Here’s a really amazing little factoid. According to today’s edition of “Breakpoint“, a new poll commissioned by the think tank Theos, shows that “only 37 percent of people in the UK believe that Darwin’s theory of evolution is ‘beyond reasonable doubt.’” Moreover, 51 percent “say that Intelligent Design (ID) is either definitely or probably true.”
But that’s not the most surprising thing. What is, is this: the UK is an extremely secular country from an official government policy standpoint. What I mean by that is that their laws and their official position is highly secular, yet the actual people are unwilling to declare the battle over and simply call themselves atheists. So, even though 71% identify themselves as Christian, only 10% demonstrate that they are actual believers by attending church services on a weekly basis. Trust me when I tell you that true belief in the Christ of the bible and church attendance are highly correlated!
The reason I took notice of that is that so many anti-ID scientists insist that ID is the same as creationism. So here we have a very large percentage of these fairly non-religious people expressing doubt in Darwinism, and a deep-seated belief that something else – something intelligent – was somehow involved. Even Richard Dawkins, unwilling to embrace the notion that life arose out of non-living material, suggested that maybe space travelers brought us our first life from another place in the universe!
…after a century and a half of having Darwinian evolution rammed down their throats by their professors and the media—people still say they believe in God, and that He created heaven and earth.
That’s the most amazing thing to me. That in spite of this 150 year conspiracy to eradicate anything not Darwinian from the science classroom, the science lab and all scientific inquiry, and contrary to Nietzsche’s proclamation, God is not dead yet!
Belief in ID is not mutually exclusive with evolution!
Now, once again, I am a christian and a proponent of ID, but what I mean by that is that the two can and do coexist! I believe that evolution is real. I believe that it has played a very significant role in shaping our world. And I believe that scientists should continue to pursue nearly all of their inquiry into the mechanisms that are at work. But I do not believe that many of them are playing by their own rules. They contend that only materialism is science, because nothing else is testable or falsifiable. Yet that statement, in and of itself, is a faith statement. It cannot be tested, so by their own rules, science is not scientific!
My most recent post included just a few things for which the impression of design is overwhelming. It is simply irrational in the extreme to think that stonehenge or Mt. Rushmore are the product of random variations over long periods of time. So why do we not give the cell, with its incredible and ordered functional complexity, or a single strand of DNA, which is many times more complex, the same recognition?
Even Ken Miller believes in a creator!
Perhaps the most articulate and compelling apologist for Darwinianism, Dr. Ken Miller, is a professing Catholic Christian. His book “Finding Darwin’s God” is at least in part , his attempt to explain how he could believe in the God of the Christian Bible and yet still so staunchly and forcefully defend Darwinism without any reference to the created order. In it, he deftly explains that he does not “regard evolution, properly understood, as either antireligious or antispiritual.” But importantly, he also says this:
A believer in the divine accepts that God’s love and gift of freedom are genuine – so genuine that they include the power to choose evil and, if we wish, to freely send ourselves to Hell. Not all believers will accept the stark conditions of that bargain, but our freedom to act has to have a physical and biological basis. Evolution and its sister sciences of genetics and molecular biology provide that basis. In biological terms, evolution is the only way a Creator could have made us the creatures we are – free beings in a world of authentic and meaningful moral and spiritual choices.
That’s a faith statement from an eminent scientist and Darwinist that I have no argument with. And I appreciate the intellectual honesty of it. There are still some things I would love to ask Dr. Miller, but that is a theoretical and theological common ground that seems all too often absent in this debate. Well said, Dr. Miller!