Re: intellegent design?

The only problem with the term "Intelligent design" is it places too much
emphasis on thinking and not enough on love.

During the 1970s and 80s a number of books were published in America, some
talking about UFOs, which promoted the view that God was "a higher
intelligence". Intelligence, however, has no value without love and
kindness. Intelligence is worthless unless it is to promote love and
kindness.

God is more accurately described as, and attributed to, "higher love" or
super-loving, rather than "more intelligent".


<imemind@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1130382659.472911.4280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Secularism and science have de-mystified god and reduced his role
> within creation.
> Not that xian god had ever claimed any role within creation other than
> creating it and than leaving it alone and dealing with creation only
> through a chosen prophet. But that reduces xian god to be impotent and
> irrelevent to creation.
>
> Just as empowered human mind can produce mind-boggling complex systems,
> empowered nature too can spawn complex self-sufficient subsystems that
> can perpetuate without invervention of higher being or powers. Nature
> has evolved and created a system of nourishment, support and
> perpetuation. But xian god, by denying to be part of creation, ends up
> competing with nature to claim the authorship of intellegent design. It
> is hard to assign authorship of intellgent deign to an entity that
> refuses to be part of nature and creation. But the excercise is carried
> out as power grab - Xian god seeking power over nature which in
> actuality get claimed by xian followers in the name of god. What we are
> witnesssing, under bush's administration of world's only super power,
> is xian right-wing attemting to hijack power from nature, science,
> secularism, and super-state for empowering xianity.
>
> harmony wrote:
> > i heard a new one. it is called the intellegent design - aproduct of
fertlie
> > imagination of kirastani reppublicans. many kirastanis are so convinced
of
> > the design that they call it a slam dunk. which immdly called to memory
> > another slam dunk (from the brains of the cia chief) which later turned
out
> > to be a intellegence failure. coming from bush administration anything
> > pertaining to intellegence has to be a failure.
> >
> > my highly considered view.
>


.