Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

At Skeptic: Why Christians Should Accept the Theory of Evolution

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Larry Arnhart writes:

American Christian fundamentalists reject Darwinian evolution for at least two reasons. The first is their belief that the Bible has revealed a clear teaching about the divine creation of the world that denies Darwinian evolution. The second reason is their belief that Darwinian evolution contradicts the foundational principle of the American creed that human beings have been created equal and endowed with rights by their Creator, as affirmed in the Declaration of Independence. In this article I will argue that both beliefs are mistaken, and that Christians should all accept the theory of evolution.

American Christian fundamentalists reject Darwinian evolution for at least two reasons. The first is their belief that the Bible has revealed a clear teaching about the divine creation of the world that denies Darwinian evolution. The second reason is their belief that Darwinian evolution contradicts the foundational principle of the American creed that human beings have been created equal and endowed with rights by their Creator, as affirmed in the Declaration of Independence. In this article I will argue that both beliefs are mistaken, and that Christians should all accept the theory of evolution.

In short, religious fundamentalists reject the Darwinian idea of human evolution from earlier species of animals because they believe this contradicts what the Bible says about God creating everything, including human beings, and about God as a personal deity who hears prayers and demands faithful obedience. They think … the Bible as God’s Revelation contradicts Darwin’s naturalistic science of evolution.

Let’s see what Arnhart has to say about the evidence for intelligent design:

To all of this, the intelligent design theorist Stephen Meyer responds by arguing that although he personally believes in biblical revelation, he sees that the case for an Intelligent Designer as an alternative to materialist natural science is best made on purely scientific grounds without any appeal to biblical authority. He claims that the evidence of science based on our natural observations of the world point to the existence of an Intelligent Designer to explain the appearance of design in the natural world that cannot be explained plausibly by Darwinian evolutionary science.

Meyer’s argument suffers, however, from a fundamental sophistry. Intelligent design reasoning depends completely on the fallacy of negative argumentation from ignorance, in which intelligent design proponents argue that if evolutionary scientists cannot fully explain the step-by-step evolutionary process by which complex living forms arise, then this proves that these complex forms of life must be caused by the Intelligent Designer. This is purely negative reasoning because the proponents of intelligent design are offering no positive explanation of their own as to exactly when, where, and how the Intelligent Designer miraculously caused these forms of life. Meyer insists that the proponents of evolutionary science satisfy standards of proof that he and his fellow proponents of intelligent design cannot satisfy, because his sophistical strategy is to put the highest burden of proof on his opponents, while refusing to accept that burden of proof for himself.

The author shows an astounding lack of understanding of the positive case for intelligent design, made clearly by Casey Luskin in a series of recent articles (Common Objections, Physics, Genetics, Systematics, and Paleontology). The boundaries of science, or the limitations of natural processes, provide a positive case for intelligent design, as discussed in my book, Canceled Science.

Arnhart’s concluding paragraph:

So, there are good reasons to believe that two of the major arguments against Darwinian evolution made by American Christian fundamentalists are mistaken. There is no clear biblical revelation denying Darwinian evolution. And there is no reason to believe that the Declaration of Independence requires a creationist theology that contradicts Darwinian science.

Skeptic

It turns out that some American Christian fundamentalists may disbelieve in Darwinian evolution for the wrong reasons, but their disbelief is squarely in line with the scientific evidence.

Comments
The lack of understanding comes from not having any interest in contradictory evidence to their beliefs. They believe they are right with no willingness to accept they could be mistaken. Inflexibility, though not scientific, is commonplace among scientists.BobRyan
June 17, 2022
June
06
Jun
17
17
2022
09:28 PM
9
09
28
PM
PDT
Gak! That's not "negative argumentation from ignorance", it's the BASIC FUCKING RULE OF SCIENCE. When a theorist like Darwin offers a new theory, it's up to him and his side to persuade the jury with massive evidence. Unlike court trials, there's no statute of limitations in science, and no final verdict. New evidence on both sides should always be admissible. In this particular cold case, the old theorists got lazy for a while and stopped looking for evidence against the new Darwin theory. In recent years they started looking in new places and new ways, and found massive piles of new evidence for the old theory.polistra
June 17, 2022
June
06
Jun
17
17
2022
09:16 PM
9
09
16
PM
PDT
1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply