Guest Post by The Zman
Whenever the subject of Intelligent Design turns up, it is always in the context of believers in ID attacking evolutionary biology. The ID’ers have a list of claims about “Darwinism” that they insist make evolution impossible. A popular one now, for example, is that there is not enough time for natural selection to produce enough gene mutations to explain the fossil record. A fair description of ID is that it is a list of arguments and assertions about evolution wrapped around a set of central claims.
One of those claims is that creation, as we observe it, must be the result of design and therefore a designer. They never describe the designer, as most people just assume they mean God, but the designer could be space aliens, in theory. A certain type of self-described Christian finds this appealing. They assume the designer is God, as they have an understanding of God that is much more personal. They believe God is highly involved in the granular details of human existence.
Now, it should be pointed out that this understanding of God is outside Christian tradition and perhaps even anti-Christian. Early Christians, like the Jews of the period, were highly influenced by the Greek understanding of the world. For them, the universe was an orderly place operating by fixed rules. You can’t have a covenant with God, after all, if the universe is a lawless place controlled by a fickle creator. That would make God’s covenant with man just another trick played by him on mankind.
Intelligent Design is occasionalism. While the natural world seems to operate along a set of knowable rules, God often intervenes to change results. He is always in that space between cause and effect, ready to alter the relationship according to his design. God created the platypus for reasons only known to God. If he chooses, he can make the Nile flow south or the sky turn pink. The proof of this, according to Intelligent Design, is the variety of species alive today, as well those no longer in existence.
In fairness to the ID’ers, occasionalism did creep into Christian theology in the Middle Ages, as the Christian West came into contact with Islam. Nicholas of Autrecourt was a 14th century French theologian, who was a critic of the orderly view of the natural world and a proto-occasionalist. David Hume dabbled in the ideas, but stopped short of claiming a creator or designer. Modern ID’ers can therefore claim they are not way outside Christian tradition, but they would have to defend against it.
Another central claim of Intelligent Design is that the natural world is either the result of chance or design. This is the keystone of their theory, as Intelligent Design is not an affirmative argument in favor of a designer. Instead, they frame the debate as between two competing theories. Therefore, if one is shown to be invalid, by default the other must be true. It is a bit of rhetorical sleight of hand to avoid the central problems of Intelligent Design, which of course is that it can never be proven.
This aspect of Intelligent Design relies on a characterization of natural selection as random chance, like rolling of dice. It’s the claim that a football game is either the result of random chance or the game is fixed by the officials, either in advance or as the game proceeds to its conclusion. Obviously, this is ridiculous. The result of a sports match is not random and it is not predetermined or fixed. The result of a sportsball game, is the result of the players acting and reacting to one another, within a known set of rules.
That’s the case with evolutionary biology. Random mutations in the genome are one aspect of the evolutionary process. Environment obviously plays a role here. Sexual selection is another. Human intervention is another. After all, people have killed off whole species. People have killed off whole groups of people. Like the sportsball game, there are multiple actors, acting and reacting, within a set of rules that science does not fully understand. Evolution is not an argument in favor of chance.
The point here is Intelligent Design is built, in part, on a false dichotomy. Natural selection is not random chance, at least not how most people understand what random chance means. Further, even if natural selection is unable to explain everything, there are other forces, like sexual selection, that come into play. Even if everything about evolutionary biology is wrong, it does not make Intelligent Design true. It simply means we have no good answer understanding the natural world.
This again comes back to the question as to whether Intelligent Design is at odds with Christian theology. The Sphynx cat exists and we know why. The ID’ers would argue that it is an example of design, but that presupposes the breeders were either directed by God or compelled by God to create the breed. That means man has no agency and that sin cannot truly exist. This argument for Intelligent Design comes dangerously close to the argument that man has no free will, which is heretical on its face.
This is why ID’er focus all of their energy on the negative argument, making various claims about evolutionary science. That way, the discussion is always on the science, rather than the theology. This rhetorical sleight of hand is also dishonest, which raises another theological problem for ID’ers. How can something be in line with Biblical teaching if it is based on a falsehood? Maybe the ID’er have a way to explain this, but it is not something they choose to address in their books and articles.
The most serious issue with Intelligent Design is what it implies about God. A designer that is endlessly tinkering with his creation is not a designer with foresight. Alternatively, it is a designer that is a fickle trickster, tinkering with his creation for his own amusement, without regard for his creation. It is a designer that purposely makes flawed creations that harm his other creations. This is a designer burning army men with a magnifying glass and blowing up the model train trestle. That’s not God. That’s the Devil.
From a mainstream Christian perspective, Intelligent Design has some serious theological problems, with occasionalism being the main one. The one way to solve the theological problems is to move the designer back to the beginning, where the Bible writers preferred to place him. The classic watchmaker model, where God sets the universe in motion, according to a fixed set of rules, with evolution possibly being one of them. That leaves room to debate evolution, but does not make God a villain.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
I think you sometimes make some logical progressions ( “That means such and therefore unrelated such” is one I remember) which are unrelated.
But over all I am beginning to appreciate the theme.
Blah, blah , blah. He ‘disproves’ occasionalism, therefore there is no intelligent design. What a moron.
Intelligent design is not guiding human events, it is designing the systems of the physical universe. Humans were given free will, that negates any kind of design. He gets it right when he says that random chance has an impact, chance is the possibility of something occurring. When the odds are even, we say there is a good chance of rain or whatever. This does not mean that intelligent design is occasionalism but rather the possibility of occurrence is baked in, that is part of the intelligence in the design.
+100
ID is a theory and will always remain a theory (because many/most of it tenets can not be proven using the scientific method). Or, maybe it’s a philosophy.
At any rate, all theories come with flaws, weaknesses, etc. That doesn’t make them bad or wrong .. it’s just the way it is.
Well, Zimmerman, simply does a HORRIBLE job “exposing” weaknesses with ID. He jumps all over the place, develops nothing in any depth, and confuses more than enlightens. He is truly a terrible writer and I wonder how in the fuck he makes a living at it.
I have never heard a jew scientist not use straw man arguments whenever this topic comes up.
Ask DR Pain in the Gloss of he read Frost’s poem about a spiderweb. Design.
I’m not anti-design, baby.
My buddy was describing the creation of a sperm cell, the ‘fingers’ that separate the chromosomes of the cell to create a gamete (ouch). Here I thought a ball sack was just decorative.
Well punditried.
Elemental, almost. ? Work?
Maggoo, I gave a certain farmer my email. I have a pic to match your own wedding pic. Nice tatas, btw. Oops, sorry, Nick!
Am out of email connect but good to know.
Will do the leg work. I spent most of the day visiting with odd characters who are wise and funny and remind me of when men and women like the them were beloved elders in the corner, rocking.
Rocking while reading the Bible.
Is Stucky really so dense? Paul Bunyan might have been Polock.
Edot.
Leg work means dish connection over cell. We have a.dome of rain again.
Yeah, no piercing the dome. I read of the Babel crew who shot arrows into the sky, seeking to make war with the inhabitants of heaven.
Checking today. Email. Not tatas. Will check with mm….
Gotcha…I was looking at.some DNA swapping regarding my new breeding rabbits.
Meat and pelt rabbits.
First litter from Beauregard and the damsel. Her first litter. I bred.her to old Scrapper too. She was naughty.
Two brown babies. Two white.
Muggles.
.
Pictures coming at cloud break.
Me and Coyote have.eun up lamer ass threads than this.
What does it mean that you two have.eun up lamer ass threads than this? And what do you suspect murdering rabbits has to do with Intelligent Design. We all breathlessly await your inspired offering.
We .eun up a bunch of your articles to keeper status. There are many articles on a daily basis that never see one comment, admin flushes those pronto. You owe us, glitter boy.
All that glitters is glitter.
Galations 5:23.
Temperance in KJB is self-control.
In Yakov Smirnov, it meant bad vodka and bread lines.
Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design. Book by Stephen C. Meyer
The book pretty much blows up the theory we “evolved” out of the primordial soup. The odds are beyond, beyond and once again beyond astronomical.
As a seeker of truth I’ve found Christianity compelling and inspirational. Open discussions about the imperfections of human beings and the paths to take to make oneself a better person. Intelligent design does not conflict with belief in God and Christ.
Common Descent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_descent
Barely made it through the first two paragraphs of this claptrap. There is scientific proof of intelligent design that have nothing to do with evolution (or lack thereof) or God (Christian or otherwise). You want to masturbate do it behind closed doors.
Annie, this is a family blog. Of course, El Doggie says women are more direct than men. Men are more likely to hide the truth while women are not constrained by people’s feelings. Then they call men liars when our intention was not to lie but to avoid hurting somebody’s feelings. Yet, it’s women who are portrayed in the media as caring and nurturing. Puhleeez!
“this is a family blog” Tell that to zboy. I’m not the one jacking off in public. Generally I just ignore his posts, but once in a while I give one a test run to see if he has matured enough to write anything worth reading. Still nope.
It’s good too see you again, you have been around for a long while. At least you comment more often than Suzanna.
Before 1955 even the most devote could not KNOW how we got to where we are. Now we can.
Devoted or Devout?
Is a cliffhanger
yes, I meant devout. couldn’t think of at the time…
?
I don’t enjoy listening to non Christians tell me about Christianity.
Zman loses me more and more.
Perhaps, but let’s face it, you have not offered one word to oppose his contentions. If you have any insight to add how about offering it as opposed to just casting aspersions. I know you have given a lot of thought to this topic. You must have given your position. So explain to Zman where he went wrong.
Well, howdy Hollywood..
It seems like you may have done something similar…as far as not offering one word to oppose my contentions a couple of different times. No Matter….get it?
‘where Zman went wrong? IMO, this is elementary level slop that was written…primordial ooze, which is apparently where everything begins? Or was Zman saying that ‘matter’ came first, then the ooze? Or simply that it doesn’t make any difference ? I’m not sure what he was saying…..
Occasionalism:
NOUN
philosophy
the doctrine ascribing the connection between mental and bodily events to the continuing intervention of God.
Hahaha….another ‘ism’…..
“From a mainstream Christian perspective, Intelligent Design has some serious theological problems, with occasionalism being the main one. The one way to solve the theological problems is to move the designer back to the beginning, where the Bible writers preferred to place him. The classic watchmaker model, where God sets the universe in motion, according to a fixed set of rules, with evolution possibly being one of them. That leaves room to debate evolution, but does not make God a villain.”
Now, I consider this entire article to be lacking (and the worst I have ever read from Zman), but let’s just say one of the ‘fixed set of rules’ includes evolution….where are the myriads of evolutionary remains that should be filling museums around the world?
Do you want a short blerb to explain the whole of creation/evolution theory?
DNA language, maybe.
Have you ever approached the subject with an open mind? What would you accept, Observational evidence? Historical evidence?
annuit coeptis novus ordo seclorum<<<—
I'll go ahead and post one….I've only seen parts of this one, but there are many more, some much better, but to recall them specifically in order to retrieve them under the new algos on the search engines, takes a bit of time for me, and I doubt you watch them. At least, my memory is that you have never offered one word in response……..
Thanks sir ordo, well said brother. HR, in all honesty, the topic is just so massive, it’s hard to even know where to begin with people of strong opinion. I’ll try…
We have two foundations upon which to stand.
1) everything came from nothing.
2) everything came from something.
Which is it gonna be?
Darwin’s Black Box written by microbiologist Michael Behe is a interesting book that deals with the problems of evolution, at least at the macro-evolution level.
Excellent book, as is James Perloff’s “tornado in a junkyard”.
The intelligent design is the emergent intelligence properties in the cell and especially its nucleus, and possibly patterns of interaction that are beyond our ability to identify. This does not preclude the existence of God, but may provide insight into God.
This is something I am interested in and you would be surprised how many research scientists suspect something similar, but nobody has figured out how to test it. It is a problem I am working on and I am thinking very small as in the transistor level, not the circuit.
My interest isn’t about proving anything about god, though. Just neuroscience.
I am interested in this line of thought.
When I went to college, I took a Genetics class to see what all the brouhaha was about. Dolly the Sheep had recently been cloned.
The professor was a research scientist who taught the lecture once a year to keep his spot. He was really smart and really dry. He assigned the entire class to write four ten page essays on various subjects. I chose the Hydra. A fascinating little water critter.
Perhaps it is easy to see the Coder behind the code when looking at the tiniest of things that exist.
P.S. Oh, and I am an adult onset Hydrocephalic, aged 42 at onset. (58 now… 9 years since revision.) The neuroscientists call it aqueduct stenosis, which means the duct draining the CSP to my spine collapsed, reason unknown. 29 days ICU…I had to learn to think a different way.
For scientific facts that support the Creation account and disprove Evolution, please watch the videos from Northwest Creation Network. Your welcome.
It is human nature to assign faith in the absence of facts.
I am often reminded of Arthur C Clarke’s brilliant and insightful observation:
“Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from magic”. Think of the technology we have available today, that we take for granted and use every day. Take this technology back even a mere 200 years and the populace would have been very likely to think this magic.
Humans also are incapable of having a different universal view because we have such a limited view of said universe. The same held true for a world view in the time of Galileo, a man who rightly posited that the earth revolved around the sun, for which he was excommunicated by the Catholic Church.
Intelligent Design is almost exclusively linked with some kind of Monotheistic faith. “God” designed and created life and so we are beholden to this deity exclusively and without question.
But what if….
The “God” we think of as “our” creator is not “God” but a “god”. What if our extremely limited and narrow universe view cannot allow us to see a bigger picture, and so faith filled our lack of knowledge and understanding in order for us to move in one direction as a race? Christianity, and more specifically Catholicism was a major driving force of civilization for a very long time. Kings and Queens were made and removed by the word of a guy in a weird hat in Rome. In turn, those Kings and Queens enforced a moral, albeit sometimes very heavy handed and destructive moral code on the populace. This faith did offer a cohesion and unity of purpose, a belonging.
While I stand on the side of an intelligent force that did have some hand in our being here, I wonder if we perhaps assign too much power to this creative force? I wonder if the whole point was to put us here, let us grow up, and figure stuff our for ourselves?
What if the very faith we used for millennia has in fact only served to divide us and stifle us as a cohesive human race? Faith that says “we are right and you are wrong” serves to keep the resources of millions of minds separate and in some cases, repressed.
Our fear of death and the unknown of what comes after certainly drives many to seek comfort in some kind of organized faith that gives them the “answer” the seek. We can imagine forever, but it is out of our reach in these mortal bodies so we say that by being “good” and following a certain creed will mean we get to have that forever somewhere else.
Evolution, on the other hand, is devoid of any hope for anything after. We are here, we got here because this was the best model. We are not beholden to any thing greater than ourselves because it probably doesn’t exist anyway.
Yet still humanity knows right from wrong. We know it is wrong to take a human life. We know it is wrong to steal another’s possessions, rape.
If we truly just were an accident of proteins millennia ago, then it stands to reason that only the strong survive and the rest be dammed. Who cares if you kill someone and take their stuff? Your stronger so you have the right. Yet we know this to be false.
The more I ponder this I feel that perhaps whatever power there is out there that had a hand in our being here tried many times to point us in the right direction. Gently maybe. Think Jesus. Son of God or envoy that tried to get us to see where we were straying off the path? Historically speaking, the Jewish religious leaders of the time were divided, heavy handed, burdensome to the people and greedy. Jesus’ only threat to them was taking away that power they had over the people. Trying to make them see that all they had, all they needed, was to be a cohesive group of humanity. His preaching of inclusiveness was revolutionary at the time, but taking it in that context it makes sense.
The fear the Saducees and Pharisees had of losing their power was enough to have him tortured and killed.
The stories of Jesus’ healing, raising the dead, water into wine…could it have been technology sufficiently advanced to appear as magic?
If extraterrestrial life were to truly, absolutely show itself to humanity as a whole it would shake the foundations of pretty much every religion. There just aren’t any bible stories that cover aliens. Where does a good Catholic go when there’s a UFO parked in DC? How about Islam…Mohammed never covered space ships, and I am pretty sure aliens don’t wear burkas.
Media has for most of my memory portrayed aliens as a violent, invading force. But really, what do we have that they would even want? I mean it’s like invading the squirrels in Central Park because you want to take their nests over.
I think perhaps we are the ghetto of the universe. We definitely have a really bad galaxy Yelp review.
As far as all the butt probing these aliens supposedly want to do…not everyone is a good guy. Here or I guess any where else. We all know the bad bar on that side of town where you go when you slumming, right? You get drunk, do dumb shit, and then hope your friends don’t have pictures. I think perhaps we may be dealing with some redneck aliens.
And everyone knows no body believes anyone who lives in North Ft Meyers Florida when they say they saw an alien anyway.
In the beginning, God created evolution.
Is.45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
19 I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth: I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain: I the LORD speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.
20 Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, ye that are escaped of the nations: they have no knowledge that set up the wood of their graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save.
21 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.
22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
24 Surely, shall one say, in the LORD have I righteousness and strength: even to him shall men come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed.
READ THE BOOK!
Religion is Santa Claus for adults
Hey, I have an idea. Why not send our best and brightest men to battle over the past several millennia only to have them killed off. That will leave the imbeciles and the crips home to breed. That should do wonders for the gene pool. The proof is standing before us. One needs no more proof of evolution.
C’MON. Everyone cheated.