Evolution

You should hold onto your day-job as well.
Re: Keep your shady cushy daytime job, Remi -- DWA Post Reply Top of the thread Forum
Posted by: crossbowman
05/13/2008, 01:38:32

Author Profile (About author)

Edit
Let us assume a deity. The deity is, by definition, all-powerful and all-knowing - or at the very least sufficiently so to create something as massive and detailed as this universe.

Now, what do we know? We know the human genome contains an incredible lot of crap - coding for stuff it doesn't actually do, like lizard traits and fish traits and, yes sir, yeast traits. Why? Why would an intelligent designer create one being with bunches of unused coding for other beings inside of it? The design is inelegant, inefficient, wasteful, and misleading in that it leads others to surmise an evolutionary model when actually She just snapped Her divine fingers and said, "Be". We've already declared the Deity omnipotent, so She isn't limited to the design constraints we have to live with. She can just Will into existence whatever pleases her - and yet She's pursued this wasteful and deceptive design. Is the Deity an idiot? Or is the Deity intentionally trying to trick us as to our own origins?

That is where the "doesn't make any sense" part comes in. Not such a huge leap as you suggest. Simply the observation that for a deity to create designs that share so much in common - without obvious purpose - suggests a degree of ineptness and waste which is at odds with the idea of an omnipotent and omniscient deity, UNLESS...

Unless you postulate that the deity USED evolution to achieve Her Ends (the extra genes being a necessary part of that method), in which case you have travelled back to the pool-table view of deity: being omnipotent and omniscient, the deity started all with a single thrust of the pool cue and has since allowed all to flow - without need of further intervention - along the lines which She predicted and intended. And, from the point of view of us pool balls bouncing about on the table itself, a Deity who just sits back and watches is functionally identical to no deity at all.

"Robbins’s claim fails because the Hobbs Act does not apply when the National Government is the intended beneficiary of the allegedly extortionate acts."

WILKIE ET AL. v. ROBBINS. David H. Souter, Justice, U.S. Supreme Court
with John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy,
Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer, and Samuel Alito concurring.


Post Reply | Email Friend | Alert Where am i? Original Post Top of the thread Previous | Next | Current page
Followups

Evolution