Here was the concluding quote of a recent article on evolution, creation, and intelligent design: "My generation of evangelicals is ready to call a truce on the culture wars. It seems like our parents, our pastors, and the media won't let us do that. We are ready to be done with the whole evolution-creation debate. We are ready to move on." Is Rachel Evans correct? I don't think so.
You can read the whole article here
This article was confused and disappointing on several levels.
Click here for more discussion on faith and evolution
First, move on to what exactly? It is not at all clear what one would be left with to move on to if Naturalism / Darwinian Evolution is affirmed completely.
Second, people continue to equivocate on what they mean by evolution. Evolution can mean several different things (from simply change over time, change within species, or full blown Darwinian evolution). Definitions matter in this debate. Evidence for one is not necessarily evidence for the other.
Third, it is baffling to me how so many people (on both sides) can misunderstand what intellignet design is and how it differs from creationism. In the age of the interenet this shouldn't happen. Google intelligent design by someone who actually holds the view and then interact with it.
For example, this is from intelligentdesign.org: "Is intelligent design theory the same as creationism? No. Intelligent design theory is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the "apparent design" in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism is focused on defending a literal reading of the Genesis account, usually including the creation of the earth by the Biblical God a few thousand years ago. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design is agnostic regarding the source of design and has no commitment to defending Genesis, the Bible or any other sacred text. Honest critics of intelligent design acknowledge the difference between intelligent design and creationism. University of Wisconsin historian of science Ronald Numbers is critical of intelligent design, yet according to the Associated Press, he "agrees the creationist label is inaccurate when it comes to the ID [intelligent design] movement." Why, then, do some Darwinists keep trying to conflate intelligent design with creationism? According to Dr. Numbers, it is because they think such claims are "the easiest way to discredit intelligent design." In other words, the charge that intelligent design is "creationism" is a rhetorical strategy on the part of Darwinists who wish to delegitimize design theory without actually addressing the merits of its case." Here are some helpful resources to explore this further:
Intelligent Design Uncensored: An Easy-to-Understand Guide to the Controversy by William Dembski and Jonathan Witt
and Science and Faith by C. John Collins
and
|