[asa] Random and natural vs intelligence

The November 2007 issue of Christianity Today includes a book review titled "Deconstructing Dawkins" in which author Logan Paul Gage critiques McGrath's book "The Dawkins Delusion." I don't think it's available online yet so let me just type in two paragraphs of the article which I think deserve discussion. My point is not to agree or disagree but to say that this is an articulation of a critical point of difference within our communities that needs to be clearly addressed.

"While theists can have a variety of legitimate views on life's evolution, surely they must maintain that the process involves intelligence. So the question is: Can an intelligent being use random mutations and natural selection to create? No. This is not a theological problem; it is a logical one. The words random and natural are meant to exclude intelligence. If God guides which mutations happen, the mutations are not random; if God chooses which organisms survive so as to guide life's evolution, the selection is intelligent rather than natural.

"Theistic Darwinists maintain that God was "intimately involved" in creation, to use Francis Collins's words. But they also think life developed via genuinely random mutations and genuinely natural selection. Yet they never explain what God is doing in this process. Perhaps there is still room for him to start the whole thing off, but this abandons theism for deism."

This is essentially the same argument that Lee Strobel used on the radio a few weeks ago when he firmly but respectfully rebuked Francis Collins. Evolution is inherently random and without guidance and is therefore mutually exclusive with divine guidance, he said.

Randy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Nov 5 21:27:12 2007