Are theistic evolutionists really IDers?

Didn't see the relevance in anything you posted. Any theistic evos want to chime in on why and whether they see evidence for God, or are they just maintaining faith there is a God but all available evidence for the universe indicates there isn't...or there is....or what?

buzsaw, not getting into the question of biblical IDers.....nor the fact it is inconsistent to accept Darwinism and the Bible, though I agree with you that there are inconsistencies between NeoDarwinism and the Bible, but for me, there are inconsistencies between the view of science espoused by evos and belief in God at all.

Agreed but mainly I am getting at is that theistic evos are generally within the ID camp per the creation of the universe and yet many belittle ID as a threat to science or some such.Seems mighty inconsistent to me....would like to hear how some theistic evos resolve that.

Id is the belief that the universe can best be understood as the result of an Intelligent Cause.

How is it anti-science and yet theistic evos are pro-science?Is belief in evolution the arbiter between what is genuine science and what is not?

I forget I am dealing with quibblers. Substitute "hypothesis" for "belief" to get the picture.

Buzz, I am talking of theistic evos, probably most that believe in some aspects of the Bible, but they probably don't all accept the Bible as wholly the word of God.I wanted to start with Christians that believe God intended for man to evolve and so evolution is the creative mechanism of God because such a belief is clearly teleological, and yet theistic evos have criticisms of teleology. This is an inconstistency.But the same applies to Jewish, Muslim or even Deists if they think God knew and intended man to be created via evolution.

Unfounded and outrageous accusations are no substitute for rational discourse.Bottom line is that theistic evos accept an Intelligent Designer but apparently for theological reasons believe that the Intelligent Designer only intervened in creating the universe and that the universe is not intimately directed at any stage of it's process. Imo, this profoundly contradicts both science and biblical theology, but regardless, it strikes me that theistic evos commit the same "sins" of accepting an Intelligent Designer as other IDers, and yet you guys don't have a problem with them.interesting.....

You guys can keep mischaracterizing ID that way if you want, but it's simply not true. Both in biology and related sciences, and math and physics, ID presents very specific positive evidence. You can disagree with trying to use forensics or other more nuanced positive evidence if you want to, but to pretend no positive evidence is presented is just false. Is this really true? I would think theistic evos, at least those that believe God intended on man being created, think that evolution and so-called "natural" processes are God's "tinkering." So are you arguing that theistic evos believe in an Intelligent Designer despite all the evidence being there is no Designer?

Looks like we have found common ground.....sort of.

By "us", I assume you mean evos since non-evos disagree profoundly with your perception of reality, even in basic facts.Yea, I've seen the movie and read Uncommon Descent, which is one reason I can safely say the accusations are outrageous and false. What evidentiary reasons? Specifically, what evidence is there that:1. That God exists in the first place?
2. That God intended on man's creation?
3. That God never intervenes in this creation and has no connection to it in sustaining it?Edited by randman, : No reason given.

What basis do you have for saying this? It amazes me you guys keep saying stuff like this but many IDers only came to ID after previously being evos and finding it didn't work. In other words, they empirically abandoned Darwinism not due a leap of faith but empirical reasoning. So ID is theoritically acceptable? Hmmm....why the hostility towards ID scientists presenting material in order to do that? So you have an unreasonable standard for evidence and are prejudiced against the concept based on your belief system?Otherwise, why would you reject the idea that the universe can best be understood as the result of an Intelligent Cause rather than originating from nothing at all, by itself, with no cause whatsoever.

Uh huh....so a bunch of evos bash creationism and ID? what else is new?

There is plenty of evidence, namely the universe itself, but you choose to reject it. Certainly, the idea the universe began without cause and without intelligent cause is irrational.

There is no rigorous examination of ID by it's detractors. That is most clearly seen by their numerous misrepresentations of it. Heck, they don't even understand it, much less can claim to have rigorously considered ID papers and claims.Moreover, an appeal to authority is a very weak argument. Mere;y showing a bunch of ID haters hate ID doesn't say much at all.