Atheist accepts Intelligent Design

The problem with this appears to me to be that the person seems to think that Intelligent Design excludes evolution. It doesn’t. To make this claim means you have to -assume- that God can not design evolution which is patently false.

The same with creationists who say “Genesis teaches there is no evolution”. That’s a crock. Genesis makes a theological statement about how things came to be, not a scientific one. As soon as you say evolution, you have stepped out of the realm of the metaphysical and into the realm of science, and they are mutually exclusive.

Science can not make metaphysical determinations, as it is based on and require empirical, observable data, and “whether there is a God or not” is not based on empirical observable data but faith.

2 comments… add one
  • stephen

    An important to anyone watching the video, taken from the intro to the video on YouTube:

    This video is not sarcasm, it is parody and dramatic irony.

    Only a tiny minority missed the point, so for their sake, the premise is this: Of all the things creationists could have used as the icon of Intelligent Design (theyre all equally flawed), they chose something that gives us typhoid, cholera and stomach cancer. Hence the irony.

    If creationists do indeed mistake this for a creationist video, thats the idea. Because while most creationist videos describe the wonderful design of the flagellum and stop there, leaving viewers satisfied that their deity must be the designer, I continue with a description of what the flagellum actually does it pushes a bacterium into childrens guts and subjects them to an agonizing death. I imagine that as the video continues, the satisfaction of creationist viewer changes to discomfort, then puzzlement.


  • Hi Stephen,

    My point was that assuming “creationists” mean people who only believe in Young Earth, or Intelligent design is a gross misunderstanding of what a “Creationist” is.

    A creationist is someone who believes there is a God from who’s activities all things came to be. The science behind it is irrelevant theologically. There is nothing, and can be nothing in science that explains away God. This is true to a Creationist because a Creationist believes science exists only because it is a result of the natural order which God caused to exist.

    God did cause the universe to exist, but as to whether a flagellum proves this? bah.. doesn’t even matter, its irrelevant. Those who believe it does might be mistaken, and those who believe it does not are even more likely to be mistaken because they are basing their argument on a flawed and irrelevant conclusion in the first place.

    Lets get this straight. I (we) do not believe God created BECAUSE the bible says so. I (we) believe it because we have a personal relationship with God, and there we go.