-----Original Message-----
From: SteamDoc@aol.com [mailto:SteamDoc@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 6:29 PM
To: ateo@whitworth.edu
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: So far, new genetics leave plenty of room for faith
I hope I have misinterpreted Meyer. But in the context of the article
(which
was about whether discoveries about the human genome threatened religion),
it
certainly *seems* like Meyer is saying that "evidence of real design" (as
opposed to, say, Jesus) is the key to "the God question." Maybe this
impression is the fault of the reporter and not Meyer.
However, I would bet that most people, both in the church and outside, see
such statements as promoting God-of-the-Gaps ("Christianity isn't false
after
all because the ID people are showing evolution isn't true after all")
theology, which is an abomination. I find it frustrating that nobody in the
ID movement ever seems willing to come out and say that such theology is
wrong and is a misuse of their work. Unless they recognize that the church
is taking their work as a sandy foundation on which to build an unsound
semi-deistic theology (with its apologetic basis on gaps instead of Christ)
and make efforts to reverse this, I fear that (even if their work is
worthwhile from a scientific or philosophical standpoint) they are doing
more
harm than good.
I also fear that nobody in the ID movement ever speaks against "God of the
Gaps" theology because their most prominent popularizer appears to hold it.
[My response] Allan, I fully agree that a God-of-the-Gaps theology is how it
comes out to the general public, and yet the appeal is there because many
Christians do hold on to this theology. Steve talks alot about bringing the
God hypothesis back onto the table based on the Inference to the Best
Explanation (IBE) approach. According to him, the IDers are simply asking
that the God hypothesis be given equal weight as any other
scientific/naturalistic explanations, and allow the evidence to point us
towards the best explanation, even if that involves God/intelligent
designer. Thus, the question is whether IBE as conceptualized by IDers is
simply a God-of-the-Gaps approach in a different form and I suspect that
many here would say yes. Does IBE then really mean Inference to the Best
Naturalistic Explanation (IBNE)?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 20 2001 - 14:03:53 EST