There’s a recent column at the Chicago Tribune site, with the title “Creationism is biblical, Intelligent Design is agnostic.” I find the claim puzzling. And the argument (if it can even be called an argument) is even more puzzling.
As part of his column, James Kirk Wall writes:
If there is supernatural intelligence, then natural science is simply a study of what was already intelligently designed, and what was intelligently designed is what we now call “natural.”
Perhaps I am misunderstanding him. But it sure seems that he is saying that an agnostic can believe in a supernatural designer, as long as he refers to that supernatural entity as “the intelligent designer” instead of using the name “god.” That is surely a very unusual version of agnosticism.
In his column, Wall asks “Is all of life due to random and blind natural means, or is there something supernatural involved?” Where does Wall get his ideas? I don’t know of any evolutionary biologist who says that all of life is due to random and blind natural means. Creationists allege that, but why would somebody claiming to be an agnostic listen to theists and ignore what evolutionists have to say?