Re: Fwd: Identity of the ID designer

From: Jan de Koning (
Date: Wed Dec 18 2002 - 10:33:45 EST

  • Next message: "Re: Infant murder in I Sam 15"

    At 02:51 PM 16/12/2002 -0500, George Murphy wrote:
    >John Burgeson wrote

    and George replied

    > Having said that, I find your unwillingness to consider the
    >ID movement as it
    >actually exists very strange. In discussing abortion or
    >homosexuality, e.g., you refuse
    >to deal with these issues as theological or ethical abstractions, but
    >want to bring the
    >experience of women who have had abortions, homosexuals &c into the
    >discussion. But in
    >talking about ID you take exactly the opposite approach. You want to
    >discuss it as an
    >abstract scientific theory & refuse to consider what the ID movement
    >made up of real
    >people, carrying out real actions to influence state boards of
    >education, churches,
    >legislators &c, is. That seems very odd.

    Personally, I think that the ID movement does not accomplish anything. All
    of us, wether we "believe" that God use evolution or not, know that this
    world belongs to God and is designed by God. We know as well that through
    the fall in sin, man destroyed a lot, including his ability to (always?)
    think right, and that through that fall in sin even our thoughts are not
    what they should be. We do indeed need Jesus Christ as our Saviour to help
    us. Those grounds are basic.

    It does mean that I do not debate with a YEC, unless I know he has a
    science background, and I do not debate with an ID person, since I find it
    an insult that somebody would think that any Christian who believes that
    God created thinks that God might create at random. However, we are not
    allowed to insult God either by thinking that we know what He did
    exactly. We may study His word in Creation and in the Bible.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Dec 18 2002 - 11:42:43 EST