>There is nothing about the intelligent design concept or evidence which
>necessarily requires the designer to be supernatural. Christians
>(including myself) will naturally think that the designer is the God of
>the Bible, but this is for reasons other than that the scientific
evidence
>for design inherently requires that conclusion. Behe has a whole
chapter on
>this subject in Darwin's Black Box.
>Phil Johnson (quoted with his permission from a private communication)
This seems disingenous.
My Webster dictionary's definition of supernatural is, "Being beyond,
or exceeding, the power or laws of nature," which is also the
definition of miraculous.
Is Johnson using a different definition?
My understanding of the argument for ID is that there is no
``natural'' explanation for the diversity of life.
In short, Webster, atheists, and (apparently) most Christians see this
intelligent designer as God. What other credible possibility is there?
Surely I don't have to go read a chapter of Behe to find one.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel W. Cannon | (318)869-5160
Dept. of Physics | (318)869-5026 FAX
Centenary College of Louisiana |
P. O. Box 41188 |
Shreveport, LA 71134-1188 |