by President Bush came out for teaching both Evolutionism and Intelligent Design today. It made the news spot on the CBS Radio news this morning, and it’s lighting up portions of the internet as those that take what they’ve been taught by secular teachers for gospel attack what they do not know or understand. Let me state some things that some of the posts on other sites have plainly missed:
- First, the study of origins is purely an historical exercise. You can not perform tests on current items and extrapolate back that things were exactly as they are now. However, this is exactly what Evolutionism does. It takes what they can observe now, and says this is how it always must have been, and construct their thesis around it.
- Second, their dating mechanisms have been proven wrong by known dates. That means their interpretations of dates are flawed.
- Three, there have been no documented cases of life evolving from non life. There have been no species to species conversion. Both of these are required for species evolution.
- Four, items in our present world have what is called “irreducible complexity.” Simply put, these
items must have existed as a whole for there to have been any use or benefit. One example is the human eye– which would have been worthless or caused more pain if it was not intact than if if it was totally non-functioning.
There’s more, but don’t get sucked into this is a “scientific” vs. “religious” debate. Neither side denies survival of the fittest, but they do differ on origins.
(Visited 15 times, 1 visits today)
Good for the President! Evolution’s monolopy on origins should be challenged, and I believe that is why there’s such opposition in trying to include any other alternative theories.
We are dealing in theories, and no matter how hard evolutionists claim to be open minded, excluding other theories simply because they have a ‘religious’ bent, makes them look more dogmatic and zealous than most religious organizations. In denying access to competing theories, they wish to claim victory by default and (perhaps) change their ‘theory’ into ‘fact’.
Though I don’t fully agree with the ID movement, I do find it interesting that these ID scientists are now using ‘science’ to build a wedge on the evolutionary theory to expose it as ‘faith’. It’s so interesting how the pendulum swings.
But may the Lord be praised in this opportunity He’s provided.
One of the things that bothers me about ID is that it still assumes that sin and this sin cursed world was the way it was made, rather than a perfect God who created a perfect world that sin ruined. With that part left out, we’re back to the old arguments about why would a creator create malaria?