Intelligent Design Vs Big Bang Theory

Improved Essays
Answering where everything in the world comes from, including human beings, is a perplexing question that has been thought about for centuries. Today, there are two answers to this question; one is founded in religion, and another in science. Scientists have developed the theory of Evolution to answer how all species come into being, and the theory of the Big Bang to answer how the universe itself came into being. The theory of Evolution came from Charles Darwin and other biologists. It states that species evolve over thousands of years through the process of natural selection. The Big Bang is the theory that the universe exploded from an infinite point of energy. Religion, Christianity to be specific, believes in the theory of intelligent …show more content…
For science, God is not required to explain any phenomena and that there isn’t a purpose for the creation of things. Everything that created is therefore created because of random chance, as opposed to something creating it with a specific design or purpose in mind. For intelligent design, God created the universe and everything in it, and God intervenes in nature frequently and indefinitely. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a fundamental conflict between science and religion. This is due to the contradiction between the divine truth and the scientific truth. Intelligent design says that it is not compatible with science because if the divine truth is indeed true, then science is wrong and therefore not needed. On the other hand, science says the truth can only be reached through research. That is, everything can be logically explained through a qualitative and quantitative …show more content…
To say that he causes things in the same way things are caused in nature is a misunderstanding of what God is. This comes from the fact that creation is an ambiguous term. It has two meanings. One is how it applies to nature, and one is how it applies to God creating nature itself. Creation in nature is a type of change because it involves one thing changing its form into another form. Divine creation, however, is not a type of change. Religion is false in explaining the creation of nature as opposed to creation in nature. God is not in nature because God is not a natural thing. It is not correct to think of God in a natural way by assuming his actions or attributes are natural. Therefore, it is perfectly fine, per Tkacz, to say that nothing is created out of nothing. The confusion between creation of nature and creation in nature is part of the cosmogonical fallacy which is what intelligent design is founded

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Rather, there are only conflicts between science and natural claims without evidence. To clarify, the introduction of evolutionary biology does not challenge religion itself. An elaborate theory of evolution does not challenge faith attitudes, belief in supernatural creation, nor belief in ultimate purpose. However, it absolutely does challenge several interpretations held in religious communities. The vital keyword of this statement is “interpretation.” There is no objective method to interpret any particular religious text, so it’s illogical to say any single interpretation is the correct one.…

    • 1345 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Other than the clear statement that God was the initial cause for all things that exist, it appears God is exempt from causation. Non-theists suggest that if something clearly causes itself to exist, therefore nothing exists before it exists at all. Logically, the idea seems impossible. While arguments posed criticize the cosmological argument and its flaws, it does not prove it to be false. However, while taking into account the lack of present evidence, the argument for God’s existence based on his apparent creation of the universe is lacking with insufficient credibility to go behind it.…

    • 1350 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    People don’t believe in God based on an argument. The belief is simply that, something one just knows to be true, like that the world didn't just pop into existence five seconds ago. Therefore, there is no conflict between the two. On the contrary, there does seem to be a conflict between a particular religion, naturalism and science (evolution). Naturalism is the belief that there isn't any such person as God.…

    • 853 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Aquinas Argument Essay

    • 1349 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Secondly; affirming that evil is not a “thing” created by God meant that God is not omnipotent or omniscient. Some philosophers strongly believe that He is not all powerful, all-knowing or all-good for He has limited control over, and is not willing to prevent the horrific evil happening in the world. Jackson, 2014 stated that Aquinas initially explained that evil occur as a choice, it is not something intended by God to happen and so, in the context of natural evil, it cannot be said that earthquakes or volcano eruptions are chosen by the Earth or the volcano to ensue, as these God creations does not have the knowledge or the power to choose what can occur. Natural evil is not a privation of good nor is it the absence of the ultimate good that men are able to control, rather natural evil is the normal product of God’s creation (Jackson, 2014). God made eruptions and earthquakes as the nature’s normal consequence, which consequently suggests that an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent God does not exists.…

    • 1349 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    However, the point I would like to make it that science too doesn’t have all the answers, no matter which scientist proves that their evidence is correct and cannot be doubted, there are still flaws in science today. I believe that Coyne argues from a more naturalistic and materialistic point of view. These points of view, however fog the way for Biblical and religious compatibility to science. As one of his points he discusses the topic of evolution, and the point he makes is evolution shows evidence of no soul or spirit. However, there are three points that I would like to make against evolution; the first being, that if humans are the products of evolution then humans are simply physical things.…

    • 754 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Because according to theology, God was created and did not just exist. This is a contradictory claim within itself. One theory that Dawkins also explores is evidence of God’s existence throughout the universe. Seeing is believing or in this case providing evidence for logical reasoning is sound. Since there is no trace of evidence, God cannot exist.…

    • 1212 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    POPPER, KUHN AND LATOUR'S EVALUATION OF THE ARGUMENTS Popper's philosophy is based on falsifiability, thus he would side with Lennox. There are a lot of gaps in the science when it comes to evolution and the origin of life. There are also a lot of phenomenons that Dawkins cannot explain by using pure science, because he believes that the specific explanations have not been discovered yet. Lennox uses falsifiability as his main argument in many situations to counter Dawkins' theories. Lennox uses God to explain all of these phenomenons and because God cannot be falsified by using science, Popper would side with Lennox rather than Dawkins.…

    • 1563 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Also the nature of science is not the same as common sense. An observation based on common sense can be changed drastically as new observations arise, and Intelligent Design theory does not allow for changes based on new information. Statements of science are never accepted as the final truth, because overtime they typically form a sequence of increasingly accurate statements. Eventually, as with evolution, the data that is collected is so accurate that it is no longer questioned in science. For people who believe in Intelligent Design, their arguments and beliefs are the “end all be all” and are accepted as truth without any observable data to study to make accurate statements.…

    • 1476 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The Origin of Man How did life begin? Where did humans come from? The origin of man is a mystery of the universe, however, there is a long-lasting battle raging between the Christian belief and scientists. Christians believe God created Adam and Eve six thousand years ago, and that all the humans, animals, plants of the world began at that time. This theory is called creationism, and their evidence is everything written in the Bible.…

    • 1292 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Do God And Evil Coincide?

    • 1284 Words
    • 6 Pages

    He says that we try to come up with solutions so that God can logically exist, but they all fail at creating any logical arguments. One of our solutions is that good cannot exist without evil, but he says this is a fallacy because if God had limitless power then he could create good without evil, which means God does not exist. Next is that evil is as a means to good which is a huge restriction to God’s power because it is basically saying that God has to follow some sort of rule. Lastly there is the idea that evil exists because humans have free will; God could have and should have created us to only know and act good, which would then mean that evil would never have existed if he was actually all-powerful. He says that this disproves God because we would not have been created like this if he really were all-powerful, but I believe there was a…

    • 1284 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays