JAR's amazing theory of a Creator who doesn't Design (Faith & jar & invitees)

In response to a challenge, jar gave an explanation for his contention that there is a Creator who is not a Designer as follows:http://EvC Forum: Does Darwinism Equal "No God"? -->EvC Forum: Does Darwinism Equal "No God"? I don't want to get off on how the ToE does or doesn't equal atheism on this thread, but just address this idea that there can be a Creator who is not a Designer. And I don't get this idea at all. This boggles the mind, jar. The two terms are just about synonymous in ordinary usage for starters. Is there a creator of fiction who didn't design his characters? Is there an inventor who didn't design the invention? Is there an artist who didn't design the work of art? Etc. Scripture says He SPOKE it all into existence I believe. ... and the Word was God and by Him were all things made that were made. Isn't this the same thing as designing them? Again, how do you create something without designing it? You can create things from plans or a recipe, but that's not really creation. When one creates, one designs. When He created, He designed. Perhaps this is merely a semantic problem and what you mean to say is that he did indeed design the universe but left it to work itself out according to the laws he put in place, pretty much a Deist position. But even in this case to say he created any of it is to say he designed it -- designed it to play itself out as it is doing.This message has been edited by Faith, 12-20-2005 11:57 AM

I would like to invite Randman to this debate. I suspect you are simply having a problem with words but if there's more to it I think the addition of another person might help sort it out. Feel free to invite someone from the evo side to help translate for you.This message has been edited by Faith, 12-19-2005 06:11 PM

With your permission I would like to invite LinearAq to the debate as he has expressed an interest in it here, to which I replied here.

...and give us your understanding of what has been said so far.This message has been edited by Faith, 12-19-2005 07:32 PM

...if there's any more to say.My view of this is that I already answered jar sufficiently in my original post showing how there is no such thing as a true creator who is not a designer, so I really have nothing more to say.If all he is saying is that he believes God merely set it all in motion and withdrew from participation in it, basically he's saying he's a Deist, and that could have been more easily said than by this odd use of the concepts of creation and design.There is some question in my mind how a creator could create the universe but not the galaxies, but I guess that's the idea that the Big Bang did it. But then didn't God create the chemical properties for the Big Bang and the laws by which they were dispersed throughout the universe and wouldn't the formation of galaxies be the predictable result and therefore He would have planned that too? But I don't know that I care about this distinction enough to pursue it. If he's simply stating a Deist premise I can leave it at that.This message has been edited by Faith, 12-20-2005 03:42 AM

No, I'll get back to it. Just need to regroup as it were.

On rethinking this, I realize I don't have any more to say and the thread should be closed if others don't want to participate. There's nothing more to say to someone who can quote that same old list of predominantly liberal clergy ahd call it the standard Christian position. It would take me weeks of scouring individual church websites to come up with a comparable list of conservative literalist clergy who comment at the site on Genesis and evolution, to show how wrong you are. I think you operate by the rule that if you tell a big enough lie often enough people will believe it.So please close the thread.This message has been edited by Faith, 12-20-2005 07:46 PMThis message has been edited by Faith, 12-20-2005 07:47 PM