Friday, June 06, 2008

Why I Don't Support "Intelligent Design"

The reason I don't like "intelligent design" is because the term itself is actually code for "theistic evolution." ID advocates don't necessarily support the biblical account of creation. Many, if not most, of them accept evolution as scientific fact, but just can't shake the idea that someone or something is behind it, perhaps even actively guiding the process.

But theistic evolution is not compatible with scripture. It can be refuted with one verse. In Romans 5:12, the apostle Paul tells us that "sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned."

Therefore, since death is an inherent part of evolution, and death didn't exist until Adam sinned, I can conclude with certainty that evolution, theistic or otherwise, is false.


RC said...

I enjoyed this post and I agree that most if not all ID advocates are theistic evolutionists. I, as you, do not think a careful reading of scripture allows for theistic evolution.

C. David Parsons said...


The reason is elementary: the Discovery Institute and other ID proponents leave out the Triune God, Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Hence, Richard Dawkins can make the case for “aliens” seeding the earth.

The Quest for Right, a series of 7 textbooks created for the public schools, represents the ultimate marriage between an in-depth knowledge of biblical phenomena and natural and physical sciences. The several volumes have accomplished that which, heretofore, was deemed impossible: to level the playing field between those who desire a return to physical science in the classroom and those who embrace the theory of evolution. The Quest for Right turns the tide by providing an authoritative and enlightening scientific explanation of natural phenomena which will ultimately dethrone the unprofitable Darwinian view.

"I am amazed at the breadth of the investigation - scientific history, biblical studies, geology, biology, geography, astronomy, chemistry, paleontology, and so forth - and find the style of writing to be quite lucid and aimed clearly at a general, lay audience." ― Mark Roberts, former Editor of Biblical Reference Books, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

The Quest for Right series of books, based on physical science, the old science of cause and effect, has effectively dismantled the quantum additions to the true architecture of the atom. Gone are the nonexistent particles once thought to be complementary to the electron and proton (examples: neutrons, neutrinos, photons, mesons, quarks, Z's, bosons, etc.) and a host of other pseudo particles.

To the curious, scientists sought to explain Atomic theory by introducing fantastic particles that supposedly came tumbling out of the impact between two particles, when in fact, the supposed finds were simply particulate debris. There are only two elementary particles which make up the whole of the universe: the proton and electron. All other particles were added via quantum magic and mathematical elucidation in an attempt to explain earthly phenomena without God.

Introducing the scheme of coincidence, which by definition, "is the systematic ploy of obstructionists who, in lieu of any divine intervention, state that any coincidental grouping or chance union of electrons and protons (and neutrons), regardless of the configuration, always produces a chemical element. This is the mischievous tenet of electron interpretation which states that all physical, chemical, and biological processes result from a change in the electron structure of the atom which, in turn, may be deciphered through the orderly application of mathematics, as outlined in quantum mechanics. A few of the supporting theories are: degrading stars, neutron stars, black holes, extraterrestrial water, antimatter, the absolute dating systems, and the big bang, the explosion of a singularity infinitely smaller than the dot of an “i” from which space, time, and the massive stellar bodies supposedly sprang into being.

The Quest for Right is not only better at explaining natural phenomena, but also may be verified through testing. As a consequence, the material in the several volumes will not violate the so-called constitutional separation of church and state. Physical science, the old science of cause and effect, will have a long-term sustainability, replacing irresponsible doctrines based on whim. Teachers and students will rejoice in the simplicity of earthly phenomena when entertained by the new discipline.

The Quest for Right.

Quintin said...

The hardest thing for me is to realize that I actually am holding the truth in my hands, and not to bash people with it.

A love for God's word will naturally tick someone to creation, but the issue is making sure they understand sin. It is so hilarious that the very book and section where the devils ways are clearly shown, people want to question God's authenticity. We haven't come very far in the last 6000 years.

Bobby Grow said...

I don't think it's code for theistic-evolution. ID'rs deny the primary premise of neo-Darwinian evolution; viz. that MACRO-evolution has happened or can happen given the Darwinian mechanism of natural selection. They only support 'micro-evolution' (or adaptation within a species). I think this really characterizes the ID'rs in an unfair way . . . I adhere to it as a "scientific" model. Theistic evolutionists abhor ID because they think it appeals to a "God-of-the-gaps" approach.

Unknown said...

I've read plenty about intelligent design, and in my experience, even if they don't accept Biblical Creationism, they reject Darwinian evolution. I also believe that, while evolution is false, your argument against it is weak. One can easily make a case that the death mentioned in Romans 5:12 is spiritual in nature, and is not making a statement on the entry of physical death in the world.

Related Posts with Thumbnails