So much for the claim that the "intelligent designer" isn't God
Via Stranger Fruit and Pharyngula, I've learned that one of the leaders of the "intelligent design" movement, William Dembski, has produced an article for an online Christian news service praising President Bush's recent endorsement of the teaching of ID in schools. Money quote:
And:
Does anyone doubt any longer that the "intelligent designer" ID advocates mean when they invoke "design" is God, no matter how much they (and Dembski) might try to deny it when speaking to secular news outlets and audiences? It's now obvious that he was being quite disingenuous in his interview on CNN the other day, when in answer to a point-blank question about whether the "designer" was God, he said in essence, "No, not necessarily," and then even speculated that it might be an alien race or even an "inherent intelligence" in nature that was responsible for "design"!
There is a long tradition in Christian theology that sees God’s revelation as coming through “two books”: the Book of Nature, which is God’s general revelation to all people; and the Book of Scripture, which is God’s special revelation to the redeemed.
Accordingly, intelligent design should be understood as the evidence that God has placed in nature to show that the physical world is the product of intelligence and not simply the result of mindless material forces. This evidence is available to all apart from the special revelation of God in salvation history as recounted in Scripture.
Precisely because intelligent design does not turn the study of biological origins into a Bible science controversy, intelligent design is a position around which Christians of all stripes can unite. And, indeed, there are creationists who also call themselves design theorists (e.g., Paul Nelson). To be sure, creationists who support intelligent design think it does not go far enough in elucidating the Christian understanding of creation. And they are right!And:
The mask has slipped.Even so, there is an immediate payoff to intelligent design: it destroys the atheistic legacy of
Darwinian evolution.
Does anyone doubt any longer that the "intelligent designer" ID advocates mean when they invoke "design" is God, no matter how much they (and Dembski) might try to deny it when speaking to secular news outlets and audiences? It's now obvious that he was being quite disingenuous in his interview on CNN the other day, when in answer to a point-blank question about whether the "designer" was God, he said in essence, "No, not necessarily," and then even speculated that it might be an alien race or even an "inherent intelligence" in nature that was responsible for "design"!
Dembski's just a jerk. Seriously. Lying to support his deeply held beliefs. How disingenuous and insincere can one guy get? And he has no idea why both creationists and ID'ers have problems with him? What a legacy that poor sap is creating for himself.
ReplyDeleteblogista@yahoo.com
"Whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." Matthew 10:33 (KJV)
ReplyDeleteSo, since god is Jesus due to the whole transmogrification/triple tag-team or whatever, does this mean Dembski's screwed?? (For that matter, wouldn't Peter be too, since he denied Jesus thrice prior to the cock crowing?)
Perhaps one way to approach this is to simply say, "Okay, you want an alternate to evolution to be taught. Since you can't teach religion in public schools, and since ID allows for any form of intelligence as the designer, let's go with the alien-influence source instead." Anyone still have an old copy of, what was the book, Chariots of the Gods, I think? The one that proposed all the biblical references to sky chariots were actually alien visitors. Also, the opening sequence to the movie 2001 would be a good visual teaching tool.
ReplyDeleteGood call Gary!! Of course the ID proponents would call the alien theory nonsense. If only they'd put their own beliefs to the test...
ReplyDeleteHere's a link to Erich von Däniken and his book Chariots of the gods.
It's now obvious that he was being quite disingenuous in his interview on CNN the other day, when in answer to a point-blank question about whether the "designer" was God, he said in essence, "No, not necessarily," and then even speculated that it might be an alien race or even an "inherent intelligence" in nature that was responsible for "design"!
ReplyDeleteStrictly speaking, you aren't correct, Orac.
Dembski can quite logically slither his way out of your charge of disingenuousness by saying:
"Yes, in my personal view, the ID = the abrahamic God. However, that is merely my personal religious view; nothing in ID theory logically demands this conclusion. ID theory merely demands that some form of intelligence exists that directs (creation/evolution/whatever term an IDer uses)."
"Simply because my own personal religious view is consistent with one interpretation of ID theory, it does not necessarily follow that ID theory must explicitly sanction this specific belief; similarly, just because the personal religious beliefs of a theistic evolutionist may not run contrary to the theory of evolution, this does not require the theory of evolution to explicitly endorse any particular religious view."
And he'd be correct.
So it's basically just one more idiotic tenet of ID. "I think it's God, but it could be anything. We don't know."
ReplyDeleteWell, find out! Your whole "theory" is based on a designer, right? Is it God or is it Invisible pink Bunny Rabbits?
I find it strange that 'evolution' has us all relying on mere 'chance' or 'luck' for our origins. Does no one else find it at all wondrous that every cell in our body works (in a natural, healthy state) in perfect coordination/sympatico with all cells around it and in concert with all the other differentiated cells in our body? And that this was all just a 'spot of luck' that made it that way? And it didn't happen just once (as in 'a man was made') -- it happened TWICE ('a woman was made')! And it happened in such a way that the two 'accidental' beings that resulted from the 'primordial soup' were completely sexually compatible w/ each other and were able to reproduce....absolutely mind-blowingly fantabulous! And not only did this happen with human beings, it happened with each and every species of plant/animal on the planet! And all by some freaking, cosmic chance.....
ReplyDelete(not arguing for the existence of God, but finding some serious questions to pose to 'evolutionists')