They didn't teach creationist theory as the absolute definitive truth, they tought it as a plausible element to many Christian worldviews That's kind of the po

They didn't teach creationist theory as the absolute definitive truth, they tought it as a plausible element to many Christian worldviews That's kind of the point, though. Creationism is not a plausible theory. It does not explain the evidence and is contradicted by the world around us. The only way you could allow for creator god that fits the observed evidence is if you posit that he does exactly what nature would do by itself. I.e. the only god that fits the observed evidence is nature... which is exactly the point of Eliezer's article.