In a message dated 11/29/01 4:10:16 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org
<< Claims by ID advocates such as Dembski and Johnson that evolution implies
atheism, that methodological naturalism implies atheism, that either God or
mindless molecular processes achieved something, and similar statements rule
out the possibility of God cooperating with natural processes in His
Please separate Dembski from Johnson. Now give me, with chapter and verse if
you will, where Bill has made the statements you charge him with.
As for Phil and the implication that evolution implies atheism: I think he
has history largely on his side when he says so He also has the theologian,
Charles Hodge in his corner. Is not the criticism deserved by the
evolutionist Richard Dawkins, and the philosopher, Daniel Dennett, than whom
more outspoken atheistic defenders of evolution and bashers of Christianity
and religion in general would be hard to find.
As far as I know, IDers do not pit God against mindless molecular processes
or claim that God does not cooperate with natural processes. As I understand
those in the ID community, they say that these concepts are not enough to
explain intelligent design nor do these concepts rule out intelligent design.
You said, <<Presenting certain things and not others as intelligently
designed, based on the criterion that the former purportedly require
non-natural intervention, implies that intelligent design requires
non-natural intervention. I include activities by intelligent aliens as
Nowhere, as far as I know, do Dembski, Behe, Nelson, or Wells claim that
non-natural intervention is the criterion of intelligent design. Please tell
me, if you will, what evidence you have to support such a charge.
Thanks for your comments.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 01 2001 - 07:30:52 EST