"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank
Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005
|
| Quote (stevestory @ April 15 2007,00:28) | | Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ April 14 2007,22:59) | | Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,17:58) | | I'm not lying. ID is not creation science. |
Then, uh, what is this "traditional doctrine of creation" that DI wants Christian churches to defend, and why does DI want Christian churches to defend it. |
http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
[quote]Claim CI001.2:
Intelligent design (ID) is quite different from creationism, because |
Indeed, we can also ask *more* IDers themselves if ID is different from creation 'science' (and we can ask them right in FTK's own backyard, to boot):
Of the six defining characteristics of creation "science" as listed in the Maclean v Arkansas case:
"Creation-science" means the scientific evidences for creation and inferences from those scientific evidences. Creation-science includes the scientific evidences and related inferences that indicate: (1) Sudden creation of the universe, energy, and life from nothing; (2) The insufficiency of mutation and natural selection in bringing about development of all living kinds from a single organism; (3) Changes only within fixed limits of originally created kinds of plants and animals; (4) Separate ancestry for man and apes; (5) Explanation of
the earth's geology by catastrophism, including the occurrence of a worldwide flood; and (6) A relatively recent inception of the earth and living kinds.
Every IDer I've ever heard of accepts at MINIMUM characteristics 2 and 4, (Behe being the only exception to 4, and he has been waffling), nearly all of them accept 1 and (by rejecting "macroevolution") 3, and a very large proportion of those who testified in Kansas either accepted 6 outright, or hemmed and hawed
in an effort to avoid pissing off advocates of number 6. The Kansas Kangaroo Kourt didn't ask about characteristic 5 ("Flood geology"), but it's a certain bet that everyone who accepts 6 also accepts 5.
As for 5 and 6, keep in mind that rejecting them does NOT mean that one is not a creationist --- the old-earth creationists like Ross, for instance, reject them, and by no stretch of the imagination can they be considered anything other than creation "scientists", as the Maclean decision applies to them.
So, of the six characteristics of creationism, nearly all of the IDers who testified in the Kansas Kangaroo kourt accept four of them, and a very high proportion of IDers accept the remaining two of them (or at least have no objections to accomodating them).
--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com
|
