ID (Intelligent Design) = common ground for both TEs and Bible Creationists

[BobRyan]

Paul says this --
Rom 1
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

That is ID pure and simple - so obvious that as Paul says even the pagans of his day were "without excuse".

TE's claim evolutionism's story line is flawed to some extent and that God gets evolution out of a jam as needed to make it work.

Bible Creationists read Ex 20:11 legal code "for in six days the Lord made..." and conclude that the "jam" for evolutionism's storyline is so huge that when God bails it out he pretty much creates everything from scratch on planet earth in 6 days.

Now here is the part that is a bit of a concession for TE's:

Both groups have God acting to get things to work and thus admit that in the lab evolutionism's story will not "just happen" as a matter of pure chemistry -- as Urey and Miller found out in the 50's with their utter chiral orientation fail trying to get the building blocks for life (Amino acids needed for a simple single celled life form) to "form".

So when it comes to ID - both groups agree. It is common ground.

Mainstream science has entered into the realm of political tyranny....

what a great film. They have some world-class scientists there pointing out the massive flaws in evolutionism. They are on record there making the statement that would be the "minimum" one would expect for Christian ID.

Collin Patterson - another world-class scientist lamenting the paucity in actual-facts-known in evolutionism admitting that it conveys a kind of "anti-knowledge" - even though to his dying day he was still "a believer" in evolutionism he could not help but notice the glaring "stories without fact".

But what about atheists? they have a belief system that requires that they fail to perceive even the pagan level of understanding in nature Paul says is "without excuse" in Romans 1.

===========================
For he sake of "reference"

The Gospel, eternal life, the Trinity, scripture are all concepts beyond ID.. ID is a basic element that Romans 1 points to - common to all mankind... visible and apparent to all mankind.
1. Determine that something is made. ID
2. Deduce the invisible attributes of the maker based on observations alone.
3. Choose to submit to the drawing of God "I will draw all mankind unto Me" John 12:32
4. Respond to the conviction of the Holy Spirit "He will convict the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" John 16

Romans 1 ID is the incredibly basic rudimentary steps of 1 and 2 available to all mankind even pagans according to Romans 1.. even atheists.

Modern ID is like the Romans 1 version only with the scientific "rigor" of studies in nature that rely on structured analysis -- added to that basic level of ID found in Romans 1.

Modern ID is about taking macro systems, dividing them into micro component-necessary-parts and estimating probabilities, in addition to observing what does not occur in nature and in most cases can't even occur in a contrived scenario in the lab.

 

[Brightmoon]

ID is a silly god of the gaps argument. It’s saying the human ignorance is somehow God . Sorry not buying. But if you accept ID, There’s a nice bridge in Brooklyn that’s for sale, cheap!

 

[GodLovesCats]

Bob, nobody who denies the existence of evolution is a world-class scientist. Evolution has been proven in every natural body of water, land mass, and atmosphere layer that has life from north to south and west to east. I kept telling you to show me proof fossils older than the first humans do not exist and you could not. Why do you believe millions of pieces of evidence that prove evolution has occured over hundreds of millennia do not exist despite the fact that they have been extensively studied by many paleontologists? If the reasons are not based on what has actually been discovered and studied by scientists who had earned biology degrees at graduate schools, none of your evolution denials are true.

 

[BobRyan]

ID is a silly god

So then Paul knew nothing in Romans 1??

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, nobody who denies the existence of evolution is a world-class scientist.

1. circular reasoning is not the compelling statement you may have at first imagined it to be.

2. The "world class" scientists being quoted - are in your own group of believers in evolutionism's doctrine on origins

3. this thread is about Romans 1 and ID.

 

[GodLovesCats]

I have no idea what you mean by circular reasoning. For me it is all about LOGIC. And logic is if something that proved evolution exists today, creationists are wrong to deny the existence of proof.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, nobody who denies the existence of evolution is a world-class scientist.

1. circular reasoning is not the compelling statement you may have at first imagined it to be.

I have no idea what you mean by circular reasoning.

I should have anticipated that response.

For me it is all about LOGIC. And logic is if something that proved evolution exists today, creationists are wrong to deny the existence of proof.

Hint: its your own world class evolutionists talking about evolution in those quotes.. not creationists.

Why does this point keep slipping past you in our discussions??

Colin Patterson was never a Creationist. Sorry but that is just fact.

BTW - this thread is about Romans 1 and ID

 

[BobRyan]

I kept telling you to show me proof fossils older than the first humans do not exist

What wild assumptions would you like to use for that "proof"?

Why are "observations in nature" not sufficient for you??

 

[GodLovesCats]

What wild assumptions would you like to use for that "proof"?

I have given you some examples in other threads. So did Brightmoon.

Why are "observations in nature" not sufficient for you??

Observations in nature are what YOU ignore that I kept telling you to look at.

 

[BobRyan]

I have given you some examples in other threads. So did Brightmoon.

Observations in nature are what YOU ignore that I kept telling you to look at.

I have given you irrefutable examples "observations in nature" and "your own " evolutionists - admitting to the problem in evolutionism -- on "some other thread".

It does not get any easier than that.

And "still" you are ignoring the topic of ID and Romans 1.

I assume this is your way of claiming you reject both.

 

[Brightmoon]

1. circular reasoning is not the compelling statement you may have at first imagined it to be.


I should have anticipated that response.



Hint: its your own world class evolutionists talking about evolution in those quotes.. not creationists.

Why does this point keep slipping past you in our discussions??

Colin Patterson was never a Creationist. Sorry but that is just fact.

BTW - this thread is about Romans 1 and ID

So! Dr Patterson is being quoted out of context too. It’s called quote mining and it’s dishonest. Creationists tend to do it a lot

 

[Brightmoon]

Nobody who denies the existence of evolution is a world class biologist. I’d agree with Lady Cats with a small change . Biologists who deny evolution work for fundie think tanks , apologetics sites , fundie colleges or they just don’t work in their fields . In other words they rarely do research and the rare legitimate research they do is published in journals that don’t have much clout!

 

[GodLovesCats]

What is a fundie think tank?

 

[Brightmoon]

Not sure but they do try to fund politicians who’ll do things like restrict the rights of women,religious minorities and gays. They’ll try to Stop mainstream science from being taught in public schools . ID is actually part of their plan to actually change the USA government to become less secular. Google the Wedge Document. And of course, they spread propaganda like the USA being a Christian country when we’ve got no official religion and are forbidden to have one by the constitution.

 

[BobRyan]

So! Dr Patterson is being quoted out of context too.

You are not even responding to a quote of Patterson...

This thread is about ID and Romans 1... is this your rather oblique way of saying you object to both??

more facts ... less bluster please.

 

[BobRyan]

Nobody who denies the existence of evolution is a world class biologist.

I assume you meant to quote someone just then.

 

[BobRyan]

Not sure but they do try to fund politicians who’ll do things like restrict the rights of women,religious minorities and gays.

I assume you were "almost" going to get around to the topic of this thread.

 

[Brightmoon]

I did get around to the topic of this thread . Not all Christians who accept evolution thinks that God fiddles with it continually like a toxic micromanager .

Mainstream scientists might accept God -did-it but they don’t look for that in their research because that’s one of the limitations of science, that it has no way of examining the truly supernatural.
Non scientists and/or the scientifically illiterate never seem to get that. This is why ID is not part of science and is purely a religious belief with some science-y sounding words added

 

[GodLovesCats]

I assume you meant to quote someone just then.

Brightmoon was correcting my statement because I typed "scientist" instead of "biologist."

 

[BobRyan]

I did get around to the topic of this thread . Not all Christians who accept evolution thinks that God fiddles with it continually like a toxic micromanager .

Mainstream scientists might accept God -did-it but they don’t look for that in their research because that’s one of the limitations of science, that it has no way of examining the truly supernatural.

It is therefore a "blind spot" when determining a cause for an event in history that God Himself did personally.

This is why ID is not part of science

Ok...that is pure nonsense.

The idea that when you come across an object in the forest everyone "except a scientist" can figure out that it is artificial/not-naturally occurring --- is pure nonsense. As if "only the non scientists" would be able to conclude that the calculator on the ground will not "occur naturally in the lab from a pile of minerals given enough time and chance". It would be like the scenario of using a backhoe to dig a pit then drag a "scientist" over to look at the pit and tell him he can come up with any story he likes for how that pit got there except he can't mention anything having to do with the backhoe that is sitting next to it.

Paul admits that even pagans can figure this out in Romans 1.

we have all met atheists who claim they cannot see what the pagans are said to be able to see clearly in Romans 1 because according to the text it is "clearly seen in the things that have been MADE" .