Currently reading a book titled "The case for a creator". Planned to give it to a friend, but the contents are just too interesting that i cannot resist and had to pick it up and read for myself. Indeed, the book's fascinating. Here's a short summary from me.
The book presents the case for a creator, which would be God. From until where i have read now, its current theme is in disproving Darwinism. which is the theory of Evolution. While actually using the word disprove is not really correct too since Darwinism has not been proved too but let's just bear with the language.
Why would disproving Darwinism point to a creator? Suppose Darwinism is true, then there would not be a need for a creator. There is simply no need for guidance and design in the evolution of living things. It simply takes away the need for a creator. Of course one can say that Darwinism and a creator could come in hand in hand, ie perhaps Darwin theory is indeed a tool used by a creator for the creation of this world. However, the chaotic and messiness involved in Darwinism simply refutes this. And remember here, we are assuming that Darwinism is true. The book goes on to list down strong evidential points that Darwinism is not supported.
Just by the no. of sheer counter egs, Darwinism is already disproved. The stands used in the book are indeed convincing. The book is really an interesting read. Perhaps i would give a book review in YF. =) Welcome all to engage in lively and friendly comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment