Stephen Webb on Michael Behe

Thanks to The Panda’s Thumb for drawing attention to Stephen Webb’s review of Michael Behe’s latest book for the Christianity Today web site. I know Stephen, and thus hope that the comment I left (reproduced immediately below) is taken in the spirit of dialogue with which it is offered:

Stephen, you know I like you as a person, but this review simply shows how easily Behe’s case can seem persuasive to someone who is outside of the fields of biochemistry, biology, genetics, and other relevant fields. But the truth is that scientists within those fields have looked at Behe’s arguments, and have found them wanting. Behe has failed to persuade the overwhelming majority of scientists for one simple reason: they know the evidence far better than the general public does.

I am reminded of the Book of Proverbs, which warns us that “The first person to present his case seems right, until another steps forward and questions him”. I’d encourage you to allow Behe to be cross-examined by one of the Christians who also has relevant expertise in biology, such as Ken Miller or Francisco Ayala, and then see if Behe’s arguments seem as persuasive as you apparently find them now.

"And don't you find it a bit suspicious, following Jesus' climactic temple tantrum triumph at ..."

Mythicists Shock Bart Ehrman, Set Off ..."
"Sometimes the best we can manage is "implies" and "may have." Hence, postmodernism. Just the ..."

Mythicists Shock Bart Ehrman, Set Off ..."
"Any time a question contains two “implieds” and a “may have,” I suspect that there ..."

Mythicists Shock Bart Ehrman, Set Off ..."
"I don't really mind when 'day 0' is. Just...if we colonise Mars or something, please ..."

Before Common Calendar

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment