Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stephen Meyer & Eric Metaxas Discuss Darwin's Doubt

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stephen Meyer & Eric Metaxas Discuss Darwin's Doubt

    Here is a brilliant interview on the topic of Intelligent Design theory. I was surprised to hear that the battered old topic has been gaining traction with scientists in western Universities in the past decade.

    Dissatisfaction with Darwinism among scientists centers largely on the inability of the Darwinian Evolution/Origin theory to explain the Cambrian Explosion, the very short prehistoric age in which new forms of very complex life suddenly appeared, literally establishing the many phyla (kinds) of life that are extant today. Darwin himself is quoted as seeing this as a major flaw in his theory because the Cambrian Explosion was a spike in his premise that evolution operated on a slow, smooth, incremental scale. Neo-Darwinism has attempted to explain the absence of fossil records leading up to the Cambrian Period that should show the progression claimed by the Darwinian theory, but even those theories are accumulating evidence against them.

    Recent discoveries in genetics and biology are a fatal blow, leading scientists to realize that random, even opportunistic, mutation cannot account for the creation of such intricate, finely tuned information systems as genetics and the incredible complexity of living cells.

    A growing body of scientists are beginning to acknowledge that 150 years of Darwinian Evolution/Origin theory and paleontology have produced none of the predicted proofs, and bold scientists are moving away from the dominant narrative. Intelligent Design theory, using the same scientific method used by Darwin, makes a comparatively solid case.

    Dr. Stephen Meyer is the author of Darwin's Doubt (I haven't read, but intend to). For those who prefer something that is shorter and moves, there is a video Darwin's Dilemma which I thought very good.

    In 2004 Dr. Meyer upset the scientific community with a paper on Intelligent Design that called Darwinism into serious question, and sparked a lot of controversy. He's also written a number of other intriguing titles making a scientific case for an intelligent Creator.

    The following interview is from December 2013, 90 minutes long.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFPh...nV2sXKqbUZzQhN

    Last edited by Baruch; February 2, 2015, 08:01 PM. Reason: forgot the bit on genetics and biology

  • #2
    Here is an article from 2004 describing the panic. I like old stuff.

    http://www.albertmohler.com/2004/09/...r-controversy/

    So... Does anybody think the publishing of this paper in a respected scientific journal was a coincidence? Or maybe it had Help.

    Comment


    • #3
      Fesh Air

      Baruch,
      I read the article you posted written by Albert Mohler.
      Dr Mohler is president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville Kentucky. This is the main Seminary of the Southern Baptist Conference.

      I was very pleased to find out Dr Mohler believes in the inerrancy of scripture in whole and in part.

      "I do not believe that evangelicalism can survive without the explicit and complete assertion of biblical inerrancy. Given the pressures of late modernity, growing ever more hostile to theological truth claims, there is little basis for any hope that evangelicals will remain distinctively evangelical without the principled and explicit commitment to the inerrancy of the Bible."
      ~Dr Mohler https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/20...cal-inerrancy/

      I don't know of any other mainline denominational seminary president who takes such a plain and simple "no strings attached" stand on the inerrancy of Holy Scripture.

      This made my day. Thanks Baruch.

      ********************

      In 1986 I attended an astronomy course offered by the University of Maryland. My professor was a refugee from a cold war era Eastern European communist country. I forget which one.
      Out of the blue, he made a comment about classic evolution. He said classic evolution is akin to smashing a fine watch with a hammer and expecting an improvement in the watch.

      *******************

      The scientific community has been corrupted by government and corporate grant money. It cannot be trusted. Bad science is touted as sound and good science is shot down as is shown in the article questioning classic evolution. Classic evolution is easy to refute because it does not hold up to the scientific method. It takes more faith to believe random molecular collisions created incomprehensibly complicated life forms than to believe God created them.

      Ask an evolutionist how long would it take for random molecular collisions to produce a modern cellphone complete with backup systems, cell towers and power grid to make it useful. Random molecular collisions cannot produce a worldwide workable cellphone system and we are far more complicated on all levels. The world is full of educated idiots and God makes the simple wise.

      "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple."
      Psalms 119:7

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Baruch View Post
        Here is an article from 2004 describing the panic. I like old stuff.

        http://www.albertmohler.com/2004/09/...r-controversy/

        So... Does anybody think the publishing of this paper in a respected scientific journal was a coincidence? Or maybe it had Help.
        What a wonderful article. I must have missed this before. I loved this part:
        "Meyer’s article was enough to cause hysteria in the evolutionists’ camp. Knowing that their theory lacks intellectual credibility, the evolutionists respond by raising the volume, offering the equivalent of scientific shrieks and screams whenever their cherished theory is criticized–much less in one of their own cherished journals. As Dr. John West, Associate Director of the Discovery Institute explained, “Instead of addressing the paper’s argument or inviting counterarguments or rebuttal, the society has resorted to affirming what amounts to a doctrinal statement in an effort to stifle scientific debate. They’re trying to stop scientific discussion before it even starts.”

        Because it reminds me somewhat of this:
        Acts 7
        51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers [did], so [do] ye. 52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept [it]. 54 When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with [their] teeth. 55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, 56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. 57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, 58 And cast [him] out of the city, and stoned [him]: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.




        Thanks for bumping this Baobab, I would not have noticed it otherwise.

        Originally posted by baobab View Post
        I was very pleased to find out Dr Mohler believes in the inerrancy of scripture in whole and in part.

        "I do not believe that evangelicalism can survive without the explicit and complete assertion of biblical inerrancy. Given the pressures of late modernity, growing ever more hostile to theological truth claims, there is little basis for any hope that evangelicals will remain distinctively evangelical without the principled and explicit commitment to the inerrancy of the Bible."
        ~Dr Mohler https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/20...cal-inerrancy/

        I don't know of any other mainline denominational seminary president who takes such a plain and simple "no strings attached" stand on the inerrancy of Holy Scripture.

        This made my day. Thanks Baruch.

        That Article, was a great read, thanks for the link. I agree with what R. Albert Mohler, Jr. says there. Good stuff. I had never heard of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, I will have to check it out.

        Blessings,

        Travis

        Comment

        Working...
        X