The Knock on ID

From: Dick Fischer (dickfischer@earthlink.net)
Date: Wed Feb 21 2001 - 12:58:02 EST

  • Next message: Bjoern Moeller: "Human cloning"

    Howard Van Till commented recently on YEC and ID:

    "The pattern is familiar: (1) Presume that evolution = Darwinism; (2) Define
    Darwinism to include explicitly anti-theistic, naturalistic propositions;
    (3) Allow no distinction between the scientific concept of biotic evolution
    and the exploitive rhetoric of naturalism; (4) Accept the rhetoric of the
    preachers of naturalism when they claim that evolution warrants their
    naturalistic worldview; (5) Conclude that any teaching favorable to
    evolution is the enemy of Christianity.

    On this YEC and ID agree. However, ID's allowing or encouraging the YEC
    advocates to jump on the ID bandwagon may cost the ID movement dearly in the
    long run. The ID advocates may have to admit their episodic creationism
    (which focuses attention on episodes of form-imposing divine intervention as
    essential to their concept of divine creative action). As I've been saying
    for years, what is called ID Theory is really a claim that some organisms
    and biotic subsystems could have been actualized only by episodes of
    extra-natural assembly. IDT is really EAT (Extra-natural Assembly Theory)."

    The knock on ID, as I perceive it, is that it attributes an imperfect
    creation directly to the imposition of a God, who the Bible tells us is
    "perfect in all His ways." In abbreviated form, according to ID theory:
    God > sculpts > life forms. If so, where was God when Alzheimers entered
    the world via altered DNA? Or, for that matter, where was the Creator when
    any of the over 3,000 genetic diseases, resulting from genetic defects,
    entered into the stream of humanity? If God personally intervenes to
    introduce new life forms, He is curiously absent in the introduction of
    genetic disease. This, as I see it, is the prime flaw in the ID method of
    apology.

    A better explanation would be that the Creator ordains nature, which
    through its own process causes new life and life forms to come into
    being. In short form: God > empowers > nature > sculpts > life forms. By
    this method of apology, biologists are right in searching for purely
    natural causes without puzzling over where divine intervention enters in,
    and theologians can marvel over a God who can know the end results from the
    foundations of the earth without manipulating the outcome as He goes
    along. Divine intervention is only necessary if our Creator is just as in
    the dark as we are as to what the future holds. A God who knows the
    outcome in advance need not impose upon nature in order to bring about
    desired results.

    Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution - www.orisol.com
    "The answer we should have known about 150 years ago."



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 21 2001 - 12:45:19 EST