers the question of the origin of matter time and energy is, it is bound to seem strange. I simply think that life and the universe reflects an intelligent designer rather than random chance.

What do you mean by "nothing"? Can you describe a state of nothingness? Do you have examples of nothing? If not then how can make any assumptions of what nothing can do or what nothing can produce?

Nothing would be the absence of matter, energy, or time. But I'm not the one who believes that nothing has creative properties. It is irrational to think that nothing can produce everything. It seems like a reasonable assumption that the universe required some form of energy to be formed. I think I can safely say that nothing does not have that capability.