From: Joel Cannon (jcannon@jcannon.washjeff.edu)
Date: Wed Apr 09 2003 - 14:45:01 EDT
"For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God
has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his
eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have
been understood and seen through the things he has made so they
are without excuse." (Rom. 1:19,20 NRSV)
Intelligent design's goal (repeated in previous posts and by
Wiker) of justifying belief in an intelligent designer through
creation runs counter to what Paul is saying here (and what many, if
not the vast majority of biblical commentators [1] find the passage's
significance to be). Firstly, the passage seems to emphasize that
natural revelation is ineffective, at least in most cases.[2] The
extended passage's point is that we are all "without excuse." In this
context, Romans 1:19 and 20 emphasizes that people are without excuse
"because God has shown it to them." How can a passage proclaiming
Creation to be generally ineffective at creating faith (and the basis
of God's judgement) warrant Creation's use as an essential
intellectual foundation (and evangelistic tool)? The intelligent
design program attempts to encourage faith using precisely what the
passage says is ineffective at such a task.
Secondly, Intelligent design proponents' association of general
revelation with so-called "intelligent causes" (a structure's
resistance to traditional scientific explanation) also runs counter to
the sense of the passage. "The things he has made" refers to all of
Creation. But identifying isolated structures (e.g. the bacterial
flagella), that allegedly exhibit "intelligent causes" as the
fingerprint of God implies that natural wonders like the Cascade
Mountains, the Grand Canyon, and the stars and galaxies of the sky
(for which the causes and history are well-understood scientifically
and thus show no "intelligent causes") do not have God's
fingerprints. Everyday events such as sunsets or thunderstorms are
also excluded. One cannot have it both ways. If God's fingerprint is a
structure's resistance to traditional scientific explanation, then the
vast part of Creation explainable by traditional science
("unintelligent causes" in intelligent design language) does not have
God's fingerprints. All Creation does not declare the glory of God if
intelligent causes are the fingerprint of God.
*********************************************************
[1] A survey of the following Romans commentaries failed to locate any
suggestion that these verses warrant use of Creation as either an
evangelistic tool, or an intellectual foundation for Christianity:
Douglas Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary
on the New Testament, p. 105,106, Eerdmans, 1996. C.E.B. Cranfield,
Romans, A Shorter Commentary, Eerdmans, 1985. John R. W. Stott, The
Message of Romans, p. 70-76, InterVarsity Press. John Murray, The
Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New
Testament, Eerdmans, 1988. James D.G. Dunn, Romans 1-8, Word
Biblical Commentary, Word, 1988.
[2] Consider Moo, " For Paul makes clear that "natural revelation" in
and of itself, leads to a negative result. That Paul teaches the
reality of a revelation of God in nature to all people, this text
makes clear. But it is equally obvious that this revelation is
universally rejected, as people turn from knowledge of God to gods of
their own making (cf. vv. 22ff.)?natural revelation leads not to
salvation but to the demonstration that God's condemnation is just."
p. 105, 106
.------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel W. Cannon | (724)223-6146
Physics Department | jcannon@washjeff.edu
Washington and Jefferson College |
Washington, PA 15301 |
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Apr 10 2003 - 16:42:10 EDT