ID and contradictions to other faiths

On another thread ID man states: On other threads I have claimed that many proponents of ID do not realize that when followed to their logical conclusion ID contradicts other beliefs. Let us evaluate this proposition.Before we start, I say other beliefs as ID is a form of faith (see Who designed the ID designer(s)? http://EvC Forum: Who designed the ID designer(s)?), and the first obvious contradiction is that of combining two different faiths means compromises must be made to both. You can't be black and white without getting into areas of gray. That issue need not be discussed here, and can be addressed on the noted and linked thread. SO -- leaving aside the faith issue of ID here and focusing solely on the other aspects of ID we can show several innate contradictions that render ID incompatible with YEC, OEC and other strict fundamental literal versions of faith.

Monotheism

Most fundamental religions are monotheistic; there is only one god and no demi-gods (although some have angels which are thought by anthropologists to be the remnants of earlier lesser gods). One exception is fundamental Hinduism.ID on the other hand proposes that the designer agents are not specified and could as easily be a race of eight armed green and purple aliens from Tau Ceti.One god does not equal many agents. Not only that, but the "critical" elements of creation of "life, the universe, and everything" are specifically attributed to THE god and not to be carried out by lesser {gods\beings\angels\whatever} (especially whatever). Forcing the injection of either demi-gods or alien agents into this mix is usually viewed as blasphemy, with the one exception of Hinduism.Assuming that "THE designer" is "the designer of your religion" contradicts the precept of ID that it can be a race of eight armed green and purple aliens from Tau Ceti.

Age of the Earth

According to ID all known scientific evidence is valid, being judged on a rational and logical basis (the only quibble is over what you assume after you say "how did that come to be?"). Thus geological, radiological, and astronomical evidence shows that the earth is 4.55 billion years old, and there is no need for ID to question this information, so the ID age of the earth is 4.55 billion years old.Any faith that includes a specific belief in the age of the earth other than the scientific one is at odds with this fact. Young Earth Creationism (YEC) specifically is contradicted by this ID position and vice-versa. Fundamental Hinduism is also at odds because it believes the earth is older than the scientific evidence allows.

Age of the Universe

According to ID all known scientific evidence is valid, being judged on a rational and logical basis (the only quibble is over what you assume after you say "how did that come to be?"). Thus radiological, astronomical and astro-physical evidence shows that the universe is 13.5 billion years old, and there is no need for ID to question this information, so the ID age of the universe is 13.5 billion years old. This also includes evidence of stars and galaxies that existed at least 13 billion years ago.Any faith that includes a specific belief in the age of the universe other than the scientific one is at odds with this fact. Young Earth Creationism (YEC) specifically is contradicted by this ID position and vice-versa. Again, fundamental Hinduism is at odds because it believes the universe is older than the scientific evidence allows.In addition any faith that places the earth as being as old or older than the universe is at odds with these two facts. Here various forms of Old Earth Creationism (OEC) have problems because they usually still adhere to the order of creation with the earth before the stars, and the evidence here is otherwise (in fact the evidence is that the earth is formed from the debris of earlier stars after their novaic deaths).

Heaven, Hell, Soul, Sin, Redemption, etc

These are some of the "bells and whistles" of other beliefs, and I include them here to show that these philosophical elements are missing from ID. All fundamentalist literal religions have a lot to say on these aspects of life. These are, really the essential parts of many faiths (those creation sections are a small part of the story).ID on the other hand says nada, and that the whole "life, the universe, and everything" enchilada can come about from the handiwork of that race of eight armed green and purple aliens from Tau Ceti, and that therefore there is no moral imperative handed down for guidance, no mechanism for prayers to be answered, etcetera. Spiritual realms, heavens and hells are outside the purview of scientific evidence no matter how rationally and logically they are considered, and thus are outside the purview of the ID universe.There are some beliefs, such as Deism, that also do not have these elements, so they do not contradict ID (rather ID is a subset of Deism, but that is also another issue addressed on another topic (see "is ID properly pursued?" http://EvC Forum: Is ID properly pursued? to discuss this issue). These other beliefs, however are not the literal fundamental ones at odds with some sciences.

Evolution

At it's heart ID accepts all known scientific evidence, including the evidence for geological layers, formations and ages, the ages and distributions of fossils geographically and temporally and the clear genetic and morphological development of different species down through the ages. At it's heart there is no quibble over the emergence of whole new classes of life at different times on this planet, from aquatic to amphibious to land based, fish to reptiles to mammals, rodent ancestor to monkey ancestor to ape ancestor to human. The only quibble that ID may have is over this issue of whether "macro" changes were natural occurrences or the result of tampering by those lovely little eight armed green and purple aliens from Tau Ceti. The cladistic tree of evolution is not a contradiction of the ID concept, in fact the statement that "evolution is 100% correct because it was designed that way" would put full and complete acceptance of all the evolution science, evidence and theory within the realms of possibilities of the ID universe.This obviously is a major contradiction for all those strict fundamental literal versions of faith, or they wouldn't be arguing that evolution is wrong.

Conclusion

​

That to me is a short list of the problems, and it should be enough to show that there are significant, fundamental contradictions between IDeism and the strict fundamental literal versions of faith such that they are just not compatible.Enjoy.This message has been edited by RAZD, 09-09-2004 11:41 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

A point of pedantry: Actually, Hinduism is as monotheistic as Christianity - which is to say they have multiple gods but claim them to be manifestations of the same deity.

yes, avatars, I believe the word is, but it is kind of a musical chairs deity ...thanks