>is true about nature. If ID is false, then it undercuts Christian faith. If
>evolution that gives no empirical evidence of design is false, then it
>undercuts Christian faith. Christ assumed human nature and thereby assumed
What I meant was that If ID is false but affirmed as true, then that
affirmation will undercut Christian faith (as many in the ASA have been
claiming right along); so too, If evolution that gives no empirical
evidence of design is false but is affirmed as true, then that affirmation
will undercut Christian faith (as Phillip Johnson has been claiming).
Allan Harvey raises the question of signs and their appropriateness as
evidence for God. Thus he cites Jesus who accuses his generation of being
wicked for seeking a sign. I address this question of signs (and indeed
that very passage from the Gospels that Allan cites) in the first chapter
for my forthcoming book INTELLIGENT DESIGN: THE BRIDGE BETWEEN SCIENCE AND
THEOLOGY (IVP, fall 1999).
I need to get back to some of my projects, so I'm going to leave the
discussion here for now. I do want to stress, however, that ID ‚ Christian
Apologetics. ID is an empirical study into features of the world that
indicate intelligent causation. No doubt, one can get apologetic mileage
out of ID, but it is first and foremost a stand-alone research program.