Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Christians Did Not Invent Intelligent Design Theory

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by CHA0S
 


Not sure how to put it in other words but it comes down to understanding what we mean by Awareness as there are many forms of this.

As you know my English is not the best but let me see if I can find a way to explain....

Give me a day or two to think about how to explain in another way...

As with regard to records, left by the human species, in the form of languages, there is an underlying geometric pattern, to the structure of letters and Glyphs.

It is the human expression of what he observes around himself...




posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Genera (creator)
Opera (sustainer)
Demoli (renewer)

Latin explanatory for the "om" (Roman AVM):
Agni
Varuna
Mithra

alternative to Latin DEO
from Greek deomai 'sought/petitioned' ('to beg/plead')
Greek THEOS 'a concept/idea'

EL 'to/toward' (an intention)
ELaH 'objective/goal' (a noun)
+ possessives I (my) IK (your) INU (our) IM (every)



posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   
And there are many other religions (every religion I know of) that support it, too. Several of which are older than Christianity (i.e. pre-2000 years ago)

It is non-intelligent design that is new, and attached to a single religion -- atheism. That we have such contempt in the western world for those who don' t buy into atheism says a lot in contrast to the words spoken so far as a state religion in the US and Europe.

The same people who say they embrace all religions, have the "Coexist" bumper stickers, are quick to point out that you're an idiot if you believe in a God who created the universe. And Christians, Muslims, Hindus and Zoroastrians are the close minded ones. Because they believe they're right. What's the definition of irony?



posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake




It is non-intelligent design that is new, and attached to a single religion -- atheism.

What? That is news to me! Atheism is as old as Christianity, even religion.



The same people who say they embrace all religions, have the "Coexist" bumper stickers, are quick to point out that you're an idiot if you believe in a God who created the universe.

But what about intelligence?



And Christians, Muslims, Hindus and Zoroastrians are the close minded ones. Because they believe they're right. What's the definition of irony?

Well yeah the irony is... ah never mind you figure it out LOL.

[edit on 6-2-2010 by Deaf Alien]



posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   
this is the first time im hearing something as bold as this actually.
i mean, the ID movement gets nothing but atheists barking at ID being a front FOR the christian faith. i have to actually use this article now for a debate with my mates. thanks.



posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Still looking for any Academic links or otherwise Scholarly treatment of the Archaic Hebrew icons and ligature, and I'll bring them in as they are found -as much as they are yet made available on the internet- this is really cutting edge even today, though not as "extra-exclusive" as the Alphabet origins in the Zodiac fixed stars!


the bottom of this page has some of the time-icons:

net.lib.byu.edu...

some EL ligature inscriptions and icon glyphs:

www.adelaidegrid.warp0.com...

and for academic orientation this is a surprisingly good site(!):

yehspace.ning.com...

[edit on 2010/2/6 by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU]



posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


My point was one along the lines of political indoctrination in societies who profess religious neutrality. The irony exists, I believe, in that many who profess the idea that evolution decimates the idea of religion say they embrace all religions, thinking their contempt for those who don't realize religions are just mythological attempts to grasp science isn't blatant. The bigger irony comes when those same folk dismiss people making cutting edge breakthroughs in physics as less intelligent than themselves because they believe in this mythic God thing.

But really, I'm just giving credit for the "Just Happened" theory to Atheists, and recognize and am glad that the creation theory did not originate with Christianity.



posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   
The "Gospel in the wilderness" is seen in the so-called "Yah glyphs" in which Ye'aH is a stick figure being bent up (resurrected) by EL condescending and is then seen to fly upon the sky (with a crown)!

To the Hebrews the idea of Messiah (MShIaCh 'to rub with') was that the LORD or named 'GOD' of the covenant at Sinai would come into the Creation as the Creatures and ultimately reign upon the Sabbath, but apparently the dying for resurrection part was not understood by the Judaean people he came into among the Roman empire.

Christianity failed to grasp the future Messianic reign from the "Jewish" perceived Hebrew and since coming to have displaced the times and laws now sees with the same shortness of view then -as though sabbath were past- and now we have passed the commandment law.

[edit on 2010/2/6 by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU]



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by CHA0S
 


OK....

First thought:- Intelligence can Not exist without first Awareness existing.
"Awareness" is one of the components that is required, for Intelligence to exist.

No Awareness, No existence (of anything), No change....



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


When did Christians mention they invented the intelligent design theory?

Two



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


I did not say that Christians said they invented the ID theory.

Many have accused of IDers of having "hidden agenda". Some may have hidden agenda to introduce Christianity. But not all of them. And Christians aren't certainly the first to bring up the ID theory. Though some think that.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Well thought out, deafalien
From The Critias to Pigmalion
these non religous ID themes
keep going on as memes



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by maria_stardust
Interesting to note that every single one of the sources you've mentioned are philosophers. So, yes, the premise of intelligent design falls squarely in the realm of metaphysics, and to a certain extent, faith.


Metaphysics covers things like ESP, meditation, telekinesis, fortune-telling, etc. ID theory on the other hand is claimed to be rooted in logical lines of thinking, much more than it is rooted in emotional reasoning or "faith".

Philosophy does not seem like an offshoot of "metaphysics" to me at all. How was Plato for example involved in metaphysics? I don't see why philosophy requires any faith whatsoever any more than science requires "faith" in science.

ID theory has much more to do with philosophy than religion, and philosophy involves logical thinking. Therefore ID theory is not religious and should not be treated as a religion.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 12:22 PM
link   
ID is what the great monolithic building projects ancient reveal was being acknowledged believed and conveyed by the earliest civilizations,
and it is what the petroglyphs are revealing was the real meaning of the iconic words that are the basis of the worlds 'religious' Scriptures!



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Some thoughts:

I don't think anyone accusing ID of being a front for Christianity actually believes that Christians first came up with the idea of ID. None-the-less, in most cases in the Western world, ID is indeed a mechanism for people to defend their belief in Christianity, which is why the debate is seen as a Christianity vs. evolution one.

In reality, it's a rational thought vs. superstition debate. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines superstition as:


1 a : a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation b : an irrational abject attitude of mind toward the supernatural, nature, or God resulting from superstition
2 : a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary


Definition number 2 sums it up, really, "a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary." ID is superstition, regardless of whether or not it was first conceived by Christians (obviously not the case), Philosophers, or Cro-Magnon man.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
ID was first witnessed with an Eclipse of the Sun by the Moon (as testified by the oldest petroglyphs) realizing they are the same size and precisely line up at times, which became the iconic word "GOD" (EL).

Plotting the Year through Equinoxes and Solstices while counting Lunations revealed that the Lunar and Solar divergences and convergences could only be simply accounted for by mediating them with Weeks (the only Continual uninterrupted Constant).

The placing of Lunations (Months) in Windows or 'houses' of the Zodiacal fixed stars -for quick sight reference- produced a Calendar, and over time revealed the slow precession of the Equinoxes.

But the real great ID is -the gift of Handwriting- that the AlphaBet mediating all languages is a connect-the-dots of those fixed stars assigned consonants, and the seven wandering planets visible to the unaided eye are the vowel aspirations!

they were sounded from highest to lowest in 7 tones thus intoning the Name of Y'aH:
iy eh uw oh uh ah ghah

[edit on 2010/2/7 by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU]



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Sure some scientists might, but I bet you not a single biologist does.



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by maria_stardust
You guys can wax poetic on subject of intelligent design all you want, but it is still a matter of philosophical conjecture. Until someone can test its premise through the scientific method that's where it will remain.

Origins by evolutionary process is also 'philosphical conjecture' until someone can test the premise.

Fact is Neo-Darwinian Evolutionists can no more scientifically 'test' this premise than Intelligent Design' advocates...
...unless they have a time machine.

Micro-evolutionary change is observable, origin is not...
...so Neo-Darwinian Evolutionists must also rely on faith or philosophy.




posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Sure some scientists might, but I bet you not a single biologist does.


Can you please prove this belief to be a fact, that not a single biologist goes along with this???



posted on Feb, 7 2010 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by The Matrix Traveller
 


Well, every single time Creationists provide lists of scientists who believe in intelligent design, they have never correctly featured the name of an actual biologist, which would be an absolute coup, and so would be expected, should one actually exist. The lists have frequently included names of scientists who have never endorsed, or possibly ever believed in, ID.

Also it's impossible to study biology to any level of competence and agree with intelligent design, as it goes against every single observation one could make in biology. DNA on its own, for example, blows intelligent design out of the water, as they are the ever-changing instructions to build an organism. If intelligent design was the truth, DNA would never, ever change from one generation to the next, rendering medicine, biology, animal husbandry, epidemiology, molecular biology, and every other facet of biology, incorrect and pointless, which clearly they are not.

But try telling that to a Creationist/IDer. They don't deal with facts, just beliefs. How very unscientific.









 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join