Intelligent Design

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Well, the Bible provides some pretty good stories about what a prick God is when on the rag.

Indeed, it was the book of Job that convinced me to be an athiest

[Gemini Cricket]

Cool Op-Ed piece from the washpost!

Because every few years this country, in its infinite tolerance, insists on hearing yet another appeal of the Scopes monkey trial, I feel obliged to point out what would otherwise be superfluous: that the two greatest scientists in the history of our species were Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein, and they were both religious.

Newton's religion was traditional. He was a staunch believer in Christianity and a member of the Church of England. Einstein's was a more diffuse belief in a deity who set the rules for everything that occurs in the universe.

Neither saw science as an enemy of religion. On the contrary. "He believed he was doing God's work," James Gleick wrote in his recent biography of Newton. Einstein saw his entire vocation -- understanding the workings of the universe -- as an attempt to understand the mind of God.

Source

[Prudence]

Unfortunately, Newton's view is incompatible with the many who consider themselves "true" Christians and who believe the world is only some 6K years old. For them, it's not just about "did God create evolution." For them, all of science (and history) with its dinosaurs and fossils and pre-human eras is not just wrong, but an indictment of much of modern science. For them, modern education has fallen into the traps planted by Satan to direct people away from the Truth. It's not just "I'm not an ape."

[€uroMeinke]

Another problem I see with "Intelligent" design is it sort of presumes God to be some sort of scientist (or watch maker if you go back to the 19th century version). Why can't we have "Poetic" design, where the world is but God's metaphore? or how about "Comic" design where God is demonstrating his boundless humor?

"Intelligent" design fails in that it embeds the superiority of sciene in it's ontology - only a culture that has lost it's faith, superceding it with science, would look to such an argument for the proof of God's existence.

[Ghoulish Delight]

You aren't alone in that thought.

In a June article in the British Catholic magazine The Tablet, [chief Vatican astronomer Rev. George] Coyne reaffirmed God's role in creation, but said science explains the history of the universe.

"If they respect the results of modern science, and indeed the best of modern biblical research, religious believers must move away from the notion of a dictator God or a designer God, a Newtonian God who made the universe as a watch that ticks along regularly."

Rather, he argued, God should be seen more as an encouraging parent.

And the article is about him saying today that ID is not science and should not be taught in science class.

link

[Prudence]

The Dover decision was just released, for those of you that follow these sorts of things. pdf available at: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/images/12/20/kitzmiller.pdf

My personal favorite part is from the very end: "The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."

Teehee! Cranky judges! Love 'em!

[wendybeth]

That judge is clearly going to hell.

[Gemini Cricket]

All I can say is... Amen to that ruling.

[wendybeth]

Does this mean God is going to smite the US District Court- Middle Pennsylvania, or just that particular judge?

[SacTown Chronic]

I think Pat Robertson decides who God will smite. And then God smites that person (usually a homo) and three thousand innocent bystanders.