Arguments against Design (General)

by BBella , Saturday, August 01, 2009, 21:24 (5591 days ago) @ xeno6696

If we agree that "if within every element (seen and unseen) that IS, lies the ability to be what it was, what it IS and, what it will become." is the property of anything that exists, that would morph your statement to "No designer is necessary if an [element] exists." Clearly you don't mean that. What do you mean? - I mean that no outside designer is needed if within all elements (or all that IS) the designer resides. It seems that when we think of a god/creator/designer we are always picturing in our minds an outside being tinkering with elements that he has already created trying to get something right. This would mean the designer itself is an outside observer of it's creation and therefore man thinks of this creator as a god separate from himself that cannot possibly understand its creation. My theory is that all that IS is the creator itself...one ever evolving, living being that not only creates but experiences everything that IS. This way, in my mind, I pretty much can have my cake and eat it too. I can believe in a creator God and at the same time feel that the creator God is evolving just as I am. This way, nothing is set in stone...