Re: Dembski's "Explaining Specified Complexity"

Biochmborg@aol.com
Sat, 18 Sep 1999 18:02:29 EDT

In a message dated 9/18/99 2:55:25 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
MikeBGene@aol.com writes:

> Actually, there is no reason to think the two are mutually exclusive.
> Speaking only for myself, I would simply say that if I did not
> think there was evidence of God's existence, I'm not sure I would
> still have faith (after all, I wasn't raised to believe in God).

That reminds me of John 20:24-29. In my opinion there is no better
illustration of the profound difference between scientific skepticism (as
demonstrated by Thomas) and faith. I was raised to believe in God, but as a
scientist who sees no evidence of the existence of God that cannot be
explained just as well by assuming naturalistic materialism and scientism, I
would not believe in God if somewhere within me there was no core of
certainty based on faith alone that God truly exists.

When it comes to God and Christianity, I see faith as a rock whereas I see a
reliance upon evidence as sand. What can be proven by evidence can also be
disproven by evidence (like building a house on sand), but what is based on
faith is everlasting (like building a house on rock).

Just a personal testimonial for you to consider.

Kevin L. O'Brien