Re: [asa] Detecting Design

These, in my opinion, are irrefutable arguments against ID. Christians have
a tendency to swallow all of the ID movement without critically analyzing
the a priori rationalistic assumptions of ID.

Rather than saying what has been said before, here are two articles that are
absolute must-read articles, and I would highly recommend everyone read
them.

"Creationism and Intelligent Design: A New Testament Perspective" by Hugh
Reynolds
"Is Intelligent Design Biblical?" by Denis Alexander

They were published, I believe, by CIS and are some of the best short
theological critiques of ID I have read, although the theodicy argument
seems...well, I don't quite know what to think of it.

I do not believe a priori that the kind of "design" that Dembski believes
exists should be non-existent (as George Murphy or van Till would say), but
rather science has shown that they are non-existent. I do believe, however,
that it is not a biblically-endorsed view to say that those gaps must exist,
or, as Dembski says, it would be "materialistic" to believe that they do not
exist.

To any ID supporters out there (not to start an argument, but rather a
friendly discussion), but where do you find biblical support for the ID view
of design? I'd be interested in examples of how ID philosophy is biblically
based.

Oh, and please don't try to cop out by saying that ID is merely "science"
and not theology or philosophy. Everyone knows that there's some
extra-scientific motivation in there. (or is it a mere coincidence that ID
supports happen to be 99% Christians?)

-David Buller (ASA)

On 7/20/07, Austerberry, Charles <cfauster@creighton.edu> wrote:
>
> I'm often struck by the contrast between the perceived threat to
> Christian faith posed by evolution on the one hand, and the perceived
> compatibility of Christian faith and other scientific theories on the
> other hand.
>
> For one example, everyday phrases such as "unplanned pregnancy" rarely
> solicit objections from people of faith. It's generally understood that
> "unplanned" means unplanned by humans. Whether God planned the
> pregnancy or not is a separate issue.
>
> Even unsolved biological mysteries are rarely attributed to unidentified
> and possibly supernatural intelligent agency - unless the mysteries have
> to do with origins of species rather than individuals. For example, if
> an unexpected and unlikely phenomenon occurs (for example, a family
> having ten children all of the same sex), God's involvement in such
> events is generally assumed to be no more or less than in a family
> having five boys and five girls. Perhaps a natural biological cause
> will be found, perhaps there was a human-designed cause (e.g., the
> parents secretly used X/Y sperm sorting and artificial insemination), or
> perhaps it was just a random event (after all, one in 1024 is not all
> that improbable compared to most lottery odds!).
>
> But here is my point: if by faith we can believe with the psalmist that
> God knew each of us intimately before we were born, without expecting
> science to detect "irreducible" or "specified" complexity or an "edge"
> in embryonic development where natural causes fail and intelligent
> agency must take over, why not approach the origins of species
> similarly?
>
> I'm reminded of a Sunday School song, "Oh, Who Can Make a Flower? I'm
> Sure I Can't, Can You?". Other verses include "Oh, Who Can Make A
> Butterfly? " and "Oh, Who Can Make the Wind Blow?". Surely the
> theological truth in the song is not dependent upon the failure of
> botanists, lepidopterists, and meteorologists to explain things, nor
> even upon our inability to engineer life or alter wind patterns.
>
> Michael Behe assures us in his latest book that the malaria parasite was
> intelligently designed, whereas its evolution of chloroquine resistance
> was not, all based on some mathematical calculations (which I think are
> very questionable, by the way). I'm sorry, but I find it much more
> compatible with Christian faith to accept that sexual reproduction,
> flowers, butterflies, and malaria parasites all evolved and continue to
> evolve much as neo-Darwinian theory suggests.
>
> My thoughts and prayers are with those of you attending the Annual
> Meeting in Edinburgh.
>
> Yours in Christ,
>
> Charles (Chuck) F. Austerberry, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor of Biology
> Hixson-Lied Room 438
> Creighton University
> 2500 California Plaza
> Omaha, NE 68178
>
> Phone: 402-280-2154
> Fax: 402-280-5595
>
> e-mail: cfauster@creighton.edu
>
> Nebraska Religious Coalition for Science Education
> http://nrcse.creighton.edu
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jul 20 23:40:16 2007