« Religious questioning is natural | Main | Flee from the fear of God »

January 28, 2005


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Why is it that non-Christians tend to know enourmously less that practicing Christians do about the case for Intelligent Design? I find that the more I speak to non-Christians or "spirituality claimers" the more that I am in awe of how little education they have on the SCIENTIFIC data for Intelligent Design.
The truth is that Intelligent Design is not a fight between religion and science, but between science and science. The book "The Case For A Creator" authored by Lee Strobel, interviews professors from prestigious universities, including scientists, bio-chemists, molecular biologist's, etc. These scientist's use science to debunk Darwinism as a viable argument for the origen of life. It just doesn't fit.
Moreover, Professor Antony Flew, the most quoted atheist of our time, denounced in December of 04 his belief that a higher intelligence doesn't play a part in the extraordinary complexity and wisdom of what we so simply call life. Why did he change his view after so many years of being the most prominent atheist among academic circles. He claims that Gerald Schroeder, a molecular biologist and MIT graduate, influence him to change his thinking based on Schroeder's book, SCIENCE And GOD. My point is that there are a number of highly intelligent, scientifically driven researchers out there that believe in Intelligent Design, based on the new scientific data that has come available to us within the last 40 years.
For example, DNA and the encoding with cellular structure has, to put it lightly, awed many scientists. Encoded within one cell along is the same amount of information that exists combining all 30 Volumes of the Britanicca Encyclopedia. The question is not "What" but "Who" encoded such a thing. And that's only one cell.
There is also enourmous data to refute certain aspects of evolution. Darwin himself state that "irreducible complexity" would render his theory false. Well, that data now exists.
Yes, any reasonable Intelligent Design advocate would aquiesce to the fact that plants and animals, to some degree, have evolved based on environmental changes. But that's not really what the debate is about. The debate is not about whether or not we should teach the Bible in schools. The debate is about whether or not we should allow the new and more modern scientific data to be presented, which strongly suggests that there is an inherent wisdom behind life. Why are those opposed so afraid of this? Let science teachers teach science. But they should also be allowed to teach the scientific complexity of the Intelligent Design case. Read the two books I mentioned and you'll see why so many people, religious and scientific, are rethinking there former beliefs.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.