Lesson 10/16: Special Creation and Evolution

what about irreducible complexity? Like the single minimal cell?

Give me a break. All of science presupposes material cause and effect and the uniformity of nature -- not design! Dessign is a teleological pressupposition based on Romans 1. I happen to agree with design, but design by itself doesn't tell you anything. Design needs a material mechanism by which it can be made manifest. When it comes to life, evolution is clearly the means by which God's deisgns become a reality.

In the video you stated that science does not need God; however, the fact is that without God science cannot be done.  Design is inherent in the creation which makes science possible.

Science has already confirmed that the universe had a beginning and we already know that it is a contradiction to say that Nature created and designed itself.

The practice of science doesn't need God. You just have to assume the uniformity of nature and the continuity of material cause and effect. I believe that if you presuppose God, then you have a rational basis for the uniformity of nature and material cause effect, whereas the athiest must have blind "faith" in these things. But the actual practice of science doesn't require theism, obviously since most scientists are atheists.

I agree with you God designed the cosmos from the beginning. This is the "fine tuning" arguement. And I also believe that part of this fine tuning was for God to build into the universe all of the properties necessary for self-organization to occur. To say that stars, or galaxies or cells could not self-organize without divine intervention means that God does not have the ability to design a comos that has these properties. That might be true, but I believe God got it right the first time.

If you disagree, then fine. But realize that if God build all of these structure by divine fiat, then He was unconstrained by any physical processess. However, if God created using natural laws via evolution, then was constrained by material cause-and-effect and the patterns and data we find in creation should match the predictions made by natural laws. And since that is what we find, you must believe that God is intentionally decieving us. See #11 and #12 for details.

Glovergj, I think Steve Matheson once said something on his blog on this topic that always resonated with me. He said that creationists and IDers think that 'design' is the answer, but he as a biologist sees it as the question. How did this design come to be? He simply thinks that natural processes acount for what we see as biological design in the same way they account for embryological development.

Did you know that Newton was Christian who was exploring the design of God in nature? How do you say this stuff with a straight face.

You have no idea what you're talking about. All Christians who study biology or physics believe in design. Paul says all of creation shows the handiwork of God. And all Christian scientists should be motivated to explore God's handiwork in nature.

But just saying that something is designed isn't science! You have to study it. You have to break it down and determin what the material cause-and-effect relationships are. Get a clue.