Is there any better argument against intelligent design that the human mouth/teeth?

reply to post by defcon5


I actually wish that all religions showed tolerance tbh, there is too much twisting of intentions with the mainstream religions. Yes, I know some sects are tolerant and others not so much, I just really wish everyone would follow the golden rule of live and let live.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
That's only true if the Bible is God's book. Otherwise, if in fact it is a human one, it is man's ruler that is measuring God.

Then it comes down to faith, eh?

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
You misunderstand. I meant it literally. Physically speaking there are people that literally never heard this 'Good News'. Never new the way to salvation. Yet, they suffered the consequences of earlier people 'falling from Grace'.

Then your back to the topic of predestination.
Now predestination does not mean that God “makes” you do anything, but as he is “all knowing” he already knows what you will do. Like if that person would be saved or not regardless of where or when they were born...and so...We are back to this:

17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[g] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[h] 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory

Now there other issues here, and this can get pretty complex, leading into stuff like universal reconciliation, where God in his wisdom positions everyone in a complex pattern that eventually lead all to salvation.

reply to post by defcon5

as the first thing that a Christian should realize is that we are not better then anyone else, we have simply accepted salvation.

Not that simple, and not that fast....

The second thing a Christian should realize is that is the claim of being so much better

If a Christian believes himself worthy of eternal reward, and the other person not, inherent to that is the belief one person is better than the other.

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
That's only true if the Bible is God's book. Otherwise, if in fact it is a human one, it is man's ruler that is measuring God.

Then it comes down to faith, eh?

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
You misunderstand. I meant it literally. Physically speaking there are people that literally never heard this 'Good News'. Never new the way to salvation. Yet, they suffered the consequences of earlier people 'falling from Grace'.

Then your back to the topic of predestination.
Now predestination does not mean that God “makes” you do anything, but as he is “all knowing” he already knows what you will do. Like if that person would be saved or not regardless of where or when they were born...and so...We are back to this:

17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[g] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[h] 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory

Now there other issues here, and this can get pretty complex, leading into stuff like universal reconciliation, where God in his wisdom positions everyone in a complex pattern that eventually lead all to salvation.

Okay, I am confused, if "God" is all knowing and already knows what we will do then how is there a case for free will? If he already knows then that would mean we in fact have no choice in our actions would it not? That logic would fly in the face of alternate dimensions and infinite possibilities.....

Edit @ Lucid Good point....

Originally posted by DarknStormy
Some people are born with two sets top and bottom but I agree with one of the above posters. If they are such an intelligent design, why don't they have the ability to replicate themselves once they are removed?

perhaps they do but we just dont believe it.

after losing most of my teeth in my late 20's i tried to will some more to grow. 6 months later i had 3 new teeth around the incisor on my left side. but they were not strong and decayed quickly. i resigned myself to dentures.
decades later i get a bump on my left lower and a tooth erupts slowly with good strength. a few years later and 3 more molars on the right are pushing up against the denture. it is rare but the chinese have written of a third set of teeth in older people.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
The fact is that Christians are sinners, right along with the worst of them. We do not achieve salvation through any personal merit, but by accepting what God has done for us. Now if you want to take that as us thinking we are better, I believe you are mistaken. It's an assumption on your part, and not in anyway the fault of the person who has accepted.

For by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

What your stating here is based on the idea of “salvation through works”, not “salvation through grace”... I will admit that this is a problem with a lot of Christians, and why the Bible makes it a point to talk about stuff such as the Pharisees:

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

Originally posted by Darkphoenix77
Okay, I am confused, if "God" is all knowing and already knows what we will do then how is there a case for free will? If he already knows then that would mean we in fact have no choice in our actions would it not?

Just because he knows what you will do does not mean that he “makes” you do it.
He already knows the outcome, but you are the one that made the choice that lead up to that outcome.

reply to post by pyramid head


Just the fact this is a Yale based study gives me pause because is is WIDELY KNOWN that this school and the majority of it's supporters are Pro-Life but not for the reason you would think.

Split Infinity

Originally posted by defcon5

Then it comes down to faith, eh?

Indeed

Now there other issues here, and this can get pretty complex, leading into stuff like universal reconciliation, where God in his wisdom positions everyone in a complex pattern that eventually lead all to salvation.

Yes that is a hypothetical solution.

I can't help but think we need to invent one because we were talking about a religious inconsistency.

It's similar to how the religious reconcile both believing god answers prayers but being forced to acknowledge some do not get answered. God cures someone's cancer, but didn't cure another person's cancer. Or the more obvious, god didn't heal the missing limb of the praying and faithful amputee. The reconciliation is essentially that God had a godly reason. There is a hypothetical solution for all the 'problems'. The question is, are they really true.

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by Darkphoenix77
Okay, I am confused, if "God" is all knowing and already knows what we will do then how is there a case for free will? If he already knows then that would mean we in fact have no choice in our actions would it not?

Just because he knows what you will do does not mean that he “makes” you do it.
He already knows the outcome, but you are the one that made the choice that lead up to that outcome.

The only way I can reconcile this as still being free will is if "God" knows all outcomes of every free choice decision you could make for all dimensions of possibilities. If one believes that all decisions one makes are skewed along alternate timelines (dimensions) then it is the only way it would make sense imo.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

I think I'm stating to see where we are not understanding each other.
You're looking to God like a gumball machine, where you put something in an you get something back out. Maybe something good, may be something bad. Etc..

And what I am saying is its more like someone laying domino’s.
They know how that domino is shaped, they already know how its going to fall, and they know what effect that action is going to have on the other domino’s around it. All action and reaction, like ripples in a pond.
Make sense?

reply to post by defcon5

Just because he knows what you will do does not mean that he “makes” you do it.
He already knows the outcome, but you are the one that made the choice that lead up to that outcome.

Right. I wouldn't argue it from the perspective of omniscience but of omnibenevolence.

God creates all the conditions in order for you to sin, creates you with a sin-prone nature, the will to act on it, and punishes by death and disease and torture (sometimes eternally), if you do what he always knew you would do.

Great god was true to his word on free-will, that doesn't somehow justify this as morally good.

reply to post by Darkphoenix77
If you and I were in a casino, and you were throwing craps.
Lets say I already knew in advance whether or not you would win or lose.
Does my foreknowledge stop you from throwing the dice?
Throwing the dice is your free will, my knowledge of the outcome does not stop you from doing so.

reply to post by defcon5

I think I'm stating to see where we are not understanding each other.
You're looking to God like a gumball machine, where you put something in an you get something back out.

Trust me I am most definitely not looking at God in any such manner. I have my God-belief and I separate it from 'Biblical god'. However I seem to be viewing god right now is only in context and in response to religious dogma.

And what I am saying is its more like someone laying domino’s.
They know how that domino is shaped, they already know how its going to fall, and they know what effect that action is going to have on the other domino’s around it. All action and reaction, like ripples in a pond.
Make sense?

Does that make sense. Yes.

But what are you representing here? If it's the Bible I will argue back and forth with you all day and night long whether the Bible is actually consistent with many 'solutions' you would bring forth to make sense of it all.

If you're speaking in hypothetical. Or just wanting to have a metaphysical conversation about God, that's one thing. But if you are claiming the Bible to be the Word of God, I am going to press whether what you're saying is consistent with the Bible.

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by Darkphoenix77

 

If you and I were in a casino, and you were throwing craps.
Lets say I already knew in advance whether or not you would win or lose.
Does my foreknowledge stop you from throwing the dice?
Throwing the dice is your free will, my knowledge of the outcome does not stop you from doing so.

There would be 2 outcomes though, one where I throw the dice and one where I do not. Therefore doesn't it make sense that God would know the outcome for both actions? If you believe in free will that is it would make sense that he knows all contingencies and would know the outcome on 2 different timelines based on which choice I make as in a different reality I may choose the other choice.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
punishes by death and disease and torture

Here is another area where you are not “getting” what I'm saying. My fault, I'm not the best writer, this is getting confusing to explain, and I'm getting tired.

God is not actively punishing you when bad stuff happens, even though it may seem like it to us.

What happens is the consequence of our own actions under the “law”.

So, for example, God didn't punish Adam and Eve by throwing them out of the garden, they were unable to stay there because they were no longer under grace and became sinful. The other stuff (death, etc.) was from sin, and being subjected to the world, it was not a punishment from God.

Again, actions and reactions. Acts and consequences.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
God creates all the conditions in order for you to sin, creates you with a sin-prone nature, the will to act on it, and punishes by death and disease and torture (sometimes eternally), if you do what he always knew you would do.

We're getting into what is the motivation of God, and the answer is that we can only speculate based on what we know. We know that man was the pinnacle of creation and the angels used to stand in fear of us. We know that God wanted man to have free will. We know that there was an angel involved in our fall from grace, and we know that God never extended a second chance to the angles that he did to us humans.

So perhaps God knew that any being that he created with “free will” would eventually screw up and fall. SO he set a plan in motion that allowed this to happen, yet still, because there was 'third-party interference' allowed him to be able to save us down the road by re-extending us a second chance at grace.

But, I mean, we just don't know, all we can do is guess.

As far as sin goes, sin is not created, sin exists because God exists. Sort of like how negative has to exist because positive does. Going outside the “will of God” is sin.

reply to post by Darkphoenix77

We don't really know if both happen. That is scientific theory and we have no way to prove it. We don't know that the time-line in fact branches with every choice made or not.

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by Darkphoenix77

 

We don't really know if both happen. That is scientific theory and we have no way to prove it. We don't know that the time-line in fact branches with every choice made or not.

I spose not. I think it makes sense however.

reply to post by pyramid head

Soooo if you dont have spontaneous generation or random chemical reactions, then how do you have evolution? I understand the two have different definitions, but that does not mean they are not related. Again, basic bio. Not arguing creationism, ID and Morowitz reinforces that. Thats why I used him. Other than a spelling error not really seeing your point.

Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. After life originates, evolution applies. The origin of life and evolution are separate issues. They are often cobbled together by creationists and ID believers, but not in science. Basic biology states that the origin of life and evolution are not related. Basic bio.

Morowitz does not reinforce anything about ID or creationism. Morowitz is often misrepresented by creationist and ID proponents. You used Morowitz in the same manner as those that misrepresent his work. That's why you used him.

Here is the point.

If a coin were flipped many times and it came up close to heads half the time and tails half the time we'd suppose that this were a event expressing a type of randomness we call uniformly random. That means that the coin is behaving not only randomly, but the outcome is evenly distributed amongst the possible outcomes. It is possible for an even number of heads and tails as the outcome without the events being random. It is also possible for the outcome to be random, but due to the physical properties of the coin, heads are much more common that tails. You have to be careful when it comes to saying random. People say it without thinking about what it means and often people have different ideas about what random means.

What Morowitz is saying is that the outcome we see is unlikely to be due to independent random events. That word independent is crucial. It means that events that happen do not influence future events. Morowitz suggests that there are things about how chemistry works and how physics works that constrain events. These constraints mean that the assumption that life arose from independent random events does not apply.

Here is where the misrepresentation comes into play. Morowitz suggests that there are physical laws that apply that constrain the possibilities just as a coin can be made to be more likely heads. Proponents of ID and creationism claim that some entity is constraining the events. That is not what Morowitz states.

Originally posted by Darkphoenix77

Originally posted by Grimpachi

Originally posted by GoldenOne23
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

If this is all so ridiculous to you, how to you explain the pull between good and evil?

That is a philosophical question heavily reliant on one’s own perception.

Some religion and entire religions believe cow is a sacred animal do you see the conundrum?

I will agree that in situations the definition enters a grey area, but some things are hard to argue. I would say to murder someone in cold blood is most definately something that can be classified as an evil act. I would also say that performing an act of heroism example: running into a burning orphanage to save a babies life from certain death could be classified as good. Just my perceptions, of course.

edit on 26-2-2013 by Darkphoenix77 because: typo

Sorry it is taking me so long to respond to you. I was exhausted last night and was having a hard time responding to others clearly. I should have just gone to sleep but you know how it goes when some post erks you.

I would still say it is perception. There are stories in the bible of murder and there is one that stands out to me. I can’t remember the names but god was going to have a father kill his son to prove his devotion/loyalty whatever you want to call it but he stopped him just before he could. If he had killed his son would we classify God as evil or the father? Consider this we perceive god as good so they could not be considered evil. Good and evil is only a matter of perception. I know there are others stories where god smites people consider the flood so does that make god evil?

Consider the death penalty and social acceptance. Some consider it evil while others do not it is all a matter of perception.