Tuesday, April 8, 2008

The Case for a Creator and Science


I didn't think about God much until I realized that whatever I was doing for 38 years wasn't working. So, discussions about who created the universe or the "Big Bang Theory" or evolution were quite limited for me.

I'll never forget one of the first scientific alignments with the Bible I witnessed after becoming a Christian 9 years ago. I was no longer skeptical of the power of Christ, he was changing my life dramatically...that was proof enough of His existence. Still, He is so gracious by giving us these assuring treats every so often.

A film I saw about archeologists discovering the path of Moses and where, more than likely, the parting of the Red Sea took place was just such a treat.

And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. - Exodus 14:21

There it was in so many ways! An opening to the sea between mountains, an elevated underwater "land bridge" or bar from one side to the other, and coral encrusted figures in the shape of chariot wheels.

Yes, God, thank you! Thank you for lifting me out of the ooze and onto the right path! As someone young in my faith, this was exciting stuff!

Now, a movie by Ben Stein about intelligent design is about to open at theaters and I'm looking forward to that smile that comes deep inside myself whenever I know God is patting me on the back or giving me a hug...once again, I'll be reminded about that path...the one that leads to Jesus.

______________


Ben Stein's Expelled: No Intelligenece Allowed is scheduled to open April 18th. I want to recommend some reading material along the same lines. Author Lee Strobel gave me that "God hug" when I heard him speak. As a former atheist and journalist, I knew Strobel wasn't fooling around when it came to facts about God. He is probably best known for his book, The Case for Christ

Knowing that the topic of our and the planet's origin will be around for awhile, maybe it's time we take a closer look with the help of Strobel's The Case for a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God.

This from Amazon.com:

Are Christianity and science incompatible? If there is a God, is he only an impersonal starter force? An introductory high school biology class first propelled Lee Strobel toward a life of atheism. God and science, he reasoned, were mutually exclusive. When the former legal editor of the Chicago Tribune converted to Christianity, he decided to investigate the science he had once accepted as truth. Did science point toward or away from God? As Strobel interviews a variety of scientists on everything from debunking evolutionary icons to the implications of the Big Bang to the existence of the human soul, he builds his case: scientific evidence points toward Intelligent Design.

Although the discussion often veers into the academic, Strobel works hard to make it accessible to those without scientific training. Throughout the book, he salts interview transcript information with interesting personal stories of his own spiritual and scientific quest for knowledge, as well as sometimes over-detailed descriptions of the actual interviews (right down to the type of beverages consumed). Each chapter contains suggestions for further reading on particular issues of science and faith.

Strobel concludes that, when correctly interpreted, science and biblical teaching support each other. He quotes physicist Paul Davies, "...science offers a surer path to God than religion." Open-minded readers will find that this book, and its questions for reflection and group study, invites conversation and investigation.


The Case for a Creator is available at Amazon.com.

_______________

Alexander is a writer in the online spiritual battlefield. You can also find him at The Scrooge Report.


7 comments:

Dimensio said...

Now, a movie by Ben Stein about intelligent design is about to open at theaters and I'm looking forward to that smile that comes deep inside myself whenever I know God is patting me on the back or giving me a hug...once again, I'll be reminded about that path...the one that leads to Jesus.

I find your comment confusing. The conjecture termed "Intelligent Design" by its proponents is not in any way inherently religious, nor does it rely upon any deity, either nonspecific or Christian. Why, then, do you associate a movie allegedly detailing Intelligent Design with religious affirmation.

Alexander said...

@ dimensio..."intelligent design" is another way of saying, "God created the universe."

That statement alone is not specifying a "religion."

Because I know the Bible to be true and because of my faith in Jesus, it is quite clear who the "designer" is.

Calling it "intelligent design" could be a start for some...for others its the whole truth.

Hope that helps!

Dimensio said...

@ dimensio..."intelligent design" is another way of saying, "God created the universe."

This is not correct.

"Intelligent Design" is the conjecture that mutation and natural selection on their own are insufficient to produce certain speficied biological structures. As such, proponents suggest a "designer", whose nature, methods and motives are not known, used an unspecificed process to "design" such features as an explanation for their emergence. This "designer", however, need not be a deity, and Intelligent Design proponents have stated as much; the "designer" could be an unspecified agent whose existence is entirely natural and non-divine.

Alexander said...

the "designer" could be an unspecified agent whose existence is entirely natural and non-divine

Now, that is funny! Sorry, dimensio...I appreciate our discussion...but are you saying some average Joe created the universe? If it wasn't divine power...what kind of power was it?

This unspecified agent is pretty darn incredible if you ask me!

Dimensio said...

Now, that is funny! Sorry, dimensio...I appreciate our discussion...but are you saying some average Joe created the universe? If it wasn't divine power...what kind of power was it?

I am saying nothing regarding a "creation" of the universe. I am merely pointing out that leading Intelligent Design proponents, such as Michael Behe, have stated that Intelligent Design proposes only that certain biological structures are "designed", and that it does not attempt to explain the means by which the "design" was implemented.

I am unaware of any aspect of "Intelligent Design" that purports to detect "design" in any aspects of the universe beyond biology.


This unspecified agent is pretty darn incredible if you ask me!

As I have stated, I am only repeating the claims of Intelligent Design proponents. I would assume that Michael Behe is sufficiently credible in the field of "Intelligent Design" to be considered an expert, as he was called upon by the Dover school board as an "expert witness" on the subject during the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial. I will also note that Michael Behe testified, under oath, that Intelligent Design incorporates no deities of any kind, including the Christian God, nor does it incorporate any tenets of Christianity. This leaves only three probabilities: that your knowledge of what constitutes "Intelligent Design" is inaccurate; that Michael Behe -- considered an "expert" by many on the subject of Intelligent Design -- does not understand the concept of "Intelligent Design", which would call into question why his claims regarding "irreducible complexity" are used in support of Intelligent Design and why the Dover school board thought to call him as an expert witness; or that Michael Behe committed perjury when speaking on Intelligent Design and denying any religious, Christian or divine implications. I will also note that if the latter situation is the case, the willingness for Intelligent Design proponents to lie about alleged supernatural implications of their claims calls into question both their integrity and their overall motives.

You may review the relevant section of the Dover trial transcript, wherein Behe is quoted on record as denying any divine or Christian implications of Intelligent Design, here.

Alexander said...

@ dimensio...thank you for your great comments! I agree that many ID people stay away from defining the designer. I do not think they are commiting perjury. However, some are leaving out the God aspect to avoid confrontation and to keep the discussion moving. So, many people shut down when God is mentioned that it's unwise for them to lead people to the next logical conclusion...and that is that the "designer" is not someone or something we can understand in secular thought.

My feeling is that, at some point, some people are able to take a leap of faith and connect the dots...that ID really is about God. That is my view and although I may disagree with your desire to keep God out of the discussion, I totally respect your view.

Agreeing to disagree is the intelligent thing to do!

However, again, I agree with you on your points in defining the ID side, but with one add: many have added faith to the equation....not religion....2 different things.

Dimensio said...

@ dimensio...thank you for your great comments! I agree that many ID people stay away from defining the designer. I do not think they are commiting perjury.

If Intelligent Design does, in fact, rely upon a deity -- whether the Christian God or otherwise -- as the "designer", then Michael Behe did commit perjury when, in response to the question "The theory [of Intelligent Design] does not mention or discuss God, Christianity, or the Bible in any way. Is that accurate?", he answered "That's exactly right. It's completely accurate."


However, some are leaving out the God aspect to avoid confrontation and to keep the discussion moving. So, many people shut down when God is mentioned that it's unwise for them to lead people to the next logical conclusion...and that is that the "designer" is not someone or something we can understand in secular thought.

If this is the case, then claiming that Intelligent Design carries with it no inherent implications of the divine beings or Christianity, including testifying such a thing under oath in a court of law, is fundamentally dishonest. Note that Michael Behe himself has -- while acknowledging that he believes the "Designer" to be the Christian God -- stated that extraterrestrials or even time travellers could potentially be the "designer".


My feeling is that, at some point, some people are able to take a leap of faith and connect the dots...that ID really is about God.

If this is the case, then either Michael Behe -- who was considered an expert witness by other proponents of Intelligent Design -- does not understand the concept of Intelligent Design or he committed perjury in the Dover v. Kitzmiller trial. I can see no other possibilities; if you can explain how it can be true both that Intelligent Design "really is about God" and that Michael Behe did not commit perjury when he testified in a court that Intelligent Design "does not mention or discuss God, Christianity, or the Bible in any way", please do so. If it is your contention that the aforementioned experts are merely incorrect, and that they do not understand "Intelligent Design", please say that; it would not be the first time that Michael Behe has been incorrect regarding the subject of Intelligent Design, as his claims of "irreducible complexity" serving as evidence for Intelligent Design are also demonstrably false.


That is my view and although I may disagree with your desire to keep God out of the discussion, I totally respect your view.

I am attempting to keep nothing "out of the discussion". As I have stated, it is leading Intelligent Design proponents
who have claimed that Intelligent Design in no way incorporates any divine entities, including the Christian God. If it is your posisiton that those individuals have lied when making such specific statements, then merely say so. Please note that I am not referring to an omission of the discussion of "God" when addressing allegations of evidence for Intelligent Design; I am referring to specific declarations from Intelligent Design advocates that Intelligent Design does not rely upon any specific "God" or any gods at all.

As I do not accept that "Intelligent Design" is a viable explanation for existing observations within biology its specific definition is not of great consequence to me, however I do find it confusing to address the subject when different advocates of "Intelligent Design" hold completely different, and often contradictory, definitions of what, exactly, "Intelligent Design" claims.


Agreeing to disagree is the intelligent thing to do!

I am not attempting, at present, to express agreement or disagreement with the validity of "Intelligent Design". I am merely pointing out that the definition of "Intelligent Design", as stated by major proponents of the claim such as Michael Behe, contradicts your specific claims about "Intelligent Design". Any disagreement with the definition of "Intelligent Design" lies between you and the leading proponents who have clearly defined it differently than you.


However, again, I agree with you on your points in defining the ID side, but with one add: many have added faith to the equation....not religion....2 different things.

Whether "faith", "religion" or both are incorporated in Intelligent Design does not alter the statements of leading proponents of the claim that contradict your specific claims about "Intelligent Design".