A lot of research has shown how, for example, modifications in HOX genes influence phenotypic changes in limb development. Thus I am baffled at your statement.
Peace,
Chris
1 Like
Thatās creationism, not ID. best to avoid confusing the terms.
1 Like
According to Wikipedia:Intelligent design - Wikipedia
" ID is a form of creationism that lacks empirical support and offers no testable or tenable hypotheses, and is therefore not science."
The fact is that it does not lack empirical support and does have a testable hypothesis in the creation of cancer and spontaneous remission of cancer. But of course they have made up a story about cancer that is NOT scientifically based.
They can create transformed cells when mutagenic agents are applied to cells as to put them into crisis. However the transformed cells never develop into cancer. And some have been in cell cultures for more than 50 years. It is only their reasoning that if the cells continue to divide then they must develop more and more mutations. It is not an observed fact.
Considerā¦ information in the non-physical realm, The Mind of God, is selected and upheld in the Divine Consciousness so that the material/ physical realm comes into being. However the Supreme Being, God, must continue to uphold that information, together with meaning/ rules that govern it, for all things in the physical realm can continue to exist and behave in a manner that we observe both in physical and biological laws or rules.
So it is really impossible to talk of intelligent design without the designer/ creator/ sustainer of the created forms both living and non-living.
It seems you believe that the physical world isnāt really anything in itself and is never anything independent of its being currently in the mind of God. That would seem to suggest a limitation in the creator Himself in that the creation of matter capable of independent existence is beyond His powers. Is this an orthodox Christian belief?
Yes, in the NT in Paulās writings.
1 Like
ID might be relevant to talking about a creator, but they are separate concerns. Former is solely about what we can validly infer from empirical evidence. Latter enters non empirical fields like philosophy and theology. Related, but an important difference.
ID can be applied to any empirical realm of possible intelligent intervention, such as forensics, network security, gmo detection, steganography, etc. All of which donāt deal with an ultimate divine creator. Same cannot be said of creationism. This is why ID is different from creationism. So to say ID is identical to creationism is a confusion of terms.
Okay if you use it in a general way. But I was thinking about intelligent design with specific reference to life forms.
1 Like
Here is one place it is pretty explicit;
ā¦he upholds the universe by the word of his power. Hebrews 1:3
Yes, the creation is really only a simulation. We, as created conscious beings, so are able to perceive the information and thus have the experience of living in a physical realm.
This is no limitation in the Creator. Nothing is outside of, or independent of God.
This is not uniquely a Christian view, which IMO is based on things that Jesus said. It is also stated in the Gita and there are references in the Holy Koran and other religious texts.
That is not an orthodox Christian belief, however. We are nonetheless real because he upholds our existence. A soap bubble is real, but it needs uniform surface tension to exist.
2 Likes
āWeā are real, for sure, but who are āweā. I donāt see that we are the body. Maybe the Christian view is that āweā are the body, but that is not my understanding. I believe that we are souls having physical experiences. So I donāt believe that the body has to be resurrected at some time in the future. We exist in the spiritual realm. So my understand of what is real is perhaps different, but from what I understand of what Jesus talked about, we are souls, not the body. The body is only a temporary garment, which we leave behind when we āpass awayā or āreturn homeā I would say.
It is like the difference between looking at things with a microscope (where the lines on a paper are never straight but jagged) as opposed to looking at the big picture. When talking of cancer, whose DNA is it really and what are the forces of natural selection on that DNA ā to favor the survival of cancer cells or to oppose them? In the long run (which is the usual focus of the theory of evolution), the selection process working on this DNA is obviously against cancer not for it.
To be sure, in the fight against cancer, we are well advised to consider that the evolutionary process can play a role. But when it comes to explaining evolution and giving examples, I cannot say that it is good idea to put forward cancer as an example of evolution. It is a matter of theory versus application. The evolution of cancer cells definitely comes under the category of application and should not be part of an explanation of the theory of evolution, which is after all the focus of this thread.
There are plenty of places in the NT that talk about resurrection bodies. 1 Corinthians 15 deals with it pretty extensively.
2 Likes
It is an idea that has intermittent support catering to religiosity aimed at making the role of God (ans thus by implication religious activities/people) more important. But in reality it makes God look like a dreamer who cannot create anything real, or an inept carpenter who cannot make a table that stands on its own without have to hold it together himself. It is typical of those who seek to elevate religion over science ā pushing the idea that it is God and not the laws of nature which holds everything together. But the result is a picture of God as a control freak so grasping for power and control that He cannot delegate to anyone or anything. This is not consistent with what we see in the Bible and it is not admirable in the slightest.
To be sure the scientists here who have found value in Christianity are not likely to support such an idea. We believe in BOTH science and Christianity. Thus we know that the laws of nature do hold everything together, but it is because God created them to do that.
1 Like
In reality, @mitchellmckain is ignoring the Hebrews verse I cited. The above is just his personal view.
I didnāt think youād sign off on that vision of God. Viewing creation as nothing but a magical illusion makes one wonder how much support there can be for creation care, and makes this sort of believer an unreliable neighbor. Regarding the planet as a toy which the creator can replace in an instant doesnāt do much to instill a sense of responsibility.
Yes there are places, but I donāt trust anything of Paul. I donāt believe he is a true apostle.
No I was not addressing Daleās post because the world does not revolve around him. I have not ignored that verse but have spoken about it previously in several other threads on this forum. As with most of the Bible we seek to understand the parts in a way that is consistent with the whole. The view of God as a dreamer or inept carpenter is NOT consistent with the rest of the Bible so that is certainly NOT how I would understand Hebrews 1:3.
To be sure there are believers in magical powers, talking animals, and golems of dust and bone, but I am certainly not one of them. The only power of words is the meaning they communicate and so this would refer to what God upholds by his communication to man and angels. And I do not believe this includes any more than directing events according to His providence and will for us and the world. So yes I certainly think that God directs events to protect life upon the earth in a universe with many chaotic and destructive forces which could end it all quite easily.
Soā¦ inept carpenter holding together his table which cannot stand on its own? Nope!
Shepherd guarding his sheep from all the dangerous forces in the universe? Yep!
You are assuming that the scientific ātheoryā on cancer clonal evolution is a valid theory. It has no supporting evidence. It is really and untested hypothesis at best.
Cancer does not arise out of transformed cells as is supposed and told to the public. There is clear evidence that cancer arises from cancer stem cells and they donāt come about out of any evolutionary process. They point to intelligent design.
The NT says the entire world will be completely destroyed, I think down to disintegration of the fundamental elements, and then remade.