Joined: Oct. 2005
But Zardoz, doesn't Dembski hisself say it's not necessarily god?:
|For one thing Scot doesn't represent ID in the true sense of the word. He calls himself an agnostic and yet believes in some convoluted form of ID?|
You cannot be an agnostic nor an atheist and believe in ID, it's a contradiction. If you don't believe in an intelligent designer then how can you believe in intelligent design?
|Is the designer responsible for biological complexity God? Even as a very traditional Christian and an ardent proponent of ID, I would say NOT NECESSARILY. To ask who or what is the designer of a particular object is to ask for the immediate intelligent agent responsible for its design. The point is that God is able to work through derived or surrogate intelligences, which can be anything from angels to organizing principles embedded in nature.|
For instance, just because I hold to both Christian theism and ID doesn’t mean that God directly designed and implemented the bacterial flagellum by specifically toggling its components. It could well have happened by a process of natural genetic engineering of the sort envisioned by James Shapiro.