In his new book Tatics: A Game Plan for Discussing your Christian Convictions (Zondervan 2009) Gregory Koukl dicusses worldviews that have self-destructive elements that cause them to fall apart. On the issue of Theistic Evolution he writes:
Some people suggest that God used evolution to design the world. They are motivated, I think, by two impulses. The first is a desire to affirm the Bible. They second is a suspicion Dawrinism might have merit. Thus, they declare both to be true.
These two notions, however, seem imcompatible to me. It may sound reasonable for God to “use” evolution, but if you look closer I think you will see the problem.
Suppose I wanted a straight flush for a hand of poker. I could wither pull the cards out of the deck individually and “design” the hand, or I could shuffle the cards randomly and see if the flush is dealt to me. It would not make any sense, though, to “design” the hand by shuffling the deck and dealing. There’s no way to ensure the results (I guess if I were really clever I could make it look like I was shuffling the deck when in reality I was stacking it, but that would be a deceitful kind of design called “cheating”).
In the same way, either God designs the details of the biological world, or nature shuffles the deck and natural selection chooses the winning hand. The mechanism is either conscious and intentional (design), 0r uinconscious and unintentional (natural selection). Creation has a purpose, a goal. Evolution is accidental, like a straight flush dealt to a poker rookie.
The idea that something is designed by chance is contradictory. Like trying to put a square peg in a round hole, it doesn’t work.
Question: is this an argument for intelligent design?