6 Replies to “ConversantLife.com videos for UNDERSTANDING ID

  1. 1
    GilDodgen says:

    Sean McDowell will be appearing at our church on August 23 for a big youth ministry event. I’ll be playing keyboards with the youth praise band and sharing the story of my deliverance from militant atheism (in 1994, at age 43), with particular emphasis on how modern science is destroying materialism and pointing ever more forcefully to design and purpose in the cosmos and life.

    I can’t wait to meet Sean.

  2. 2
    FtK says:

    Gil, have you written down your testimony about your journey from atheism to theism?

    I think that would be really interesting to read.

  3. 3
    GilDodgen says:

    Gil, have you written down your testimony about your journey from atheism to theism?

    Yes, but only the final spiritual avalanche phase, written in 1994 at the behest of my good Christian friend Dave, who had a profound influence on me. This would not be appropriate for UD but I would be glad to e-mail a copy.

    The rumblings of the final avalanche began when I bought a cartoon video entitled The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe for my then five-year-old daughter, who was finally born after a very long and very painful infertility ordeal. I had no idea who C.S. Lewis was, but I got the message. (I’ve since read most of his works.) After my daughter’s birth the darkness of my atheistic nihilism began to weigh heavily upon me, and simultaneously I was becoming increasingly aware that the intellectual, rational, “scientific” and evidential underpinnings of my atheism were dissolving. It was my friend Dave who suggested I read Evolution: A Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton, and you know where that led.

    The bottom line is that my entire life was dramatically and irrevocably altered, and oh so much for the better.

    I’ve often commented that I’m convinced God has a sense of humor, since He delivered the final coup de grâce with a child’s cartoon and not some profound intellectual insight (although intellectual insights and apologetics have certainly played a powerful longterm role).

  4. 4
    Frost122585 says:

    Bill, great job!

    I really liked how you framed the case for a natural and science compatible interpretation of Design. I thought that you made great points especially with the SETI example because it really gets at the question of origins and that is the “real” question of all questions.

    I like how you include the religious parts so as to make the ID case relevant in people’s lives but I would make the distinction between the theological connection through “particular faiths” and the scientific one which is strictly a issue of “philosophy of science.”

    All in all, Bill, this was really the best that I have seen you. You looked rejuvenated. You came across as sharp, confident, articulate and inspired.

    FYI, the way that I like to phase the evolution/design argument publicly is this

    “Design exists, we all know what it is, and evolution exists, we all know what it is, the question is this, where does design begin and end, and where does evolution begin and end?”
    In this universe of no clear beginning nor end- the question posed in this way is in fact not scientifically answerable. So the next question is, “which absolutist belief “design or evolution” has the best argument for dominion over what we call “prime reality.” The both do exist and they both exist somewhere in between the beginning and the end- they have nothing to appeal to for help except as they stand within the confines of scientific argument.

    Clearly this is an issue of faith that begins at the level of so called “science.” This is why there IS a controversy and why BOTH sides should be taught in a science class in the most scientific (not dogmatic) way possible.

    Does Design only apply when we are talking about already evolved intelligences? And if it does then what is it about evolution that ultimately causes it to evolve “intelligences” at all? A gigantic mysterious transcendent probability machine or infinite universes that we have no knowledge of at all are NOT scientific answers- they are theories and the their “truth” must be a matter of faith or belief.

    Chance and necessity are not explanations adequate for life’s SC manifestation ergo the Debate goes on.

  5. 5
    Frost122585 says:

    the design argument is for me the answer to a verysimple question-

    Where does design begin and end?

    Some people think molecular machines clearly are designed-

    Big deal- this is a sceintific argument- no one is forced to agree with it but it is what it is and should be understood as such.

    It is not rational to just eliminate the word “intelligence” out of the human vocabulary just because you don’t like it.

  6. 6
    F2XL says:

    I’ll be sure and buy a couple copies and give them away to a few youth leaders at local churches.

    If secular humanists aren’t bound by their philosophical beliefs when it comes to the scientific validity of their claims, then neither should we.

Leave a Reply