OWKtree
Posts: 16
Joined: Nov. 2005
|
| Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 20 2009,16:46) | James Bond, no less, asks Barry the obvious question: | Quote | This is a great post, because it’ll let me ask what is really my biggest question about Intelligent Design: What is the current consensus among ID propenents:
Did the designer act ONCE, at some point during (I guess the beginning of) life, setting up the starting conditions intelligently, and then microevolution has brought us the rest of the way?
Or does the designer act continuously, effecting change step by step in life, much like evolution, but with an intelligent agent at the helm?
Or is there some other intermediate model of interaction with life that the designer adopts that I haven’t grasped? |
I suspect he won't even get a "just so" story in reply. |
of course there won't be a straight answer since Admiral Akbar has already detected the question as a trap.
The first option is simply theistic evolution. That's surrendering on all points barring abiogenesis issues. And, note, that this is surrendering the point on "we ain't descended from no monkey" issue that seems to get so many folks in a lather about evolution in the first place.
The second option makes the designer responsible for lots of nasty critters; malaria, tapeworms, parasites, etc. Not to mention a bunch of inept design decisions. Not what you expect from a omnipotent all-loving being who sent an avatar down to die for our sins.
In addition the big tent must be left complete. So no answer that would serve to alienate either side of the Young Earth vs Old Earth split.*
- Kurt
*- And remember that the Book is right despite what the rocks tell you. And the rocks are much more entertaining in their description of a much more interesting world.
|
