(July 27, 2015 at 12:46 pm)lkingpinl Wrote:(July 27, 2015 at 12:32 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: Yea, great. So you have a designer. Who designed him? Why is it your god? Why is it a god at all? Why does this design look evolved?
You get too far ahead. I asked the questions because I have seen far too many people saying that if one accepts there is a God then they must reject Science. I don't find the two to be incompatible.
People forget there is more than one method of explanation. Science can give us the mechanics explanation, the "how" if you will, but it cannot answer the why. Suppose I put it like this:
I present to you the internal combustion engine. Now I give you two choices, the laws of thermodynamics and Henry Ford. You need both. Just because you can can explain how something works does not remove the need for the agent that made it work. We can explain every single detail of an internal combustion engine, but that does not mean the intelligent mind of Henry Ford did not exist. As a matter of fact it is because of the sheer complexity of that engine we must assume a mind behind it.
I find it silly when people state the Laws of Science are explanations for the universe. Laws do not create anything. They only describe what normally happens and that what we can observe and test. As C.S. Lewis put it, We know that 2+2=4 but the laws of arithmetic have never produced a single farthing.
Don't dodge. You said the argument from design is strong, so I pointed out it's holes. How do you deal with them?
