Apologetics Course Reflections, Session 2: Intelligent Design
2003-04-26
The discussion so far has led us to a larger focus on the other side of the argument, science and nature. There are two books, one is the Bible, and the other is nature itself (special and general revelation, respectively). Psalm 19 talks about how natural things, like the heavens and the earth, express God’s glory. They communicate to us the glory of God. This is general revelation, that all men can know something about God’s existence. As last week talked about the Creation narrative with science, this week we move more into seeing God’s hand in His creation. What makes something of intelligent design?
For us to acknowledge intelligent design, which is the antithesis of Darwinian evolution, there needs to be specified complexity. Mere complexity shows how there might be many parts of something, like a pile of rocks, but there is no specificity. There also could be mere specificity, like the patterns of a pulsar, but there is no complexity. If there is specificity and complexity, then there is design, and an example of these would be proteins, which are made up of complex patterns of amino acids.
What is the goal of this knowledge and study? The reason is that we might be ready to give a defense for our faith. The Bible calls us to this duty (1 Peter 3:15).
There are amazing things about our universe that suggest our Creator’s handiwork. Since Darwinism does not suggest anything about the origin of life beyond unscientific explanation, there are grounds to look for signs of Intelligent Design. The position of our earth is highly suggestive of a Creator. It cannot be in the center of the galaxy, nor can it be on an outer arm of the spiral. Life would not be possible anywhere else. The ratio of the size of the sun and the moon, and the revolutionary period of the moon are all things that contribute to a perfect solar eclipse. Because of these things, the earth’s tilt is stabilized, and the tides are as they are, which is most important for the atmosphere that we have. The atmosphere, as we know, is very important for sustaining life. Scientific discovery was made possible by God to show us how intricate and perfect our creation is, showing that it is God that made the universe. Any other way, we would not be here as we are.
Knowing these things and being able to explain them even in the simplest of ways will show that God must be in the picture. We cannot show the gospel message from the information, but the Creator God, as seen in Psalm 19, is revealed in this world, as fallen as it is.
There was some material that came into contradiction with the previous class. This professor appeared to take the view that the days of Genesis 1 were not literal days. His argument rested on the fact that the days could be relative to God, or from a distant part of the universe where a day could be longer. He also stated that the scripture says nothing about there being no death of animals before the sin of Adam.
I get concerned when I hear about things like this. Moses wrote Genesis to 15th century B.C. Hebrews that were going to Palestine to worship God in their own land. Moses did not write this for 21st century scientists. He would have written that it took millions of years for the earth to be populated with creatures. This professor’s hermeneutics was poor to come to the conclusions that he did. Animal death could not have been before sin either, because of the ordination of animal sacrifice (Genesis 3:21; cf. Hebrews 9:22). Bloodshed had to be something new when they sinned!
Secondly, he had a higher reverence for the ‘book of nature’ that sometimes were rendered superior to the ‘book of scripture.’ We see in nature that it is corrupt and cursed because of man’s sin (Genesis 3:17). We cannot believe that all the time. Nonetheless, we need to be challenged in this stuff, so we do not hear our same old worldviews dumped back in our laps: we are better equipped in this way.
This is something that could really call for change in the scientific community. People hold to evolution and such because they refuse to allow God in their worldview. If they can admit that there must be more to humanity than a random conglomeration of chemicals, perhaps they will make the connection. Perhaps if we aim at the mind and get people to think differently than they used to, we can reach the heart also. But that is up to the Holy Spirit.