Intelligent Design is for Atheists, or Satanists

To establish the problems with Intelligent design, there are a few questions that need be answered – just to establish where you (as a supporter of ID) stand theologically. I have already gone on record as saying there is a supreme being, that everything was created with a word (the Big-Bang) and that creation included freewill as a necessary component.

1. Do you believe in a Supreme deity?
2. If yes, did that deity create the everything in the physical universe?
3. Do you believe in freewill, or predestination? (Do we have choices, or are events and outcomes predetermined?)
4. If you believe in a Supreme deity, does supremacy include perfection, or is the deity falible?
5. A) If you do not believe in a Supreme deity, do you believe lesser deities exist?
B) If you believe in a Supreme deity, do you believe lesser deities exist?
6. Ancient culture, and the Bible, cite multiple “Gods” – the implication is that they are of comparable power and rank – do you in anyway subscribe to that belief?
7. Do you accept the possibility that both Moses and Jesus were real people?


If you believe in in a Supreme deity – by definition, one who is unique, all knowing, all wise and all powerful – why would you challenge such a deity having the ability to set events in motion which allow for freewill and the generation of outcomes based on the random effect which is an intrinsic part of freewill?

Freewill, means choice which is not known beforehand. Will an individual obey, or disobey? Will that individual kill another, or show mercy when killing is mandated – thus allowing another live when they should have died? (Both are demonstrated in the Old Testament – the first in Genesis the second in Exodus)

Do you understand that an individual dying changes future generations as much as one who should have died, but lived, does? And that, absent predestination, both generate their own series of events which are “undirected” because they are based on freewill?

Do you grasp the idea that Intelligent Design argues for an absence of freewill in biological process?

Intelligent Design proponents (per their website, and related pages) argue for a specific designer for complex biological organisms – examples are birds and bacteria. ID proponents argue that design has purpose, and is recognized by that purpose. Therefore, they must be able to define the purpose.

What is the purpose of a Bird? What is the purpose of bacteria? Are both necessary components of a bigger design? If so, what is that design and what is its purpose? Why was there creation at all?

If we were not, as ID allows, the product of a deity (supreme or otherwise) they all religion is wrong and ID is anti-religious belief.

If a designer created an entity whose purpose is solely malevolent, it follows that the design was/is intentionally malevolent. Such an entity could not be a loving, benevolent or kind – be it a deity, or physical entity. So, on the disease level – which is as ancient as any organic level – we are dealing with a malevolent designer. And if there is a benevolent supreme being – either that being created the malevolent designer, with us as the creation of the designer and not the deity; or the deity itself is malevolent. If the latter, ID is again challenging most established theologies.

The key element is not the existence of an intelligent design – rather it is the nature of the designer and purpose of the various designs (if those designs did not emulate directly from the original design). That purpose dictates the nature of the designer and their level – or status – in a pantheon.

Those who advocate Intelligent Design – either believe:
A. There is no deity and the designer is moral – example a member of an alien race.
B. That the deity exists, but is incapable of perfect design.
C. That the deity exists, but there is an equally powerful malevolent deity – the evidence of which is far easier to establish than that of a benevolent deity.
D. That the deity exists, and intentionally modifies disease – as an ongoing process – to destroy humanity. Since there are more efficient means then physical plagues, earthquakes of disease – an all powerful deity could just un-create everything with a word, utilizing a process opposite to that of the biblical creation or “Big-Bang” – the ID deity apparently takes a perverse pleasure in the suffering of humanity.

Among the most obvious things we know about those who advocated ID – they are neither Christian nor Jewish ... for that matter, they are not members of any Abrahamic tradition. This is so because they are seeking proof of a designer – when all we need do is look around to know one existed, or exists. Proof negates faith, and in the case of all Abrahamic faiths, faith is the operable term – more so if one is Christian, where the only path to salvation is through faith (asserted so many times in New Testament it warrants no citations).

Whereas Intelligent design proponents are either Satan worshipers, Atheists, or being suckered by ID proponents to renounce any possibility of a religious based survival, or salvation, adherents of Evolution have no such problem. Evolution begins with the Big-Bang and doesn’t address the origins issue – seeks no proof of a deity – rather, evolution accepts our existence and deals with the explanation of process utilized to affect creation.

Rather than challenging the existence of a deity, evolution – if pushed to discuss time before the big-bang – accepts the deity as being, ultimately, an inescapable given which, since it is by definition theological, is not a fit topic of discussion in an evolutionary context.