The problem with naturalism, the problem with empiricism

Journal of Creation ^ | Lael Weinberger

[GodGunsGuts]

For all of history, the fundamental issue in the creation-evolution conflict has been philosophical presuppositions, not empirical evidence or ‘brute facts’. Creationists have been pointing this out for many years, with varying degrees of effectiveness. To their credit, the modern Intelligent Design movement has recognized this same point, and for almost twenty years now, has explicitly made philosophical argumentation central in the debate over Darwinism. Phillip Johnson played an important role in bringing the philosophy of naturalism out into the open and onto the dissecting table with his best-selling Darwin on Trial, the book usually credited with launching the modern ID movement.1 Distinctions between ‘methodological naturalism’ and ‘metaphysical naturalism’ became key points of debate.2 Biophysicist Cornelius Hunter has added to this understanding by authoring several books focused on the history of Darwinism and design.3 His latest work, Science’s Blind Spot, turns the tables completely on naturalism, this time in the realm of history, arguing that Darwinism is religious and ID is empirical. This thesis is not new in the ID literature, but Hunter’s way of saying it is.

Bacon vs Descartes

Hunter begins with a trip back in history...

[betty boop]

It always amazes me that YEC’ers would embrace a movement that believes that man evolved over hundreds of millions of years and a movement that believes that God may be dead.

Jeepers, you lost me there, ColdWater. YECers are part of the "God is dead" movement??? I don't think they embrace the theory that man evolved over hundreds of million years.

Your description applies better to Neo-Darwinists than to YEC theorists. Or so it seems to me.

Did I miss something?

[ColdWater]

Did I miss something?

Yes.

[betty boop]

What?

[ColdWater]

I don't think they embrace the theory that man evolved over hundreds of million years.

From your post:

"Many Christians have welcomed the ID movement ..."

[tacticalogic]

It always amazes me that YEC’ers would embrace a movement that believes that man evolved over hundreds of millions of years and a movement that believes that God may be dead.

It would be a rational strategy if ID was being used as a Trojan horse, meant to be torn down and burned once inside the gates.

[betty boop]

"Many Christians have welcomed the ID movement ..."

Well — so what?

[betty boop]

From your post: "Many Christians have welcomed the ID movement ..."

From my post? I don't recall writing that line...though I think it's very likely true.

[ColdWater]

"Many Christians have welcomed the ID movement ..."

Well — so what?

You welcome a movement that has declared that God must be dead since there is no evidence for his existence in the last few hundred million years?

[ColdWater]

From my post? I don't recall writing that line...though I think it's very likely true.

You posted it from the article.

[ColdWater]

It would be a rational strategy if ID was being used as a Trojan horse, meant to be torn down and burned once inside the gates.

The YEC'ers have even stated that they will tear down and burn their OEC and theistic evolutionary allies once they defeat Darwinism.

[betty boop]

You welcome a movement that has declared that God must be dead since there is no evidence for his existence in the last few hundred million years?

What on earth are you talking about?

When did I "welcome a movement?" Especially one that declares God "dead?"

I don't need "empirical evidence" for God. His "existence" is "evident" to me daily, from non-empirical sources.

[ColdWater]

When did I "welcome a movement?" Especially one that declares God "dead?"

I was a little careless. Not that I know that you do NOT welcome the ID movement, I will not state otherwise.

[betty boop]

The YEC'ers have even stated that they will tear down and burn their OEC and theistic evolutionary allies once they defeat Darwinism.

Oh really???

Point me to a source that corroborates this allegation?

[ColdWater]

Oh really??? Point me to a source that corroborates this allegation?

Several FR's have stated in the past that NO one that believes other than their YEC belief is a Christian and they will have to be dealt with in the future as non-Christians.

[betty boop]

I’m not into “movements.” But I do care about interesting science....

[betty boop]

Several FR's have stated in the past that NO one that believes other than their YEC belief is a Christian and they will have to be dealt with in the future as non-Christians.

So you're the source?

[ColdWater]

Point me to a source that corroborates this allegation?

You have been on these threads for years and are not aware that YEC'ers consider anyone that does not accept their YEC philosophy to be non-Christians?

[ColdWater]

So you're the source?

No. Ask any YEC'er. Except GGG. He is an anomaly. He even states that God is the Intelligent Designer, unlike Metmom.

[tacticalogic]

The YEC'ers have even stated that they will tear down and burn their OEC and theistic evolutionary allies once they defeat Darwinism.

Someone might have expressed that sentiment, but you can't attribute it to all of them.

It's ugly when a single person mentions the Inquisitions and suddenly that's "what the Evos say". It doesn't get any prettier coming from the other direction.

[ColdWater]

Someone might have expressed that sentiment, but you can't attribute it to all of them.

It was several. Give me a YECer and we can ask him.