Re: Post-Darwinist: Pope uses term "intelligent design" in a favourable context

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Sat Nov 12 2005 - 18:10:31 EST

I give up. I read her blog which is not intelligently designed. How long
will it take ID types to realise that Creation involves the purpose/plan/
design of God and thus a Christian must accept intelligent design but not
necessarily Intelligent Design. I do not accept Intelligent Design as it
vacuous , god of the gaps and a striving after wind and is not science or
good theology.

As I went mountain walking today in the sun - a rare November day I blessed
God for my good aerobic system which must have been intelligently designed
by God, though Behe denies it is intelligently designed DBB p 207. However I
didn't fall down a cliff so what Behe considers to be intelligently
designed - blood clotting -couldn't come into play. I always have a chuckle
at Behe when climbing a long slope on a mountain or cycling up a long steep
hill, but I never saw the man in the moon

Michael

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Schneider" <rjschn39@bellsouth.net>
To: "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>; "Denyse O'Leary"
<oleary@sympatico.ca>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: Post-Darwinist: Pope uses term "intelligent design" in a
favourable context

>I thought Owen Gingerich put it well in the most recent "Science & Theology
>News": He said that he believes in an intelligent designer but has trouble
>with Intelligent Design. I believe that B16 would agree.
>
> Bob
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>
> To: "Denyse O'Leary" <oleary@sympatico.ca>; <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 4:41 PM
> Subject: Re: Post-Darwinist: Pope uses term "intelligent design" in a
> favourable context
>
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Denyse O'Leary" <oleary@sympatico.ca>
>> To: <asa@calvin.edu>
>> Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 4:05 PM
>> Subject: Post-Darwinist: Pope uses term "intelligent design" in a
>> favourable context
>>
>>
>>> Post-Darwinist: The Pope was mistranslated. It appears that he did say
>>> "intelligent design" in a favourable context
>>>
>>> It appears, from a reliable source, that when the Pope used the words
>>> "intelligent plan" he meant "intelligent design". He was using the
>>> German
>>> word "Plan", which, according to Cassells German Dictionary, can mean
>>> "design". In that case, the Pope was signalling clearly that intelligent
>>> design of the universe and life is indeed the correct Catholic view.
>>>
>>> [Cardinal Schonborn has the story at his Web site, where he translates
>>> "intelligenten Plan" ans "intelligent design".]
>>>
>>> Read more at http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/
>>
>> Sorry Denyse, this won't work. "Intelligent Design" in English is now a
>> technical term & you always need to be careful with those in any
>> language. The fact that a German word _can_ mean "design" doesn't prove
>> that it's being used in the same technical sense that Dembski, z.B.,
>> means when he says "design." Cassells lists 16 English meanings for /der
>> Plan/, of which the 11th is "design." The 10th is "plan." If the Pope
>> wants to make an explicit endorsement of ID he should do it in English
>> because that's the language in which it has become a technical term.
>>
>> Besides, there is still the ambiguity between "intelligent design" as a
>> religious belief & as a putative scientific theory. Of course the former
>> is the correct view not only of RCs but of all Christians. The latter is
>> a different matter. (Do you know the difference Denyse? Some things you
>> write make me wonder.)
>>
>> Shalom
>> George
>> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>>
>
>
>
Received on Sat Nov 12 18:11:33 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Nov 12 2005 - 18:11:33 EST