Intelligent Design, a counter-argument to evolution, maintains that it may be scientificallly proven organisms are so complex and composed of multiple complex parts, that they could not have evolved since the usage of one part is dependent upon another; t

Intelligent Design, a counter-argument to evolution, maintains that it may be scientificallly proven organisms are so complex and composed of multiple complex parts, that they could not have evolved since the usage of one part is dependent upon another; that is, all of the components would need to evolve at the same exact time in order to fit together to form the organism, or a part of the organism.  Thus, an intelligent designer is needed.

This debate commenced when the courts ruled creationism was religion and could not longer be taught in public schools.  The idea behind Intelligent Design is that the scientists involved are promoting science and concluding the need for a designer without telling who that designer is.  It is the job of religion to name the designer.  As such, to teach Intelligent Design is to teach science and religion.

As I commented in an earlier blog, the courts disagree.  See here.

Today I came across an article on the Web discussing the publication of a Vatican newspaper article calling Intelligent Design something other than science.  Says the web post "The Vatican newspaper has published an article saying “intelligent design” is not science and that teaching it alongside evolutionary theory in school classrooms only creates confusion."  (The web article is found here.)

The sad part of this article is one of the quotes concerning how the Vatican author arrived at his conclusion.  "

The author, Fiorenzo Facchini, a professor of evolutionary biology at the University of Bologna, laid out the scientific rationale for Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, saying that in the scientific world, biological evolution “represents the interpretative key of the history of life on Earth.”"

While I believe there are a lot of "good Christian believers" in the Catholic Church, I also believe that much of the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church allows it to be called a cult or an apostasy.  See my thoughts here.

The above quote supporting evolution shows why I believe this about the Roman Catholic Church.  Without ever arriving at the question about the validity of Intelligent Design, I find the article tells us that biological evolution is the KEY to the history of life on Earth.  Yet, when I read Genesis 1, I discover that life on earth comes from God.  In order to arrive at the conclusion being promoted (evolution), the author has places science above God.  My Bible tells me that God comes before all things. 

If God comes first, then there is an Intelligent Designer in creation.  This Designer is the God of Scripture.  If more in the Church, the real body of Christ, not the Roman Catholic Church nor your favorite Protestant church, would truly understand that God's Word is Truth, that God is sovereign and in control, and that God rules, the world would become such a better place. 

Unfortunately, too many church members are like Professor Facchini.  They place man's science in front of God.  God is there, on the religion side of life, but not on any of the other parts.  Science rules, even if science cannot truly prove the major concepts of its theory. 

More of us need to look at all of the world through the eyes of the Bible and see God first, allowing Him to show us the rest of creation.

Jim A.