I’ll have to admit that I haven’t followed the Intelligent Design issue because I’ve had more pressing matters on my mind. But, could someone enlighten me on one point? I thought of this as I was cleaning out my office. Don’t ask about the thought pattern that lead to the question. You wouldn’t understand.
Okay, the ID theory is being touted by some Christians as proof that God exists. But, isn’t Christianity based on faith…which means that you’re supposed to believe even though there is no proof?
Or did I miss something?
I’m not trying to be funny. I just need an answer.
Comments (7)
This is why religion and science don’t mix.
But ya know something Kevin? I believe science and religion can and do mix. To me, religion is a way of explaining to our souls how things work in nature. When I was studying meteorolgy (yes, I did weather for a short bit y’all) I thought of myself as putting into words and pictures a “Cliff Notes” version of what was going on in the sky.
Also, look back in history as folks like Avicenna, who was a physican, a scientist and an Islamic scholar.
The problem with mixing religion and science comes with you toss in fanaticsm and ignorance.
in re: ID - I’d never heard of ID being used as “proof” that God existed, but rather as “proof” that God created life as we know it. As I understand the tenets of the ID myth, the “irreducible complexity” proves that God (meaning: the Christian God, not any other God) created it as it was. To assume that this complexity proved the existence of God would either be circular logic, or admit the possibility that some other God designed the universe, which I seriously doubt that ID proponents would countenance.
In re: science and religion. They really don’t mix, though, not because of some pompous ideals of the proponents of one or the other, but rather because of the epistemological methods that each employ. Science and religion are complementary, in that each of them are properly used to answer different kinds of questions. The problem is when zealots in either community attempt to use religion to answer scientific questions or science to answer religious questions.
Hey Brent!!!:-)
“in re: ID - I’d never heard of ID being used as “proof” that God existed, but rather as “proof” that God created life as we know it.”
Yeah, but I’ve heard some of the proponents say that life as we know it couldn’t have just popped up. There had to be a designer and that designer was the Christian god. Therefore, that proves that god exists.
From Wikipedia - Teleological Argument:
Now, I ain’t cock diesel enough to go up against someone with a PhD in…what was it…physics (YIKES:-)), but this is what I’ve heard.
The teleological argument smacks of a passage in Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy:
—
Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindboggingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
The argument goes something like this: “I refuse to prove that I exist,” says God, “for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.”
“But,” says Man, “The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn’t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don’t. QED.”
“Oh dear,” says God, “I hadn’t thought of that,” and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.
“Oh, that was easy,” says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
—
Personally I don’t believe that religion and science can’t be mixed on some level…while he had theological doubts, even Darwin acknowledged that perhaps there was a divine “touch” that started the process of life from its ancient beginnings…
I personally do not think there is any divine touch in the universe at all, it’s all a matter of probabilities vs. very large numbers.
I also think that while it is probably pointless for most, the school systems should aim at teaching their students critical thinking skills. The ID theory has only one place in this: to be taken apart and invalidated.
John - I’ve *got* to pull out my copy!:-) That’s hilarious!
Susanne - You’ve got a point. Maybe this ID theory will have some use after all.