Sunday, October 02, 2005

Creationism vs. Intelligent Design

Are Creationism vs. Intelligent Design Different?
What Progressives, Liberals & Democrats Need to know!

Ok - I'll say it. As Liberal, Progressive, and/or Democratic Christians we need to know the difference between Creationism vs. Intelligent Design.

Is there a difference? The answer is YES! The Radical Right's neo-luddite response to the pain of the very words "Evolutionary Biology" is not to wrangle with the tough nuggets of paradox, but rather to attack science and fact with emotional generalities, social mythology and an almost vaudvillian atack on Evolutionary Biology. And Daniel Engber's article on Slate.com posted Tuesday, May 10, 2005, is below and should help us identify the two headed beast that with all its thorny abberation of scripture.

Daniel writes:

Critics who argue that evolution should not be taught as scientific fact presented their case to the State Board of Education in Topeka, Kansas, last week. Testimony is scheduled to resume on Thursday, and the board expects to make a decision on whether to change its science standards this summer. The public hearings have pitched proponents of evolution against those who subscribe to "Intelligent Design." Is Intelligent Design the same thing as Creationism?

No. Intelligent Design adherents believe only that the complexity of the natural world could not have occurred by chance. Some intelligent entity must have created the complexity, they reason, but that "designer" could in theory be anything or anyone. In 1802, William Paley used the "divine watchmaker" analogy to popularize the design argument

If we assume that a watch must have been fashioned by a watchmaker, then we should assume that an ordered universe must have been fashioned by a divine Creator. Many traditional Creationists have embraced this argument over the years, and most, if not all, modern advocates for Intelligent Design are Christians who believe that God is the designer.

Creationism comes in many varieties, from the strictest biblical literalism (according to which the Earth is only a few thousand years old, and flat) to the theistic evolutionism of the Catholic Church (which accepts evidence that the Earth is millions of years old, and that evolution can explain much of its history—but not the creation of the human soul). Between those extremes, there are "Young-Earth" and "Old-Earth" creationists, who differ over the age of the planet and the details of how God created life.

The limited scope of Intelligent Design theory makes it compatible with a wide range of views. Some prominent ID theorists believe in evolution—or at least that species can change over time—and many believe that the Earth was created more than 10,000 years ago. But there are also ID theorists who believe in a literal reading of Genesis.

Young-Earth creationists have criticized the Intelligent Design movement for encouraging a loose reading of the Bible. The design theorists respond that ID represents at least the "partial truth" and that it is, at the very least, the best available tool for dislodging what they see as evolutionist dogma.

Now THAT wasn't so painful - was it? Our little human minds can handle both GOD, the beauty of the Bible and Evolutionary Biology....without the need to deamonize, distory and stamp out His evolutionary laws of Biology with our 3,500+ year old Biblical parables - yes?

After all...isn't everything His creation?

Peace -

Mary

2 Comments:

At Sunday, December 25, 2005 7:47:00 AM, Blogger veggiedude said...

I think Intelligent Design is a ufologists dream come true. In the 70's, the likes of Erik Von Daniken ('Chariot of the Gods') was actually pushing the idea of Intelligent Design, and he was shouted down by religious fanatics. Today, they have taken his underlying theme and trying to attach it to their own theology. But it will backfire, because it really belongs to those who believe in little green men, and quite frankly, their theory is more plausible than that of an always hiding supernatural being.

 
At Friday, February 29, 2008 12:15:00 PM, Blogger TheModernConservative said...

The problem is, and it's a big one, that there is very, very little evidence that backs evolutionary biology aside from survival of the fittest. Darwin himself said that for his theory to be valid, the fossil record must contain literally millions of transitional species. Where are these millions? Show them to me and I'll believe.

The fact is, they aren't there. They have not been found, despite the billions of other fossils we have in our museums across the globe. God and His Creation are enough. No evolution required.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home




Fair Use Notice: This site contains material which may be copyrighted, the use of which may not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of religious, spiritual, political, philosophical, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, environmental and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.