Joined: Aug. 2005
|Quote (Cornelius Hunter @ Jan. 27 2007,04:29)|
Responding to GCT
To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and hurnan beings are created by God.
Mr. Hunter, you are a fellow of the DI, surely you know what their position is. Do you reject that position? Do you hold that ID is purely scientific? If so, why does the DI push so hard for theistic understandings?
Of course I wouldn't be a DI fellow if I did not share some fundamenatal views with DI. But I certainly do not agree iwth everything that DI people have written. Regarding the quote above, the problem is this quickly gets fairly complicated, and too lengthy for posting. I'd like to defer to my upcoming book entitled *Science's Blindspot* which should be out in spring, where I go into issues such as this in detail. I hope the book will help build bridges between disparate folks who nonetheless share the goal of pursuing the truth rather than dogma.
It seems that you don't really wish to answer my question. I thought it was pretty straight-forward. If ID is indeed scientific, and the DI is only concerned with pushing a scientific theorem, then there should be no need to sermonize to the crowd and continually speak about religious matters. That the members of the DI can not help but speak, endlessly, on religious matters speaks volumes. I have, to date, never heard a scientific argument for ID, yet I've heard many religious/philosophical arguments for ID. I wonder why this is, but it seems I won't get an answer in this thread.