Rethinking the use of “Intelligent Design” in our apologetic.
By Rick Clinard
As a teacher of Apologetics, I must admit that I all-too-often run to the various aspects of the Intelligent Design argument for a basis of belief. In doing so, I feel that I can better articulate or argue the necessity of a supreme Being and the creation of all things. However, after a little more study, I have found a flaw in my way of utilizing Intelligent Design in my apologetic.
I believe that Intelligent Design (ID) has two major strengths in our apologetic methods. First, ID relies heavily on an observation and study of our universe which is open-minded rather than through closed evolutionary lenses. Unlike one who begins with a presupposition and then either manipulates or ignores evidence that would lead to the contrary, ID follows the evidence to a conclusion that is totally compatible with reality.
Second, I find a strength of Intelligent Design within our apologetic framework in that it does not find its origins in Scripture; rather, it gathers data from the observable biology and physiology of the universe to reach its conclusions. When discussing the origins of the universe with an unbeliever, we want to safeguard against the same charge of beginning with a presupposition and leading the evidence in that direction.
Intelligent Design does have its weaknesses, however…
FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO CONTINUE READING >>>
RECOMMENDED FOR FURTHER READING: