The bible...this book that at some point in time got translated and translitterated so the lhm many gods became one...gosh intelligent design.
Let's not miss the point. natural disasters were later attributed to the wrath of the god.
It's never a funny god that farted or some such accident of nature.
But more cultures had angry gods when the massive draught hit. The most chilling explanation was that there were too many people for the resources so god got rid of them.
By a flood etc.

The europeans had the god LUG bad luck good luck
But we usually do indeed not call it full of wonder if someone is dying or has a parasity in the eye, though it's pretty amazing that this happens.

But we would be aghast is we did not die anymore; cancer of the whole body. Though some woud call it a miracle from god.
We would also not enjoy having no more bacteria...we would stop to function. Mankind has two brains; the head +spinal cord and the independent belly c.q. digestive system.
The one must stay impervious the other needs loads of hosts.

Usually intelligent design is discarded because some small yet pertinent questions are not answered yet. To presume that god would be around, because we are not yet providing the answer would make him an impatient god of imperfections.

But given the variation in different species and even evidence of mixed DNA in softshelleds(Germany) in the Burgess-shale Canada it's not at all strange that some had benificial parasitic relationships.
Life in a protected location was more prolific then it is now.
Apropos: Most pregnancies go well but occasionally a mother gets poisoned by the child growing inside her.

By the way; in the vatican is a secluded room with paintings. One of Adam and Eve and god who has just made his angry point. We see god from the back, striding away... with bare bottoms.

You forgot that we have free will...all life has.
Moses and some intelligent thinkers: God can't give mercy, but people can. It can only hope that people stick to it's good tenets, shines of on it. No one really believes in divine intervention (!who's that naked sod mooning around..., oi!), but we can believe in people and finding out more and the coincidences of reality.
Serendipity happens ever often.
We, if made, then to use our faculties to the full ability and to exchange.

The qur'aan says to use the pen...observe,learn, write.
All cultures had local gods and 'earth' was really a rather small place for most.

Thank you for the answer Oneworld,

if possible I would also like to have an opinion of someone who is capable of imagining something else than a naked mans butt when contemplating the ultimate cause for everything.

The whole point is that the kind of people that forward intelligent design also believe in man created in gods image. But no butts... and no discussion about the basis of their flawed thoughts.
Cause and effect...edges to the universe...tea-party
people...IN ORDER TO BELIEVE IN JESUS ONE HAS TO FIRST BELIEVE IN THE DEVIL...KIDS BORN EVIL,etc
But I.M.O. you were not asking for the ultimate cause of the universe and the rest (and thanks for the fish)but aT most for the thought-pattern of intelligent design proponents.

Questions like this are implicit to the origin of life on the planet. You would be served well to read Fred Hoyle's book on " The Intelligent Universe. In it you will be amazed to find how a former athiest came to gripps with the fallacy of modern day darwinian evolution. The book is jamb packed with lots of good stuff . Its a good read!
Mike

Interesting mike
too bad it's an internet forum so lets start with some questions and leave the evangelizing for occasional interims. Given that the mindset of ID ners is also a factor.


darwinism left a few unanswered questions.
so my open question would be what is meant by modern darwinism?

how would f.i. the discovery of the same dna species, tiny creatures/not olympic swimmers- on the antipodes, and only in arctic and antarctic waters, be explained by that 'fallacy' and how by intelligent design?

As for modern darwinism goes that would be "neo-Darwinism"or "new Darwinists". These Darwinist believe that mutations are entirely spontaneous accidents that happen inside organisms, that in addition nothing else except natural selection is required to explain the evolution of the whole of life. Is natural selection really the powerful idea it is popularly supposed to be? If among a number of varities of a species one is best fitted to survive in the environment as it happens to be, then it is the variety that is best fitted to survive that will best survive. Surely the rich assembly of plants and animals found on Earth cannot have been produced by a truism of this minor order? The spark plug of evolution must lie elsewhere. It lies in the source of the variations on which natural selection operates. Dawinians nowadays believe the ultimate source lies in chance miscopyings of genetic information. It is evident that in the fosslile record we have evolution in major leaps not the preferred pictures of Darwinians of natural selection as a daily and hourly scrutinizing the slightist variations. Just the oppisite. Rather a adding of genes to existing organisms over a longer period of time as if wound up in a catapult and then let loose causing abrubt changes in species. Now I am not an evolutionary biologist. But something is amiss in Darwins understanding. My suggestion to read Fred Hoyel's book would give you some kind of idea about those questions you seem to be more knowledgeable about than I do. Your original question deals with natural and man made evils. Lets discuss that. Your inquiry is ancient. It deals with metaphysical questions. Is that something you can converse on? Or are you an imperical verificationist only? Those whom are looking for truth explore all disciplines and are more broad minded. What about evil? Is it possible that because it exists it somehow disposes of an intelligent cause? How do you account for awareness? Given that evolution deals with biological and chemical processes how does it follow we have awareness? That's not an outcome of physical processes. You may doubt this but. Lets go a little futher. What about moral values. Where do they come from? You may say they are learned. That would be wrong. It has been studied exstensively enough to show that it indeed is a fallacy. So now we have two things to account for that evolution cannot accout for. 1> Awareness. 2> Conscience of right and wrong found throughout all societies from the beginning of history up until now. Later , Mike

Thanks Mike,

I am open to all disciplines and am an interdisciplinarian. I would like a proponent of intelligent design explain to explain why there is sickness and disease - not because I want to put intelligent design to the wall, but because I am in many ways leaning towards intelligent design myself and want to learn more. Why would the intelligent designer create sickness and disease?

I already have answers to my question from two other schools of thought, but they don't put my mind at ease:

1) The Darwinian theory has a good answer to the problem of sickness and disease: there is really no wrong or right, only success or failure in adaption and survival in a neverending process of evolution. In this view there is no higher power that thinks a human has more value than a virus, but every form of life just struggles as best as it can. As far as I know this theory has a lot of scientific backing.

2) The book of Genesis (and holy scriptures from other faiths) claim that God was the intelligent designer and created a world without any sickness, disease or death, but humans and creatures such as the serpent sinned against God and therefore God cursed the earth and put the law of death into place, which explains why there is sickness and disease. As far as I know the teaching that there originally was no sickness, disease or death on earth does not have any scientific backing at the moment, right?

I know that intelligent design is not necessarily interlinked to the Genesis account, but is standing on its own foundation of scientific research. What are it's answers to my question in contrast to the above mentioned doctrines?

Point 2) depends on the proper translation and the interpretation used.

the rest up to mike

if it comes to self awareness and morals they do seem to relate to intelligence and proper chemical balance.
I'm curious as to this research that does not support these findings.

creationism now believes in general evolution (days of creation stretched to eons)but states that species are unchangable, needed a creator and is not an autonomous proces. So when and where exactly was god the tinkerer involved?

Franz Rozenzweig 'Stern der erloesung': behind the beginning there is nothing to think. Creation does not mean that once, at a given moment in time a beginning was made. Creations signifies the world as begun by god....creatio continue: creation is not finished....god works in humans as fellow-creator...in creation god chooses and calls man and world.
http://www.modia.org/tora/berechite/bereshit.html
man is still man but only adam (man and woman he created them) in procreation. there is only one edict in bereshit/creation: be fruitfull and multiply. then the precence of g-d becomes.
Not doing so would be like spilling blood, as if one and thus g-d never was. It's presence that is.
myriad of thousands ;22,000 needed for the presence of g-d.
dialektik and democracy in any new circumstances are/is following in the presence of g-d/are g-d. In christianity and islam prophets and new appearances to enlighten people crop up all the time but in the Book g-d comes ones and then it's up to people.

(The Zohar, by the way, completely retranslates the first line of Bereshit into “With Wisdom [chochmah], the Infinite created in Elohim [binah] ‘et’ [the other Sefirot, aleph to taf, and the Immanent Shechinah],” totally revisioning what the story is about.) A beginning as in Chapter 1.
Were the lhm -the starsigns form the letters of the alphabeth and thus THE WORD. ~1300 BCE
in the days of El about 70 lhm were known which corresponds with cuneiform number of characters. Have to look further into it though.


Marc Alain (1886-1951) on the talmud: we are build in such a way that only and solely through contradictions we can know religious truths. A choice for some or other of these opposites would be disastrous and destroy the work we have to do...only god unites the opposites in itself. Humans will never be able to connect...because of their condition the religious situation is allways broken.

Any pope: we behold the absolute truth.

Feuerbach(1804-1872): mankind itself is measure for all moral. Der Mensch ist, was er isst. (is what he eats)

only recently we've become aware that animals feel pain and a lot have self-awareness.
i never forget reading about the vote on women being animals -around 500 AD-by one vote it was decided they were not...it turns out all mankind is an animal, but it seems awareness and morals were the prerogative of freemen of status most and foremost. Religion killed philosophy.

'Staying with Rashi for a moment: it’s notable that Rashi begins his commentary by asking why this story is here at all. Why tell us about creation? This is a shocking statement. Today we take for granted that one of the things “religion” is supposed to do is explain how the world came to be – and then we undergo crises of faith when it fails to do so adequately. For Rashi, religion – or at least Torah Judaism – has no business explaining cosmology. He quotes the tanna Rabbi Yitzhak’s objection that really it should begin with the first commandment given to Israel, and justifies the existence of the creation story in nationalistic terms: see, the whole world is God’s, so it’s okay that he gave the Land of Israel to us. '

Posted By:
autofire

Discussion Topic:
How does Intelligent design explain diseases, viruses, brutality and death. ...
Questions involving the appearance of these natural evil. Why would God create these natural evils? Everone has a particular way of interperting data. Everyone comes to a particular premise with his own metaphors( presuppositions) for interperting data. This is based on the influence of many different things. For the most part, I believe, it has to do with the stuctures within the traditions that have been handed down to us. In addition, influences like culture; science; experience; religion; philosophy; etc., including a certian amount of bias goes a long was to imprinting core beliefs. In our modern world when it comes to finding out about truth we rely on sensory data. Modern science has given us tools (imperical data) to show the fallacies of things that have kept people in the dark for most of history. So it has to be understood that when we apply our modern day understandings to formulate opinions about what happened thousands of years ago never mind billions of years ago we must be mindful about using the wrong tools. For example: You would not get very far using a hammer to remove a screw in a door hinge. You could remove the hinge with the hammer but in the process you would destroy part of the jamb and possibly the hinge in the process. Then I would have to replace the orignal jamb. I am not interested in replacing something that already works! So lets proceed with the original question. How does Intelligent design explain diseases, viruses, brutality and death. ... It is quite possible these things were already in place before the appearance of man. It is quite possible that these things were a necessary example to show our first parents what would happen to them is they disobeyed the command. Suppose I told you that the day you eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you will surely die. How would you know what is meant by the word death. If having no example to look at you would not be able to coginitively put 2+ 2 together. So it would follow that life and death and diseases, viruses, brutality and death were being played out everyday before their very eyes to provide them with the answer. These things were understood by adam and eve as part of the created natural order to allow for the suvival of the species of plants and animals. As darwin said, without natural selection through diseases and predations, the species would overpopulate within the species groups and thereby exhaust the natural resouces and end the natutral cycyles of life. It was not intended that we were created to participate in these cycles. Only by choice did we become infected as it were by the natural order of things. So the answer is the earth was created with these things in mind to play out in the natural order of the evolving of the planet and its lower creatures.
Later , Mike

God knows us all best right at least thats what i believe i like to think outside the box and pose some simple understandings like can an apple tree produce oranges no not so evolve that right, we couldnt create the smallest anything so why is it so hard to understand were over our heads when it comes to creations leaving me with no doubt theres a higher creater than man, the other thing i know is im gona miss alot of this stuff he created when im gone so he must have knew me pretty well to

I KNOW that God is God and anything is possible through him. He has the power to do anything and everything, He is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. There is no other God, and there never has been. That's all i wanted to add :)I'm not brainy or anything , but i'm just adding the truth.
God Bless.