Tuesday, January 09, 2007

evolution is not as popular as it used to be

In the past year, I have read two significant works authored/co-authored by Nancy Pearcey, How Now Shall We Live? and Total Truth. I have become convinced that the issue of the origin of human life is one of the most critical, if not the most critical, issues that people living in the 21st century must face.

If evolution is the "creation story" we believe, then not only has the human race evolved gradually, but the thoughts and ideas are all results of like evolutionary processes. If evolution is true, then the idea of God is something that evolved by natural selection processes. This makes no one view of God superior to any other, because they are all just human inventions. This results in the pluralistic worldview that plagues post-modernism.

If biblical Creation is the "creation story" we believe, then God created the world and created human beings in the image of God. We did not create him, he created us. We can trust our abilities of perception because they are due to the fact that we have created in God's image to accurately perceive the world that God created. This means that all views of God are not equal, but the Truth is available through the correct perception of God's revelation.

When Darwin came up with the evolutionary scheme he desired to come up with an origin story that would explain the existence of life without God. Because so many have bought into his theory, tolerance and relativism have become the religious consensus of post-modernity.

Strangely enough, as the impact of Darwinism continues to swell within the ranks of philosophy and academia, members of the scientific and medical communities are no longer blindly accepting Darwinian dogma.

Two websites to check out are A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism
and Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity.

Both of these sites have lists of doctoral level professionals who have signed a signed a statement saying: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

Encourage your physician to add his/her name to this list.

1 comment:

Larry B said...

"We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

This is precisely the point at which people should be skeptical. These two ideas are what Darwinian evolution is all about and people really should ask themselves if the evidence really supports the idea that these two mechanisms are all that are needed for the bounty of life we see around us.

Much of what is published today assumes these two mechanisms did just that and goes on from there. But the evidence to support the 2 mechansims as a theory of origin is scant at best.