Quote from Teleologist:
I'm discussing ID as it relates to the origin of life on earth not the origin of the universe. Most ID theorists don't argue that a Designer is necessary. They initially infer design from empirical data. Over the course of time additional empirical data is investigated that either works to strengthen or weaken the initial design inference.
The purpose of this thread is to dispute the claim that ID is creationism. How about everyone staying on topic. Seems like we are veering off in many different directions.
Too bad I missed this thread early on!
Theologist, very good thread and well presented. You are correct in that ID <> C.
The Darwinist set allows for the self instantiation of fully sentient and fully corporeal beings, as a simple matter of bio-mechanical alchemy with a mathematically random substrate as the 'logic engine' from which all
intelligent life on earth is now seen. Not Biblical.
The Intelligent Design set, as you clearly point out, has no problem whatsoever with 'a creator,' but is open to the idea that the source and origin of such a creator,
could be from a logically derived arrangement of bio-mechanical processes that over time, yield the potential for the creation of fully sentient and fully corporeal beings, or an infinite number of other non-Biblical arrangements that fulfill the 'need' for a creator to fit their belief system. Not Biblical.
I would assume that your reason for making this differential between the ID set and the Creation set, is to highlight and contrast the distinctions for those that might not have a Biblical grounding and who might be susceptible to getting confused about the differences between the two and for that, you are to be commended. Sadly, there will be many who fall prey to the illusion that ID = C.
Having said that, I think that if one is going to make such a distinction (that between ID and Creation) for the purpose of ONLY dealing with the question of how life on earth began, then it would seem that one would miss the opportunity to extend the logic to its fullest conclusion by extrapolating backwards and clearly articulating the logic AND substance for the existence of the Universe itself as having been "created" by a single source. This of course, is not the topic of your thread, but your chosen topic does beg the question in a rather tantalizing way!
I don't want to turn the tone and tenor of your thread, so I'll leave it at that unless and until you give authorization to
move your thread in that direction, for I believe, as an empiricist myself, that there is PLENTY of both physical and logical evidence for the existence of a single source Creator (notice the capital 'C' used here and not above) for the Universe in which our planet resides.
In fact, I believe that using very simple mathematics (a given tool), one can easily establish the logical framework that not only assumes the existence of a single source Creator for the Universe and thus all life on earth, but actually
proves it beyond any logical doubt.
Whose logic exactly, is the question yet to be answered.
Awesome thread!
