Jack Haas wrote:
>
> Howard's comment on the ownwership of the 'anthropic principles' reminds us
> that 'design arguments' rooted in Rom. 1:20 have (and can) be used by
> atheists and deists as well as theists. Use of such arguments without the
> eye of faith is doomed to falure.
1) It's doubtful that arguments of the sort the IDers pursue can appeal to
Rom.1:19-20 for support. When Paul speaks about things that are "plain" and could be
known "since the creation of the world" he can hardly be referring to features of the
world which (supposedly) require the subtleties of information theory, biochemistry &c
to discern.
2) The problem Paul points out here is not atheism but idolatry - not that
people fail to conclude that there is any deity but that they imagine & put their trust
in false deities - which is the perennial problem of natural theology, whether the
resulting idol is a theromorphic statue or the Intelligent Designer.
3) Your concluding statement is quite correct - attempts to discern God's
presence & activity in the world without first knowing & believing in the true God who
has been revealed is bound to end up in idolatry.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 29 2000 - 07:52:55 EDT