Is Intelligent Design Just Another 'God of the Gaps' Theory?

[@katamas832]

Creationists putting down OOL researchers for trying and struggling with a highly complex topic such as biochemistry and the biochemistry of life while they sit in their armchairs saying "God dun did it with magic" without doing an ounce of work themselves never ceases to amaze me. It's just pathetic. And the projection is always amazing.

[@piano9433]

The problem with Bill's explanation is that the fact something is unexpected under evolutionary theory by itself doesn't make it expected under the hypothesis of an intelligent designer. And, of course, postulating it's the case because the designer simply wanted to be so is arbitrary.

[@BCam-m4w]

No. The difference between a god of the gaps appeal and appealing to a natural phenomena that is not yet evidenced is that a natural explanation can make predictions and can be disproven with evidence, while a god of the gaps could have done it anyway despite any contrary evidence.

[@Anonymous247n]

I have been talking to many people on the internet about creationism and intelligent design for about 30 years now. I've studied a related topic later in life. All i can conclude is... YES, intelligent design probably still is a form of a "god of gaps" theory. It comes from people saying "I think this could have impossibly developed in living beings", and then there are the more humble versions like "I believe this person who is a scientist, or this small group of scientists that believes this could have impossibly developed in living beings"... though they are all rooted in egotism, i think. People can't accept the possibility that a certain understanding is not yet achieved, or not yet tested sufficiently. Which brings me to the very clear distinction between the theories of evolution and abiogenesis. There is a pretty good understanding of abiogenesis among the RELEVANT, and i will repeat this again, relevant scietific community. Molecules we call "biomolecules" because we find them in living beings do form from nonliving precursors. The current problem is only that labs have been trying to replicate this for what, 30 years?... While the earth has had billions :) Besides, we might even find good evidence for extraterrestrial life some day. Anyways, for someone with a good grasp on molecular biology, and let's not even talk about people who SPECIALIZE in the field of abiogenesis, for us it's not really that difficult to imagine life forming out of the nonliving materials. It isn't easy though, and does require quite a bit of study and understanding.

[@jordandthornburg]

So you just believe it could have happened by itself but have no evidence but those suggesting there is positive evidence for an intelligent agent (which there is) is a god of the gaps argument?

[@jordandthornburg]

Also do you define relevant origin life researchers as those who agree with you?

[@Anonymous247n]

@@jordandthornburg I understand it could have happened and have evidence to back up my claims. I define relevant origin of life researchers people who specialize in researching the topic of abiogenesis, geology, biochemistry, sister disciplines basically. And yes, those usually have a level of understanding that leads to (mostly) agreements... but of course there is no exciting science without disagreeing the details :)

[@Anonymous247n]

@@jordandthornburg It would be quite hypocritical to define "relevant scientists" as "those who i find agreement with", don't you agree? 🤣 now why would you expect me to do that, or to fall for very obvious baiting after debating people for the better part of 30 years?... :)

[@jordandthornburg]

@@Anonymous247n ok how do you know that it “could have” happened? What scientific experiment was conducted to prove that or give evidence that that is so?

[@The-F.R.E.E.-J.]

Of course Jesus is the God of the gaps, what kind of God would He be if He did not bridge the gap between Himself & human understanding? This goes to the personal, and individual, nature of His being so, it is something that we will be engaged in forever. BTW, Think of this gap: BEFORE there was anything, there was God alone. No time, no space, no matter. How long could you meditate on the gap between then and, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth" ?

[@Anonymous247n]

Well you said it yourself, if there was no time, then the question "how long" does not have any meaning :) You could just as well say it took trillions of eternities worth of "time"... or that there was no time at all. That things just... HAPPENED. Kinda like a big bang :)

[@The-F.R.E.E.-J.]

​@@Anonymous247n I didn't say time, I said gap. So, you're saying the Big bang "just happened". Nope, No faith required to believe that, uh-huh.

[@lmlimpoism]

if he is beyond time and space there is no reason to create the heavens, nor the earth. he is eternally happy.

[@Anonymous247n]

@@The-F.R.E.E.-J. I wasn't citing you. I didn't say "the big bang just happened", but i suppose you weren't citing me either, right? :P No need for the attitude. The big bang is not a question anymore, so no - there is no faith required 🤣 It is a well-proven scientific theory.

[@The-F.R.E.E.-J.]

@@Anonymous247n "PROVEN Theory" Is it a proven scientific theory that that statement is "an acceptable contradiction" ? It has been proved to be true that, some people believe, the theory Elvis is walking among us is true. Hmm, I see now, you are legitimizing those who see Elvis. Well, I guess it has its appeal because, certainly, you are not an unreasonable person, right?