Wednesday, August 03, 2005

 
Mentioning Intelligent Design Upsets Some People
Much of the scientific establishment says that intelligent design is not a tested scientific theory but a cleverly marketed effort to introduce religious -- especially Christian -- thinking to students. Opponents say that church groups and other interest groups are pursuing political channels instead of first building support through traditional scientific review.

Hard-core atheists have failed to realize that they have already lost. How do I know this? Every time I turn around there is some article in Time or MSNBC postulating that multiple universes exist. And those who postulate that readily admit that this universe is so fine-tuned to allow for life, there must be other universes...otherwise God exists. And we can't have that.

So from plate techtonics, the moon, a stable orbit, Jupiter being at just the right spot, the weak and strong nuclear forces being just right, the complexity of a single-celled organism, etc., etc., etc. the opponents of Intelligent Design face an uphill battle.

I only know of one side that is afraid of debate and is using dogmatic hegemony to shut down that debate. I'll give you a hint. That side doesn't consist of Intelligent Design folks.

Comments:
My thought was always with the thought that something can't come from nothing, so how can their be no God? Of course I know there is a criticism of that in the fact that wouldn't something have to create the Creator? But whatever.


How about some Ed Wade talk? I can't believe his contract has been extended two years? Are the Phillies trying to turn off fans on purpose? Are they trying to run this organization into the ground??

chris
 
I can't start posting about Ed Wade without crying. I will get it to it.

Your insight about something can't come from nothing is incredibly insightful. The argument would have to be a first cause which is uncaused b/c you can't have an infinite regression backwards. If you didn't have a start (an uncaused cause) you could never get to the present, b/c the time before the present is infinite.

R.C. Sproul argues the point you made very well.

Very good Chris. Very proud of your insight.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?