Alexander Brands ID Unchristian

Denis Alexander has used the Guardian newspaper to brand Intelligent Design as unchristian. He asserts that it promotes a non-christian understanding of God as creator. This is a strange view as Intelligent Design has nothing to do with promoting any concept of deity. However, if Alexander is concerned that a theory of origins can convey a wrong concept of God he should be very very worried about evolution. Dawkins, Dennett and others are fully persuaded that it demands the rejection of an immanent God and theistic evolution demands a deity who deliberately used death, agony and extinction as the primary means for developing life.

Alexander commends the hard work of peer review so he should be impressed with the credentials of our editor, Norman C Nevin OBE who has over 300 peer reviewed articles to his name. Unfortunately, Norman Nevin was not impressed with either the theology or the science that Alexander put forward to persuade Christians to embrace evolution. Should Christians Embrace Evolution? is written as a direct challenge to Alexander's campaign. We urge you to read the book and consider the issues seriously. To read Alexander's article and comments on it go here.

 

Guardian Readers Make ID Education No 1 Concern

Guardian readers have given the lie to any idea that Intelligent Design is an irrelevant sideshow in the origins debate. Following an article by Dr Alastair Noble stating that ID should not be excluded from the study of origins there have been a flood of over 1500 reader responses making it the most commented on item in the newspaper. The item in 2nd place has almost 1000 less comments and others engender even less interest.

Even though climate change, the Copenhagen Conference, Obama's extended commitment to the Afghan war and many other major issues are currently making news it is Intelligent Design that provokes a massive public response. Some might even describe the reaction as hysterical. According to many respondents, Dr Alastair Noble who has a PhD in Chemistry and is a former science teacher and schools inspector, is ignorant about both science and education and his article is identified as imbecilic, pathetic and the poorest ever to grace the pages of the Guardian. Hardly worthy of all that response then especially with so many important things happening in the world.

 

Templeton Fund Tidal Wave of Theistic Evolution

The Templeton Foundation have financed the major promotion of theistic evolution that we have seen in recent months. In this Darwin double anniversary year, Theos working in partnership with the Faraday Institute have been campaigning to have Darwin recognised as a brilliant scientist who has unfortunately got caught in the crossfire of a philosophical debate. Theos, a public policy think tank, obviously felt that this was the most pressing issue to address in order to get the Bible considered in the public square and Templeton were happy to provide a generous grant to make it happen.

What they have done is demand that the theology that underpins theistic evolution be thoroughly examined and we commend the book Should Christians Embrace Evolution? as an excellent aid to that process. They have also drawn attention to the scientific claims that support the evolutionary paradigm. Examining the empirical evidence will be enlightening for many. Leading scientists currently researching in the fields of genetics, biology, chemistry and thermodynamics have contributed to this book and we are sure that you will find their views most illuminating.

 

Alexander Wants to Avoid Red Herring

Denis Alexander has expressed his concern that the evolution debate could turn into a significant distraction. In his book Creation or Evolution he writes, "Christian campaigns against evolution represent a giant 'red herring', distracting believers from far more important pursuits. We are faced with a huge challenge of reaching a lost world with the message of the gospel. Why not take all that money, energy and human gifting and abilities, and use them for evangelism?" Alexander's point about the gospel's pre-eminence is well made.

However, as one who has committed my life to the proclamation of the gospel and who has travelled to many nations of the world to pursue that I find it a little hard to reconcile Alexander's concern with his current 'campaign'. I have never campaigned against evolution until now. The incessant onslaught by Alexander, Spencer, Theos and the Faraday Institute to persuade me to concur with their convictions has caused me to question the "evidence" for evolution and the theology Alexander invites me to embrace. If I adopt Alexander's suggested theology, then the fall has made little material difference to the world, sin (whatever that is) is not the cause of death, death is apparently God's chosen means of developing life, I have no idea then why Christ had to die and I am not exactly sure in what way he is my Saviour. Under this theology evangelism loses clarity and purpose.

What about the energy, human gifting and abilities and the significant amount of money that has been put into commissioning a play, two major independent research studies, writing etc. that make up the Rescuing Darwin project. Why didn't Alexander direct all this into evangelism and world poverty? Instead he started a campaign and then criticised those of a different view with the following words, "Christians who make it their mission to attack evolution...are embarrassing and bring the gospel into disrepute." At least he and Nick Spencer have stated their desire that the debate would be carried out in a spirit of courtesy and mutual respect! (see Rescuing Darwin p10).

 

Page 1 of 2

Infomation

Book Price: £9.99
Paperback 192 pages
ISBN 9781844744060
Published 20/11/2009

Edited by
Norman C. Nevin
Foreword by
Wayne Grudem

Latest Comments

RSS