King Follet Discourses

[asbestosman]

Try, instead, to think of God as ANY and ALL people who are the same kind of being he is,

Okay, I can do that.

and then ask who our Father in heaven would have learned from had he learned from someone else who had, as you would say, already come up with the design.

He would have learned it from any or all (God) who came before our Father. That still doesn't change that there was no first instance of a body and hence no original designer of it.

[Tarski]

asbestosman,

When you say God, I often get the idea that you are talking about only one person, specifically.

Try, instead, to think of God as ANY and ALL people who are the same kind of being he is, and then ask who our Father in heaven would have learned from had he learned from someone else who had, as you would say, already come up with the design.

God is the one who designed us, but God isn't limited to only our Father in heaven, or Jesus Christ, or the Holy Spirit.

When did "God" (using your definition) design the human body?

[Ahab]

He would have learned it from any or all (God) who came before our Father. That still doesn't change that there was no first instance of a body and hence no original designer of it.

No "original" designer, in the context of there being no "first" of absolutely everyone of his kind, yes, but still he would be a designer of some and the designer who planned and created all of "us" as well as this Earth that "we" all live on as well as the universe in which all of "us" live, even if the universe was here before he was born through his parents, as well as an infinity of people into the past like him and us, along with this Earth or the elements of it in some form.

God, our Father in heaven, is AN intelligent designer of us and his creations, even though he is not THE inteligent designer of absolutely everyone else who is the same kind of being he is because there is no such "first" person like that in existence.

[Vance]

Sure, but how do we make an argument for Steward Inference?

Well, as I see it, it comes down to faith on both sides.

They have faith that the extremely improbable occurred (evidenced by "we are here") and that therefore God doesn't exist.

And I have faith that God (the Divine Steward) (through the witness of the Holy Ghost) used the intelligent application of energy to do it. Also, due to what I know about the laws of thermodynamics and probability, I believe that it is far more likely that God did it than that the extremely improbable occurred.

With that being said, I think it is obvious that an argument can be made in defense of a Divine Steward. Is that argument strong enough to persuade the atheists? Nah! I think that only a personal experience with the divine on their part could persuade them.

Edited to correct faulty language.

[semlogo]

asbestosman,

When you say God, I often get the idea that you are talking about only one person, specifically.

Try, instead, to think of God as ANY and ALL people who are the same kind of being he is, and then ask who our Father in heaven would have learned from had he learned from someone else who had, as you would say, already come up with the design.

God is the one who designed us, but God isn't limited to only our Father in heaven, or Jesus Christ, or the Holy Spirit.

The problem with that is there is no original God - there is no beginning, thus no one designed us.

[asbestosman]

No "original" designer, in the context of there being no "first" of absolutely everyone of his kind, yes, but still he would be a designer of some and the designer who planned and created all of "us" as well as this Earth that "we" all live on as well as the universe in which all of "us" live, even if the universe was here before he was born through his parents, as well as an infinity of people into the past like him and us, along with this Earth or the elements of it in some form.

God, our Father in heaven, is AN intelligent designer of us and his creations, even though he is not THE inteligent designer of absolutely everyone else who is the same kind of being he is because there is no such "first" person like that in existence.

If I follow you, what you're saying is that even though nobody designed the first body, that without God (including any before our Father) it would be impossible for bodies to exist either. Bodies and universes don't exist independent from God. Or perhaps more generally, complex designs don't exist independent from designers (or stewards) even if both have always existed.

[Brade]

No "original" designer, in the context of there being no "first" of absolutely everyone of his kind, yes, but still he would be a designer of some and the designer who planned and created all of "us" as well as this Earth that "we" all live on as well as the universe in which all of "us" live, even if the universe was here before he was born through his parents, as well as an infinity of people into the past like him and us, along with this Earth or the elements of it in some form.

God, our Father in heaven, is AN intelligent designer of us and his creations, even though he is not THE inteligent designer of absolutely everyone else who is the same kind of being he is because there is no such "first" person like that in existence.

Did our father in heaven come up with the pattern for our eyeballs?

[Ahab]

The problem with that is there is no original God - there is no beginning, thus no one designed us.

Perhaps it depends on what you mean by "original" and "beginning" and "design".

In my mind, the "original" God is the one and only true God which has always existed forever, without beginning of days or end of years, not to be confused with the fact that the one and only true God exists as more than only one person.

Beginning, likewise, could also depend on the context of what is being spoken about, and I recognize the fact that there was a time when all us began as something, even though we may always continue on our journey to become even more than we are now, while we also have had and likely will continue to have many designers who would like to help us.

[Ahab]

If I follow you, what you're saying is that even though nobody designed the first body, that without God (including any before our Father) it would be impossible for bodies to exist either. Bodies and universes don't exist independent from God. Or perhaps more generally, complex designs don't exist independent from designers (or stewards) even if both have always existed.

You added a little more to what I was saying, but yes I agree with that, too.

[Ahab]

Did our father in heaven come up with the pattern for our eyeballs?

Yes, and I'm sure that at least one of them had hazel colored eyes, like mine are.

[semlogo]

Perhaps it depends on what you mean by "original" and "beginning" and "design".

In my mind, the "original" God is the one and only true God which has always existed forever, without beginning of days or end of years, not to be confused with the fact that the one and only true God exists as more than only one person.

Beginning, likewise, could also depend on the context of what is being spoken about, and I recognize the fact that there was a time when all us began as something, even though we may always continue on our journey to become even more than we are now, while we also have had and likely will continue to have many designers who would like to help us.

That works if you understand all of those words not to mean what they mean in English.

[Ahab]

That works if you understand all of those words not to mean what they mean in English.

It also works if you are applying the meaning of those words to something specific, in English.

[semlogo]

It also works if you are applying the meaning of those words to something specific, in English.

No, I'm afraid none of the words "original" "beginning" or "design" mean the things you're trying to shoehorn them into.

[Ahab]

No, I'm afraid none of the words "original" "beginning" or "design" mean the things you're trying to shoehorn them into.

You should become more familiar with things like dictionaries before you make silly statements like that.

Here is what you orginally said to spur on the beginning of our little discussion about whether or not God is the one who designed us.

The problem with that is there is no original God - there is no beginning, thus no one designed us.

As I was saying, the original God who designed us didn't have a beginning to his existence, even though there was a time before he was what he is now with each stage having both a beginning and an end to that particular stage.

This life experience, for example, has both a beginning and an ending, even though there is no beginning or ending to our, and his, overall existence.

Likewise, there are several different "design" stages that all of us go through, with our Father in heaven being one of the many designers who is trying to help us become all that we can become.

So, there. You've now been corrected, again, in English.

[44Foxtrot]

Here is the scientific method, as I see it.

CHEERS:

1. Choose an idea and/or problem to research.

2. Hypothesize using if/then and/or cause/effect statements.

3. Experiment to test hypotheses.

4. Examine results of the experiment(s).

5. Record procedures so the experiment(s) can be duplicated.

6. Share what has been learned.

I'm one of the many who has figured out how to scientifically learn from and about God through religion, and if you still think it can't be done then I think that means you haven't learned very much from or about God, scientifically.

I plan to continue to use science and scientifically based research to learn everything there is to know about everything, including God and religion.

I learned a long time ago not to believe everything everybody tells me, and I also learned that the key to learning the truth is in learning who to learn from.

The Church claims to have the ultimate eternal truth because the Church claims to have God with us, and as long as we are with him we will have all that he has.

Thank you for the invitation, and we would be happy to discuss things with you pretty much anytime wherever we are, anytime.

Well thought out, point by point response. In fact, that is as good as I have ever seen in one place from one believer.

I do not agree with much of what you said, such as the idea that one can find valid truth by taking the word of others so long as he chooses who to believe (instead of what to believe, I assume). On this and several other points, I am tempted to ask for some data (as we rationalists are wont to do) However, I will leave that discussion for another time so as not to sidetrack this thread.

While I am on the subject, I should add that I am impressed with the job that Asbestosman does on these threads from the standpoint of a believer. I am impressed with his low key, even-handed approach and apparently high level of general knowledge.

___________

Again from the other thread: You know where we live. We take guests out on the boat often and have not lost one yet. Of course we have never had an Ahab on board (captain or otherwise), and there is always a first time . The invitation stands.

[Tarski]

You should become more familiar with things like dictionaries before you make silly statements like that.

Here is what you orginally said to spur on the beginning of our little discussion about whether or not God is the one who designed us.

As I was saying, the original God who designed us didn't have a beginning to his existence, even though there was a time before he was what he is now with each stage having both a beginning and an end to that particular stage.

This life experience, for example, has both a beginning and an ending, even though there is no beginning or ending to our, and his, overall existence.

Likewise, there are several different "design" stages that all of us go through, with our Father in heaven being one of the many designers who is trying to help us become all that we can become.

So, there. You've now been corrected, again, in English.

I just don't get it. When did any God at all design the human body? 50 billion years ago? A billion billion years ago? Whatever time you say, I think there will immediately be a problem with matching up to King-Follet theology which would hold that long before whatever time you say there were already human bodies (and who designed those?) and this God of yours would know all about them already. Copy is not design.

[asbestosman]

You added a little more to what I was saying, but yes I agree with that, too.

Maybe one way to believe in design inference as put forth by the proponents of Intelligent Design while also holding to a traditional interpretation of the KFD would be to say that one is statistically compelled to infer initial design from a designer for certain complex things (like life) unless one can legitimately infer eternal existence of a design. However, to infer the eternal existence of design requires that one have evidence other than that usually taught in science (such as evidence one might use to justify one's own testimony).

[Ahab]

Well thought out, point by point response. In fact, that is as good as I have ever seen in one place from one believer.

You're being much too kind, so much so that it borders on flattery. Seriously. Stop that, please.

I do not agree with much of what you said, such as the idea that one can find valid truth by taking the word of others so long as he chooses who to believe (instead of what to believe, I assume).

Your rephrase of what I said and meant is missing the mark, my friend. I'll say it again and expound a little more just in case you will get what I mean this time:

I learned a long time ago not to believe everything everybody tells me, and I also learned that the key to learning the truth is in learning WHO to learn from.

The reason the key is to learn WHO is telling the truth rather than WHAT is the truth is because once you know WHAT is the truth, you already know it, so it's then too late to learn that truth because you have already learned it. Can you see that, now? You can't learn what you already know, so the key is to find someone who can teach you what you don't already know, yet, while knowing that the person you are learning from is someone who is telling the truth.

You wouldn't want to intentionally absorb something from someone who wasn't telling you the truth, I'm sure. So, the key is in knowing who is telling the truth.

On this and several other points, I am tempted to ask for some data (as we rationalists are wont to do) However, I will leave that discussion for another time so as not to sidetrack this thread.

Lots and lots of people can give you some data. The key, then, as I said, is in learning who is telling the truth so that you can then know who you should learn from.

Without someone like that, you're liable to just believe whatever you think is the truth without knowing any better than to believe whatever you think or believe.

[Tarski]

Maybe one way to believe in design inference as put forth by the proponents of Intelligent Design while also holding to a traditional interpretation of the KFD would be to say that one is statistically compelled to infer initial design from a designer for certain complex things (like life) unless one can legitimately infer eternal existence of a design.

[Ahab]

I just don't get it. When did any God at all design the human body? 50 billion years ago? A billion billion years ago? Whatever time you say, I think there will immediately be a problem with matching up to King-Follet theology which would hold that long before whatever time you say there were already human bodies (and who designed those?) and this God of yours would know all about them already. Copy is not design.

Have you ever talked with any kind of designer, Tarski?

I'm not any kind of a "professional" designer, in the sense of people paying me with money for my work, but I have designed many things in my life just as other people design things even though I have never received any money for my designs.

Take landscape design, for example, which I have done a lot of over the course of my life. Do you really think it's impossible that I could have done any of that simply because there have always been landscapes or landscape designers going back to at least the dawn of time on this Earth?

What does design mean to you, and what kind of design do you think God could not have done in regards to the human body?

As I've been saying for quite a while around here, the fact that some kinds of things already exist doesn't mean someone else can't design another one of those things, just as the fact that landscapes and landscape designers exist doesn't mean other landscapes can't be designed with other landscape designers doing the designing.

[asbestosman]

(img: Meh)

It does still look like special pleading, doesn't it? I mean it's coming down to saying that you should just allow me my faith while also saying that you should reject belief in eternal complexity which doesn't also have eternal designers to build it.

[Tarski]

Have you ever talked with any kind of designer, Tarski?

I'm not any kind of a "professional" designer, in the sense of people paying me with money for my work, but I have designed many things in my life just as other people design things even though I have never received any money for my designs.

Take landscape design, for example, which I have done a lot of over the course of my life. Do you really think it's impossible that I could have done any of that simply because there have always been landscapes or landscape designers going back to at least the dawn of time on this Earth?

What does design mean to you, and what kind of design do you think God could not have done in regards to the human body?

As I've been saying for quite a while around here, the fact that some kinds of things already exist doesn't mean someone else can't design another one of those things, just as the fact that landscapes and landscape designers exist doesn't mean other landscapes can't be designed with other landscape designers doing the designing.

Strange.

Look, you will never get my point unless you at least attempt to give some possible specific answers to some of my questions. This will force the point.

1) What is it about the human body that is so amazing that people think it must have been designed?

2) Who decided that the human body should have eyes situated on the head? When did this happen? (just a possible answer will do). Whose intelligence is implicated in the machinery of the musculoskeletal system or the form of the human hand?

3) Do you agree that if the majority of the most complex apparently designed things in nature may not have been designed at all having always existed, then pointing to apparent design does nothing to provide evidence for an intelliegent designer? Why? Because we then know that things may look intelligently designed without being so. This undercuts ID.

4) Do you agree that if ID theorists are correct, then the human body as such in its most essential and impressive features is designed and therefore originated in an act of purposeful design contrary to the idea that the human body plan has always existed?

[Ahab]

Strange.

Look, you will never get my point unless you at least attempt to give some possible specific answers to some of my questions. This will force the point.

I'm thinking similar thoughts about you, Tarski. Try answering my questions instead of just giving me some of your, or other, questions to answer.

1) What is it about the human body that is so amazing that people think it must have been designed?

Without any design, there would be no standard form for a body. One person could conceivably look like an elephant while another person could conceivably look like a dog while everybody thought something like: What, isn't that normal?

It's the "design" of the body that describes what the body is supposed to look like, and as any good scientist should know, that "design" code is inherent in the DNA we possess which enables us to design bodies of other people who look at least something like us, at least if all things go as they should go without any glitches in the manufacturing processes.

2) Who decided that the human body should have eyes situated on the head?

All of us, pretty much, and preferably on the front of the head a little above our noses instead of in the back or on the top where our hair would get in the way.

When did this happen? (just a possible answer will do).

Every time one of us who can design one designed one.

Whose intelligence is implicated in the machinery of the musculoskeletal system or the form of the human hand?

Ours, with our Father in heaven among us.

3) Do you agree that if the majority of the most complex apparently designed things in nature may not have been designed at all having always existed, then pointing to apparent design does nothing to provide evidence for an intelligent designer? Why?

No, because without any design there would be random chaos with no pattern to tell us anything about how anything should be.

Because we then know that things may look intelligently designed without being so. This undercuts ID.

Not to anyone with enough intelligence to see that it doesn't.

4) Do you agree that if ID theorists are correct, then the human body as such in its most essential and impressive features is designed and therefore originated in an act of purposeful design contrary to the idea that the human body plan has always existed?

What I see is that both ideas are not mutually exclusive.

Try thinking of the DNA of a person being what enables a person to design another person like they are, rather than a person having to write some kind of design plan on some kind of a piece of paper to tell someone in some kind of manufacturing plant how to manufacture a body like ours.

Once you get to that point, you still won't be considering what it takes to create the spirit of a person, rather than just a body like ours, but at least you'll be a little closer to understanding the true design and manufacturing processes that are involved in the creation of one of us.

[zerinus]

Have you ever talked with any kind of designer, Tarski?

I'm not any kind of a "professional" designer, in the sense of people paying me with money for my work, but I have designed many things in my life just as other people design things even though I have never received any money for my designs.

Take landscape design, for example, which I have done a lot of over the course of my life. Do you really think it's impossible that I could have done any of that simply because there have always been landscapes or landscape designers going back to at least the dawn of time on this Earth?

What does design mean to you, and what kind of design do you think God could not have done in regards to the human body?

As I've been saying for quite a while around here, the fact that some kinds of things already exist doesn't mean someone else can't design another one of those things, just as the fact that landscapes and landscape designers exist doesn't mean other landscapes can't be designed with other landscape designers doing the designing.

This looks like it has been an interesting discussion. I had neglected this thread for some time; but now that I have been looking through it, it appears to have been an interesting discussion.

I think that both side of the argument have missed, or overlooked, an important point: The question does not center on the design aspect of things, but on the origin of things

[Ahab]

This looks like it has been an interesting discussion. I had neglected this thread for some time; but now that I have been looking through it, it appears to have been an interesting discussion.

Yes, it was. Sorry you missed it.

I won.