It's not about definitions. The understanding that many see "no conflict" with the view that, "One (belief) is based on faith and one is based on a well-defined pathway to the search for knowledge" is false.

There is conflict, and many know it.

A Christian's worldview and what many call science (naturalism: the belief that everything has evolved from natural causes without any aid of an intelligent being) cannot coexist equally in one's mind unless you are unwilling to follow through on your logic.

One must be truer than the other. Conflict. Accepting the conflict is like putting a Band-Aid on a sucking chest wound.

One cannot be sold out to naturalism and believe that you are really looking through undistorted lenses. It simply is not true because evolutionists will not accept any other philosophy other than naturalism, even if the search for empirical truth leads to a different philosophy (intelligent design).

When one looks through the distraction of a falsely declared foundation of "just the facts," he might find that it isn't just about the facts. It's about a philosophical worldview. The reason that creationism has "failed" is due to the aggressive attack of naturalists on religion and the blind acceptance of a debilitating contradiction of beliefs. Not due to the lack of evidence.

Intelligent design, when viewed through clean and clear lenses, is as valid as Darwin's evolution and the philosophy that guides it.

Brian Wedge

South China

brian.david.wedge@us.army.mil