Oak Park is the community where I live and we have 2 local weekly newspapers. On October 26th, 2005 the Wednesday Journal ran an open letter from a local resident, which read:

An open letter to my religious brethren on intelligent design

To my evangelical friends:

Why not consider evolution to be God’s concept of intelligent design?

To deem such a thought as invalid is to restrict the magnificence of our Almighty Creator. And certainly it would be blasphemous to claim to know the mind of God.

Unless we believe that Jonah literally survived the juices of the belly of the whale, then we must recognize the allegorical beauty of the Bible.

Allegory teaches us theological and moral truth in a way that stimulates both the intellect and the imagination. We need not take things literally to know there truth.

So too, the Bible … an incredibly revelatory book when read with a biot of insight and imagination.

Your liberal friend,

Paul Moroney
Oak Park

I don’t know why Mr. Moroney decided to write this letter at this particular point in time. Maybe his concern has something to do with the ID vs. Evolution cases in other states that have been in the news recently? – I’m not sure.

Based upon his letter, apparently Mr. Moroney thinks that it is “evangelicals” who are leading the crazy questioning of evolution. Otherwise, why address this to evangelicals? And what’s with the “liberal friend” thing — Is this a political issue? Is he not aware that it is the scientific community itself that is leading the way in questioning Darwin’s theory of evolution?

Here are some facts for Mr. Moroney to deal with:

A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism

“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”

“Darwinism is a trivial idea that has been elevated to the status of the scientific theory that governs modern biology,” says dissent list signer Dr. Michael Egnor. Egnor is a professor of neurosurgery and pediatrics at State University of New York, Stony Brook and an award-winning brain surgeon named one of New York’s best doctors by New York Magazine.

“We know intuitively that Darwinism can accomplish some things, but not others,” added Egnor. “The question is what is that boundary? Does the information content in living things exceed that boundary? Darwinists have never faced those questions. They’ve never asked scientifically if random mutation and natural selection can generate the information content in living things.”

“More scientists than ever before are now standing up and saying that it is time to rethink Darwin’s theory of evolution in light of new scientific evidence that shows the theory is inadequate,” said John West, associate director of the Center for Science & Culture. “Darwinists are busy making up holidays to turn Charles Darwin into a saint, even as the evidence supporting his theory crumbles and more and more scientific challenges to it emerge.”

The list of signatories includes member scientists from National Academies of Science in Russia, Czech Republic, Hungary, India (Hindustan), Nigeria, Poland, and the United States. Many of the signers are professors or researchers at major universities and international research institutions such as Cambridge University, Moscow State University, Chitose Institute of Science & Technology in Japan, Ben-Gurion University in Israel, MIT, The Smithsonian and Princeton.

Darwin’s Black Box

Has Mr. Moroney even read the pivotal book by Dr. Michael Behe called “Darwin’s Black Box,” in which he put forth his theory of irreducible complexity? This book and theory had nothing to do with evangelicals or religion. Dr. Behe was looking at the claims of Darwinian evolution, and noting how it did not fit with his scientific observance at the microbiological level.

As one of the “evangelicals” that Mr. Moroney is addressing in his open letter, I simply respond with… “Why should I consider (the theory of) evolution as God’s concept of intelligent design, when (the theory of) evolution itself does not hold up under rigorous scientific scrutiny?”

Pursuit of Truth is the Scientific Method

We evangelicals believe that all truth is God’s truth. We don’t claim to know everything, regardless of how the media portrays us. We actually like science, and believe Christians ought to be involved in science. In fact, as a group we have made many important contributions to science! We happen to think that evolution should be put to the test, just as intelligent design, global warming and any other scientific theory should. We are all about discovering the truth. The issue with evolution vs. intelligent design has nothing to do with religion or God. After all, even if Intelligent Design were to become a widely held theory, it would not answer the question of — WHO was the intelligent designer?

The manner in which some people get so defensive about their beloved Darwin and his theory, makes you wonder who is really interested in discovering truth. Why would someone want to blindly continue to defend a worn out, increasingly suspect theory from the Victorian era? What’s wrong with questioning evolution?

Darwinian Evolution as Religion

Mr. Moroney and others like him have based their worldview squarely upon Darwinian evolution. When something comes along that threatens that worldview, they get all shaky. This response is not very scientific. The scientific method keeps an open mind, and is willing to continually look for truth based upon the evidence. It is always challenging presuppositions, and seeking to break down the ways of thinking that are blinders. I don’t see much of that going on here.

Instead, Mr. Moroney’s letter reads an awful lot like the response you get from a person who holds blindly and firmly to a religious belief and you start asking some probing and challenging questions. The similarity in response is so striking that I would theorize that many people have made Darwinian Evolution their religion, and can’t face the possibility they might be wrong. Sadly, I’m afraid this is what the open letter is really all about.

Mr. Moroney… if you are out there, I welcome your response. Please let me know what is so solid about evolution that should stop me from questioning it’s scientific basis. And, let me know what my being an “evangelical” has to do with it.

Your “evangelical” neighbor,

Randy