Re: [asa] Doug Groothuis v. William Dembski

From: David Opderbeck <>
Date: Fri Jan 02 2009 - 13:48:52 EST

But the difference is, ID, as Mike describes it, says "the designer could be
an alien." The probabilistic / reason-based arguments made by Aquinas,
William Lane Craig, etc. are all meant (properly) to point towards the
Christian God. Yes, these arguments don't get you "all the way to God" --
but they are meant to point in no direction other than towards God. If the
result of the ontological, teleological, moral, etc. arguments is a space
alien, those arguments have utterly failed.

David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology

On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Schwarzwald <> wrote:

> Heya David,
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 1:35 PM, David Opderbeck <>wrote:
>> Aquinas would *never* have said that the "designer" of creation could be
>> other than the creator-God. For Aquinas, the teleology he saw in creation
>> traced back to an unmoved mover, which must be God. And yes, it would have
>> been heretical (and completely contrary to his system) if Aquinas had
>> suggested that creation could have been designed by some other created being
>> -- by definition, for Aquinas, all created things have a cause, and all
>> causes trace back to an uncaused cause, which is God.
> Absolutely, but the specific arguments that Aquinas offered in proof of a
> creator-God did not on their own indicate 'This God is triune, Christ is
> part of the trinity which comprises this God' etc. The unmoved mover,
> Aquinas' five ways, etc - those alone will get you to 'creator-God', but
> they won't get you to 'the creator-God who sent his only begotten Son to die
> on the cross for our sins'.
> Yes, Aquinas (who I'm reading of more and more lately - as an aside, I
> suggest 'The Last Superstition' by Edward Feser for a thought-provoking
> book) certainly did get into the more specific and Christian topics in great
> detail. All I'm saying is that the arguments Aquinas - or even William Lane
> Craig, among others - offer as proof of God, or inference of God, do not on
> their own bring them to 'The God of Christianity'. Other arguments do, and
> taken together, their whole intellectual offering could be viewed as
> specifically leading to such a conclusion.
> But the same could be said of a Christian invested in ID. ID alone would
> encompass a number of arguments for/proofs of a creator-God. But their
> 'whole thought' could be comprised of ID, philosophy, even personal
> testimony - and point unmistakably towards the God of Christianity.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jan 2 13:49:22 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jan 02 2009 - 13:49:22 EST