Tópico: Answers in Genesis: Intelligent Design: é inteligente; é Cristão?

[APODman]

Será que ninguém mais quer adotar a criança ? *** 

Intelligent design: is it intelligent; is it Christian?

War of the Worldviews sneak preview series: part 8

by Pam S. Sheppard, staff writer, AiG–USA

February 4, 2006

When it comes to intelligent design (ID), one thing is for certain—the mere mention of it stirs up much controversy. Whether it was President Bush telling reporters last fall that students should be taught ID alongside evolution or Judge Jones III ruling against the teaching of it in the landmark Dover (Pennsylvania) case, ID has become a major player in the creation/evolution battle.

Without question, ID has gained an increasing amount of recognition and publicity over the last several years at local and national levels. But just where does ID fit in the battle? It really depends upon whom you ask.

“I think people don’t really know where to place the ID movement (IDM) as far as worldviews go,” says Dr. Georgia Purdom, adjunct AiG–USA lecturer, researcher and author of chapter 9 of War of the Worldviews.

“Those within the ID movement try to maintain a middle ground so as to not bring wrath from either creationists or evolutionists. They have a ‘big tent’ approach where everyone lives happily in the middle. However, the ID movement is experiencing criticism from both camps for either going too far or not far enough in their explanations of who the designer is and what he has done,” she adds.

In order to understand the controversy behind ID, a person must first understand what is behind the ID movement. Is it religious … is it science … and is it intelligent?

In this chapter, Purdom answers these questions about ID, which holds that “certain features” of living things were designed by an “intelligent cause” as opposed to being formed through purely natural means.

ID affirms that living things are designed (it doesn’t claim that everything is designed) and show irreducible complexity. As Purdom explains, determining whether or not a feature of a living organism displays design can be made by using what is called an “explanatory filter” which includes the following levels of explanation:

Necessity—did it have to happen?
Chance—did it happen by accident?
Design—did an intelligent agent cause it to happen?
While some of the ideas from this movement help support a creationist worldview, they fall short, says Purdom. For one, ID does not attempt to explain all designs. Only certain features are designed and evolutionary processes are not ruled out.

The ID movement does not oppose an old age for the earth and even allows evolution to play a vital role once the designer formed the basics of life. By allowing for evolution, it also allows ID supporters to distance themselves from the problem of evil in the natural world.

Without the framework of the Bible and the understanding that evil entered the world through man’s actions (Genesis 3), God appears sloppy and incompetent. Because the ID movement does not acknowledge God as Redeemer, there seems to be no final solution for the evil in this world.

Although much of the media might say otherwise, the ID movement is very careful not to associate itself with Christianity or any formal religion. By doing so, some think it will stand a better chance of gaining acceptance as an alternative to Darwinism in the schools because it does not violate the so-called “separation of church and state,” Purdom points out.

In fact, many are attracted to the ID movement because they can decide for themselves who the creator is—a Great Spirit, Brahman, Allah, God, etc. The current movement does not have unity on the naming of the creator and focuses more on what is designed.

This divorce of the Creator from creation is the central problem of the theory. As Purdom points out in the book, the Creator and His creation cannot be separated; they reflect on each other. All other problems within the movement stem from this one.

In summary, ID has many good tenets, such as the idea of irreducible complexity, but it purposely separates the Creator from creation. God has a dual role of both Creator and Redeemer. An understanding of both these roles can only be accomplished using both general revelation (nature) and special revelation (the Bible).

fonte: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/wow/preview/part8.asp



*** creditos : Atheist


[ ]´s

[Atheist]

Então, Sodré...

[Vito]

Pobre criacionistas, até quando? 

[Nina]

 
 
:cala:
 :nao-sei:
 
 :fool:
:porco:
 
 
 
:segredo:
:onde:
 :flecha:
 
 

 
 :parede2:
:roleta-russa:
 :medonho:

[rizk]

Design inteligente não é "visão de mundo", é má-fé explícita.

[Suyndara]

  aaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Pois é, ficam alimentando a criança depois de meia-noite

 

Olha só no que dá: multiplicação de crias