if there is intelligent design ....

Originally posted by moonbus
It's called punishment for original sin. As a loving father chastises his child to teach him moral right from wrong, so God is chastising us. Theists disagree on whether only man is being punished, or all of creation, for man's sin. Some theists have held that lions were vegetarians in the paradisiacal state before the fall, and that lions too fell, subseque ...[text shortened]... s to galaxies (cf. Ross's video, linked above), were here just for us. It's looney tunes.

Many theists believe animals do have souls. Many also do not believe that HIV was a 'punishment from God'. We're not ALL whack jobs, you know.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Then what, exactly, do you think the Creation story and the story of Adam and Eve was all about? Even if Genesis does not come out and say it, I think it can be inferred that God created Earth for man. What does God need with a planet?

Maybe you should have provided this to twhitehead for his interpretation:

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so.

(Genesis 1:26-30 NKJV)

Originally posted by Suzianne
Then what, exactly, do you think the Creation story and the story of Adam and Eve was all about? Even if Genesis does not come out and say it, I think it can be inferred that God created Earth for man. What does God need with a planet?

Funny how you managed to infer that based on the question 'what does God need with a planet' but the whole thread is asking the question 'what does God need with over a thousand billion billion planets and that's before we even get to the stars and moons and all the vast space in between'.
The fact remains that Genesis does not say that the Earth or the universe were made for the benefit of Adam or any other human. The English translation says that God made the Earth and all the life forms first and then made man to look after it and Eve to look after him. Of course it all backfired because Eve was Adams downfall and Adam with the Earth's downfall, and the people most active in destroying the Earth today are Christians trying to hurry up the end times.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
It's a quiet corner of the galaxy. Apparently other parts of the universe are better 'managed'

So, uh, where's the tech support hot line?

I wish to register a complaint....about this parrot wot I bought from this boutique not 'alf an hour ago.

Wot's wrong wiff it, squire?

I'll tell you wots wrong wiff it. It's dead.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Genesis says no such thing.

That is the standard interpretation though.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Maybe you should have provided this to twhitehead for his interpretation:

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in His own ...[text shortened]... s life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so.

(Genesis 1:26-30 NKJV)

Hasn't anyone ever told you not to quote the Bible to an atheist?

I mean, really, what would be the point of that?

It's like asking an anarchist to vote.

RJH quotes: "In this book, Rees points out that there are many values — the intensity of dark energy, gravity, electromagnetic forces, atomic binding energies, to name just a few — that would, if different by even an extremely small amount, result in a universe that is inhospitable to life as we know it. (In some cases, the universe would have collapsed only moments after creation, resulting in a universe inhospitable for any form of life.) "

Yes, if any of those parameters were different, there would be no life as we know it. Endless such parameters could be mentioned: the permeability of membranes within cells, the valences of electrons which make up complicated molecules, the salinity of the seas, the amount of radiation which penetrates our atmosphere, the mean temperature of the planet, the distance from our planet to the sun, the solar luminosity, the time required for the sun to stabilize and reach the optimum luminosity (mentioned in Ross's video), the placement of our solar system within our galaxy (not too near other bright celestial bodies), the rate of expansion of the universe, the proportion of dark matter in the universe, and so on and so on.

What all that proves is just this: that life is delicate and precarious. It does not prove that anyone other than ourselves wanted life to be here or designed those parameters to bring about just this form of life.

Furthermore, if any of those parameters were different, it would not follow that there would be no life at all. It just wouldn't be life as we know it. That proves nothing about why life as we do know it is here now.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Many theists believe animals do have souls. Many also do not believe that HIV was a 'punishment from God'. We're not ALL whack jobs, you know.

My apologies. I know you're not among the whackos and did not mean to include you personally in the company of those who believe that disease is 'heaven sent'. (My mother was a Christian Scientist--believe me, I know how whacky theology can get sometimes.)

Originally posted by Suzianne
I wonder what would be the result if you had posted this in the science forum.

I take the view of most scientists in that the universe is so vast that other intelligent life must have arisen many times and in many places in the universe. My take on it is that the universe is so vast so as to keep these civilizations away from each other. Relativistic d ...[text shortened]... the US. I believe this is why the universe is so vast, simply to keep us away from each other.

I posted it here at SF because I want to test the intelligent design theory. My contention is that a vast amount of superfluous emptiness does not speak favorably for intelligent design; a little bit of dross in making a fine piece of craftsmanship, I could understand--but 99% or more dross looks stupendously unintelligent. Others here have disagreed, and that is the basis of this discussion.

Originally posted by moonbus
That is the standard interpretation though.

Is it? It is a common assumption by ego centric humans that the universe was made for them, but that is not the same thing at all. Can you provide any evidence that there is a 'standard interpretation' of genesis and that interpretation includes the earth being made for man? It certainly is not obvious from the actual text.

Originally posted by Suzianne

That's a decent argument. But what happened to the original 'pagans' wasn't really my point.

I know, was just opening the door to jokes about the Borg:

I am Forest Gump of the Borg. Futile is as futile does. Assimilation is like a box of chocolates.

I am Yoda of Borg. Assimilate or do not assimilate. There is no 'try!'

I am Dirty Harry of Borg. Go ahead, resist us. Make my day.

I am John Lennon of Borg. Imagine all the people... assimilated.

As you were. 😞

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I know, was just opening the door to jokes about the Borg:

I am Forest Gump of the Borg. Futile is as futile does. Assimilation is like a box of chocolates.

I am Yoda of Borg. Assimilate or do not assimilate. There is no 'try!'

I am Dirty Harry of Borg. Go ahead, resist us. Make my day.

I am John Lennon of Borg. Imagine all the people... assimilated.

As you were. 😞

I've noticed that in any potentially intellectual conversation including men and women, it's always the men who first break out the puns. Don't get me wrong, that's not always a bad thing. Sometimes the tension needs to be broken.

On the devil's advocate side, I do enjoy the intellectual pun. This often includes sci-fi puns, because I notice it's always the intellectuals that 'get' the sci-fi puns. I did notice the 'assimilate' but I waited to be sure that you used that particular word on purpose. 🙂

Originally posted by Suzianne
I've noticed that in any potentially intellectual conversation including men and women, it's always the men who first break out the puns. Don't get me wrong, that's not always a bad thing. Sometimes the tension needs to be broken.

On the devil's advocate side, I do enjoy the intellectual pun. This often includes sci-fi puns, because I notice it's alwa ...[text shortened]... otice the 'assimilate' but I waited to be sure that you used that particular word on purpose. 🙂

Two months, six days and nineteen hours ago (approximately) you posted that you enjoyed a good pun. The Ghost cunningly stored away this piece of information (Achilles heal?) ready to deploy against you when the opportunity presented itself.

The moral of this story. Men may be the first to break out the puns, but it is women who are more likely to be distracted by them.

😉

Originally posted by twhitehead
Is it? It is a common assumption by ego centric humans that the universe was made for them, but that is not the same thing at all. Can you provide any evidence that there is a 'standard interpretation' of genesis and that interpretation includes the earth being made for man? It certainly is not obvious from the actual text.

I refer you to the web site catholic.org, specifically:

http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=3475

Scroll down to section V. FINAL CAUSE OF CREATION. It's all spelled out there. It is heavy going (typical Catholic theological jargon). The punchline I copy-paste for you here:

Lactantius (4th C.) thus sums up the hierarchy of finality in creation: "The world was made that we might be born. We were born that we might know God. We know Him that we may worship Him. We worship Him that we may earn immortality. We are rewarded with immortality that, being like unto the angels, we may serve Our Father and Lord forever, and be the eternal kingdom of God " (Instit., VII, vi).

That's the official position and has been for at least 1600 years; it would be very strange if the mainstream churches were to back away from it now.

Originally posted by moonbus
My apologies. I know you're not among the whackos and did not mean to include you personally in the company of those who believe that disease is 'heaven sent'. (My mother was a Christian Scientist--believe me, I know how whacky theology can get sometimes.)

I hope that you know that it was prophecied by Jesus and His apostles that false prophets and teachers would come in among them to bring in damnable heresies and distort the faith and deceive them to draw followers away for their own profit.

It is clear that the Catholic Church has become apostate and many cults of Christianity have arisen, like the Christian Scientists. But I hope you do not confuse Christian Scientists with Creation Scientists.