As the Creation versus evolution controversy rages
in universities, public institutions, and the political arena, evolutionists
persistently claim that the Intelligent Design (ID) concept as an explanation
for the beginning of the universe is unscientific and should have no
place in scientific discussions. Examples are as follows:
"For Americans who view evolution as inconsistent with their intuitions
or beliefs about life and how it began, Creationism has always been
a seductive alternative."
"ID is not a scientific theory and should not be taught alongside
the Theory of Evolution. It offers nothing to help students understand
how science works. It is merely a statement of how complex life seems
to be - not even worth an hour of classroom time."
As reflected in the statements above, evolutionists would have religion
and science kept as far apart as possible. They tend to handle the theory
of evolution as sacred and the concept of Intelligent Design (ID) as
bogus. How does this mode of thought measure up?
The Bible tells us that "The fool hath said in his heart, There
is no God. (Psalms 53;1)" Are scientists fools by nature? Do we
attribute their magnificent advancements as the work of such? Does foolishness
fit the description of a disciplined, unbiased work of fact-finding
and patience that lead to cures of diseases and a deeper understanding
of the secrets of nature around us? Far from it! Science instead glorifies
God by increasing our understanding and appreciation of the magnificence
of His creation.
God has supernaturally intervened to reveal the answer to a difficult
molecular mystery to a chemist through a dream. That's how he discovered
the Benzene Ring. Fact-finding Discipline only leads to God, not from
Him. As sports car enthusiasts speak highly of the builder of a high
performing car as they discuss intricate details of its operation, so
does man glorify God as he discusses the intricacies of creation around
us.
Why should anyone despise the ID concept? Even If one should consider
science the primary source of knowledge, why should he count it necessary
to downplay and ignore the findings of those that support ID? Such discrimination
is not scientific practice, but an abuse of science instead. The law
of probability, thermodynamics, and common sense uphold the ID concept.
The law of probability tells us that life is too complex to have appeared
on the scene by random chance. Thermodynamics tell us that anything
left to itself only goes the way of decay. Common sense tells us that
if one finds a sand castle on a beach, it would not be a product of
the wind and the waves. The only possible explanation for its existence
would be that humans were present. Why then should it be difficult to
apply the same principle to the origin of the universe around us?
Man does not reject God because of a shortfall of scientific evidence
to prove His existence. He instead ignores much proof that's already
available. The Bible tells us that "The heavens declare the glory
of God (Psalms 19:1)." The frantic effort to keep the creation
mindset from scientific thought is only a fool's act of denial. It is
a misuse of science to cover up the rejection of truth that man is responsible
toward God during the teaching of future generations in the institutions.
Knowledge of this accountability is the essential foundation for maintaining
our liberty. E. L. Dunn
E. L. Dunn
norearlster@yahoo.com
