Posted on 03/08/2004 1:33:06 PM PST by Mr. Silverback
One subject I enjoy reading about is the intelligent design movement and its arguments against natural origins. And believe me, there's a lot to read. Recent years have seen an explosion of books, articles, and websites on the subject of intelligent design. Scientists, philosophers, and theologians have all contributed valuable insights to the debate.
But I think I can safely say that, with all of this reading, I've never read a book by an eminent scientist and intelligent design advocate that ended with a presentation of the Gospel -- never, that is, until now.
Henry F. Schaefer's book SCIENCE AND CHRISTIANITY: CONFLICT OR COHERENCE? does exactly that. As his book's title indicates, Schaefer, a five-time nominee for the Nobel Prize, has spent a lot of time studying and teaching about the relationship between science and faith. So his writing is clear and compelling not just on intelligent design, but also on a whole range of other issues that are of interest to both people of faith and people of science. But I think his treatment of the intelligent design issue is one of the best parts of the book, because it shows Schaefer meeting nonbelieving scientists on their own ground and using their own observations to undermine their arguments.
Schaefer quotes the brilliant scientist and agnostic Stephen Hawking, who wrote that a good theory "must accurately describe a large class of observations" and "must make definite predictions about the results of future observations." While acknowledging the strengths of the "standard evolutionary model" in the first area, Schaefer points out that it has serious weaknesses in the second area. He writes, "Over the past 150 years evolutionary theorists have made countless predictions about fossil specimens to be observed in the future. Unfortunately for these seers, many new fossils have been discovered, but the interesting ones almost always seem to be contrary to the 'best' predictions." Schaefer then contrasts the theory of evolution with other theories, such as the atomic theory and the theory of gravity, which are able to make precise predictions of future events, such as when Halley's Comet would appear -- predictions, Schaefer says, that turned out to be true in his lifetime.
So, contrary to what many believe, the theory of intelligent design isn't just something people believe because the Bible tells them so. It's something we believe because it makes sense and describes the real world far better than the alternative theory.
As passages like this demonstrate, Schaefer's book is a wonderful resource for the high school or college student interested in studying science. In fact, it's ideal for parents to go through with their high school or college-age kids. Schaefer's own story of coming to faith in Christ, his descriptions of many other prominent scientists who are Christians, and his desire to share his faith will be an encouragement to kids who are wondering if their love of science is compatible with their commitment to God. And his exploration of issues like intelligent design will not only demonstrate to them how God has manifested Himself through nature, but also provide them with an excellent example of how their own gifts can be used for God's glory.
Some things are inherently unknowable by man without divine intervention, if there is such a thing.
So9
This is just false. Creationism continually predicts that there will be no more new transitional forms found. (At least, that's the implication of all the creationist jeering about "Where is the missing link?") Evolution predicts that intermediates outlining a phylogentic tree of life must have existed and that more and more parts from this real phylogenetic tree will be found. Evolution has been right, creation wrong, since 1859.
With this kind of misrepresentation, Henry F. Schaefer shoots himself in the foot before anyone with any scientific literacy, not that I'd expect Colson to know the difference. One gets the same old bad pennies all the time from these people. ID is not on the level and will never be good science or good education. It's a fabric of lies.
But that just proves that it's all a vast-World-Wide-Conspiracy by evil elite scientists and their minions to thwart the study of paradigm-shattering ideas, and to corrupt our precious bodily fluids.
</ lunatic mode>
Yes. If ID ever gets some serious work published in a reputable journal, that will be heralded as proof that it's arrived as genuine science. Meanwhile, with no serious work published, that too is heralded as proof of its being such potent science that everyone is afraid to publish it.
Publishing in the journals is good; being "frozen out" is even better.
"Heads" they win; "tails" we lose? Neat trick.
Evolutionists are behind fluoridation?? COMMIE SWINE!
You mean you don't get a copy of the anti-Evo "talking points" memo every morning? I assumed Darwin Central distributed a copy to the membership as soon as our mole forwards it....
Beware, it's not unheard of that great thinkers make logical errors in resolving scientific doctrine in the face of religious ideology. It is reasonable for a scientist to use intelligent design ideology as a bridge between science and religious ideology in order to resolve personal conflicts between the two. But it's entirely unethical to substitute ID for science for such a resolution (which, in fact, it doesn't provide). There are many areas of life where one has to learn to live with paradox or conflict. Chipping away at one (science) to accommodate the other (ideology) is not the right solution for a scientist.
Huh? Show me where "the symbol for atheism was most commonly the atom" - I've never seen or heard of such a thing. In fact, I never heard of atheism having any symbols at all.
There is no way to prove which of these two possibilities is more likely.
God made the world, the manner in which it goes on it's way is his work, and that we call that part of that process, the part that does not separate man from the animal kingdom, Natural Selection.
The majority of Christians in the world agree with this statement, certainly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.