Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.
IMO, the only reason that ID doesn't specify the designer is so that it can pass the non-religious test to get into public schools. Still, it shouldn't affect the Science behind ID whether or not the designer is specified.Once I was at a seminar where the guest speaker was Dembski. This is at the Christian university where I work, they had a lecture series on creation and evolution and also had a CRI guy, Howard van Till, a Hugh Ross type guy, and a panel of local science profs on separate dates. Dembski had earlier that day spoken at chapel and been very forthright about his own Christian faith. I was one in the audience who he called on for a question after his talk and I asked him about Hebrews 11:3 which I've spoken about here earlier (if it says that we know by faith that the universe is not self-existent, why is he expecting that he'll be able to dsicover specified complexity pointing to a supernatural origin to anything in the universe). Earlier that morning he was all about how crucial this topic is to Christendom, now all of a sudden he's dodging my question by saying that ID isn't specifying the designer as the Abrahamic God. I had been genuinely interested in his response as a fellow Christian, but afterwards I was kicking myself that I hadn't mentioned his chapel message, acknowledged myself that ID doesn't specify the designer, and then asked him explicitly about his own personal views on the passage. Before I had wanted to know his answer, afterwards I was just role-playing how I missed an opportunity to hopefully make him squirm. It was a scales-from-eyes experience for me and put me firmly into the ID-is-disguised-creationism camp.- Joe
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |