Christian Darwinism Intelligent Design News

Why Christian Darwinism is a dead duck

Spread the love

Along with anyone who buys into it.

Being as Communion Someone brown-bagged me the Canadian Christians in Science publication, Perspectives’s review of William Dembski’s Being as Communion.

That took me back a ways. To the days when I used to listen to those clever people, and their immense betrayal of basic principles: Like it matters whether human beings can think or not.

This is what it seems like:

They wanted jobs in a system run by materialist atheists. And meeting the system most of the way was the only way to get them. That was their right.

Christians for Darwin are mostly decent people, but have no idea that they do not need to grovel anymore. Raise your heads. To say nothing of your standards.

Anyway, from the review:

And for those already familiar with the intelligent design movement, this book does much to clear away some long-standing misconceptions that have diminished its appeal.

Misconceptions that Christians for Darwin benefited from promoting.

The book as a whole, however, can be somewhat frustrating. The internal logic of the progression of chapters and topics is not readily discernible. There were a number of better ways Dembski could have built his argument and organized his book to enhance its cogency, increasing significantly the ease of informational uptake of the book’s message.

Funny a journalist like me who had been paying attention wouldn’t have any trouble understanding it then. Why was no Christian who has a job in science paying attention? Too scary?

Leaving aside issues of improving the book’s form, I will offer in closing a couple of comments on its content-one commendatory, two critical. … – Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith Volume 67 #3, September 2015

Pay if you want; it is not worth pursuing.

The reviewer works for a Christian university whose students can no longer be licensed in the (big) province of Ontario because the U doesn’t endorse Big Gay.

Doctors in Ontario are no longer entitled to refuse to refer unborn children to be killed (“ abortions” is the polite word). They will soon no longer be entitled to refer adult patients for euthanasia.

All this is, in my view, largely the doing of Christian Darwinism and other efforts to accommodate Big Atheism. And the people involved may well be happy stewing away in the mess, as long as they still have their jobs.

Note: This would have been a Sunday story, but there were issues around copying from the .pdf the journal provided that could not be resolved prior to the end of the long weekend (Labour Day). Sorry for any inconvenience.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

10 Replies to “Why Christian Darwinism is a dead duck

  1. 1
    Dr JDD says:

    If the materialists are right, and abiogenesis can occur through pure luck, single celled organisms by blind chance and molecules to man in random happenstance is true, why on earth would anyone invest their life and it’s direction to the Christian paradigm? A belief that encourages the receipt of persecution, mocking, and denial of worldly things the flesh craves for.

    Paul says similarly about the resurrection of the dead. If it is not true we are to be the most pitied among all humans.

    Christian Darwinism is an allagorous term for weak faith unfortunately. Or seeking to find favour among men.

  2. 2
    daveS says:

    The reviewer works for a Christian university whose students can no longer be licensed in the (big) province of Ontario because the U doesn’t endorse Big Gay.

    I’m not familiar with Trinity Western University, but it appears to be subsidized by the federal government, so I can understand the gay community’s concern over the university’s discrimination.

  3. 3
    News says:

    TWU is a not-for-profit institution:

    http://ablawg.ca/2015/03/09/tr.....s-at-work/

  4. 4
    daveS says:

    TWU is a not-for-profit-institution

    Yes? I’m confused why you posted a link to that blog, since the last paragraph includes:

    The public deserves an inquiry into how TWU is spending taxpayer money to advocate in the media, before law societies, and now in the courts, the position that it is acceptable – in fact, essential to freedom of religion – to discriminate against gay and lesbian students and staff. These activities are contrary to public policy; therefore, TWU’s charitable status should be revoked. Then the taxpaying public will no longer be compelled to fund an institution that is hostile to gay and lesbian equality.

  5. 5
    anthropic says:

    dS 4 “The public deserves an inquiry into how TWU is spending taxpayer money to advocate in the media, before law societies, and now in the courts, the position that it is acceptable – in fact, essential to freedom of religion – to discriminate against gay and lesbian students and staff. These activities are contrary to public policy; therefore, TWU’s charitable status should be revoked. Then the taxpaying public will no longer be compelled to fund an institution that is hostile to gay and lesbian equality.”

    Charitable status equals taxpayer funding? Only if one assumes that all activities that are not taxed, like reading to your children, are taxpayer funded.

    Sounds like North Korea, not the US or Canada.

  6. 6
    daveS says:

    anthropic,

    Charitable status equals taxpayer funding? Only if one assumes that all activities that are not taxed, like reading to your children, are taxpayer funded.

    Sounds like North Korea, not the US or Canada.

    They get tax breaks based on their charitable status. The school also gets funding from the federal government to support their infrastructure.

  7. 7
    News says:

    In Canada, not-for-profit status has traditionally meant just that: The organization is not run for profit. It has NOT meant that the organization promotes various widely-held opinions or beliefs.

  8. 8
    goodusername says:

    Christians for Darwin are mostly decent people, but have no idea that they do not need to grovel anymore. Raise your heads. To say nothing of your standards.

    It’s funny to see ID proponents complain about groups like BioLogos in exactly the same way that I often see Creationists (particularly YECs) complain about the Discovery Institute and other ID Proponents.

    Creationists often accuse (most) ID proponents of compromising with atheists/materialists by not accepting a literal interpretation of Genesis and accepting an old earth, and often even accepting common descent. They often see IDers as groveling for acceptability among wordly peers.

  9. 9
    daveS says:

    In Canada, not-for-profit status has traditionally meant just that: The organization is not run for profit. It has NOT meant that the organization promotes various widely-held opinions or beliefs.

    Is accepting students regardless of sexual orientation considered promoting opinions/beliefs? I would characterize it as a basic principle of nondiscrimination, and would expect federally funded institutions to uphold it.

  10. 10
    anthropic says:

    dS 9

    “Is accepting students regardless of sexual orientation considered promoting opinions/beliefs?”

    Yes. Just as accepting students with regard to their sexual orientation is considered promoting opinions/beliefs. The problem arises because the state wishes to discriminate in favor of the first belief and against the latter.

Leave a Reply