“So we are confronted with the following odd situation. On the one hand, there is an almost instinctive and overwhelming temptation to infer from the existence and nature of biological information that it has an intelligent origin. On the other hand, some of the very people who grant that the temptation is strong resist it because they are convinced that no designer is necessary; unguided mindless, evolutionary process can and did do it all.” P87
I’m sure Lennox thinks it an odd situation because he seems to think that knowledge comes from abduction and inference. As I said before, everything we know about the natural world, we know from science. Even Lennox tacitly admits this himself when he talks about the three areas where theism can have something to say about the natural world – the origin of the universe, the origin of life and the inner workings of the mind. There’s a reason why there’s no theistic theory of magnetism nor gravity but one for abiogenesis, and that’s because everyone would think you’re a loon if you said that prayer makes the needle turn or the ball drop whereas only some laugh at the thought that the first woman was made from the rib of the first man. There doesn’t have to be much of a gap to let god in.
And not only does theism have only a select few areas that it can say anything at all without looking just a little bit silly, when it has said something in the past it was never right, or at best not provable to be wrong (which is the same as being right for some theists). So those people who do hesitate to say that life is designed by a designer just because it looks so, do so with good reason. For they know that we know what we know today because scientists in the past didn’t gaze at the stars and say “they look like pinpricks in the curtain of night. Let’s go with that”.