Intelligent Design is NOT Creation[ism]

Am I mad that "it was shot down" ??? hardly, for I have not heard from JOE on this, and he would be the only one I can think of that can tell me what JOE believesWhat I find so incongruous is that you are so willing to go so far off on a long extemporaneous limb to posit what amounts to a HYPOTHETICAL issue as if it was valid to this argument.Your points are valid about the differences of beliefs from Deism, but are NOT valid in telling me what someone else specifically believes -- The ONLY way that would have any validity is if you say that you know what Joe believes based on previous conversations with him: you have not done that or even implied it.I also cannot see what this has to do with the topic at hand here and will henceforth stop wasting bandwidth on your petty problem.Joe's statement is consistent with Deism. Stating that point does not make me determined to turn Joe into a Deist, and the point of the question was to see where JOE draws the line between his beliefs and Deism, not where you or anyone else draws that line for Joe.enjoy.

Well you seem upset at getting an answer to a question you asked so the natural conclusion is that you don't like the answer.My points are relevant to what Joe believes since Joe says he is Christian. So I referred to beliefs which are pretty minimal for Christianity (I didn't include the Virgin Birth, or Jesus' miracles for instance). It's a pretty safe bet that Joe beleives at least that much.That Joe's stated views are consistent with Deism is one thing - but they are also consistent with Kenneth Miller's, for instance. But you don't seem to want to know that.

quote:

---

Percy:
There's a movement that promotes the teaching of conservative Christian religious views in public school science classrooms. Usually they're referred to as Creationists. And it is conservative Christian groups, the same ones that first advocated the teaching of YEC, and then later of scientific creationism, that are now promoting the teaching of ID in the classroom, most recently in Ohio.

---

NOWWWW I understand! Finally... Just because some or most Creationists want to jump on-board with ID does not make ID = Creation, anymore than atheists being evolutionists make the theory of evolution an atheistic theory.However I also know there are Muslims (Moslems?) and Jews, that are Crteationists, YECs. Spetner is a Creationist although not a YEC and he is Jewish.

quote:

---

Percy:
It is certainly valid to argue that the attraction ID holds for conservative Christians does not bear on the scientific validity of ID, but this then makes ID's scientific foundation key to resolving the issue of whether ID is just part of Creationism. As one board member in Ohio said, "Somebody's dreamed up another way of expressing creationism, for heaven's sake." If this view isn't true, then someone should be able to describe ID's scientific foundation.

---

That has been done in the literture I have mentioned.

quote:

---

Percy:
But if ID is scientifically valid, then ID stands apart from Creationism.

---

And what happens if biological Creation is scientifically validated by baraminologists?

quote:

---

Percy:
So shall we adjourn to the other threads for now?

---

Sure. I take we need to start a thread on the evidences for ID.

---

"...the most habitable place in the solar system yields the best view of solar eclipses just when observers can best appreciate them." from "The Privileged Planet"

You have mentioned lots of literature and authors and some of them are quite inconsistent with each other. They are inconsistent if not directly through stated disagreements (as seen in Ratzsch vs Dembski), then in logical disagreements between models they are espousing.I guess this is to say that too many creationists of all stripes are taking advantage of ID and saying the exact same thing you are... it's in the literature.It is time that you be very specific and explain which authors you hold to be correct and NOT part of the creationists glomming onto valid ID theory, as well as which ones are the creationist camp and you disagree with.It might also be important, to delineate it as a scientific pursuit, what model is being pursued? Once and for all, are your FOR OR AGAINST common descent (regardless of underlying biochemical mechanism)? Are you for or against our knowledge regarding fossilization? I thought you said that baraminology had nothing to do with creationism at all?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

what I seemed to be getting (and still am to some extent) is an answer from left field from someone else and not from Joe. If he has said elsewhere that he is a christian, then that is information I do not have (not having been here all that long, and only able to go on what I have seen).I think we can agree that the answer to this issue has to come from Joe and no one else, k?

Message 123 is the latest information we have.--Percy

IDman,Could you please answer the following question. Does ID, as you are presenting it here, require the input of a supernatural being? If yes, then isn't ID just a different flavor of creationism?

heh -- which is where we started this issue when I said that it sounded a lot like deism. who's on second?

The difference between Deism and Intelligent Designer is that the "creator" in Deism does not interfere with the universe and its natural laws. In order for an intelligent designer to design the organisms, he would have to swoop in whenever the environment changes and design a new organism, which just appears out of nowhere. Now isn't that interference?
I've originally thought the Intelligent Designer was some creationist's attempt at trying to make Creationism sound more scientific, by adding this idea behind it, just as Evolution works on natural selection, but they still don't realize Intelligent Designer still has to be explained, just as Creationism and Evolution and natural selection have to be explained. I don't know if they thought they could get away with the explanation part of it by sticking in Intelligent Designer, but obviously, they've failed.

---

DeviantArt: 404