The new book by Garry Wills. In it, he dismisses the claim that creationism is a science, and says a Christianity that refuses to face up to intellectual difficulties will always render itself ridiculous. (as displayed on many threads of JC).
On the other hand, brainpower alone is inadequate. He also says:
-Emerson and Thoreau rejected the arid confines of Scripture to become nature mystics. Who else wants to??
-Disestablishment, embodied in the First Amendment, was “a stunning innovation” and “the only original part of the U.S. Constitution.”
-Why has religion thrived so much more in the USA than in the rest of industrialized democracies, where only a small minority attend church?
Overall, he argues we need both head and heart, in good balance.
I agree. Creationism cannot be defended as a science. Intelligent design however…
Religion needs Science to explain the HOW and Science needs religion to explain the WHY. If they are taken out of that context, they do not play nicely.
No. Science only uses measurable and observable phenomena to come to it’s conclusions. God is not measurable or observable and therefore not any part of science.
You can ask yourself Why does gravity exist? Science explains how gravity works but doesn’t need any reason why it works because we know that it works because it’s observable. You don’t need God to explain the law of gravity. If you want to say God made gravity that’s fine, but the God part isn’t necessary to explain how it effects objects in the universe.
Intelligent Design is just a fancy word for Creationism, and other than the Bible, there is still no evidence suggesting that we have any reason to believe it more than another theory, for example one that does have a lot of nearly irrefutable evidence behind it.
ID theory is more than just creationism. It’s also an amalgamation of philosophy and statistical methodology, like evolutionary theory. If either theory were just “hard science,” we wouldn’t have anything to argue about.
I’m sorry to sound rude, but you obviously have no idea what intelligent design theorizes. Maybe you should do research before sounding like a moron in front of everyone.
Creationism: God created the world in 7 days the way the bible says
Intelligent Design: Some sort of higher being orchestrated things because there are too many coincidences to assume probability took care of it.
I disagree, I don’t believe that is what Creationism is. I believe it to mean that a higher being created us, hence the term…and I believe that Intelligent Design is that an intelligent being designed us. The same thing, but using different words. I know that both theories go deeper than that, but the simple definition (in my opinion) is what I just said.
I still stand by my previous statement:
Saying that there are too many coincidences to assume probability is to blame is, in my opinion, the same as saying that because we don’t know the answer, we assume that God did it.
And proponents of ID would claim it is some kind of science (why else would they want it in a science classroom?), but yet the science part can never be nailed down. It’s like trying to get a direct answer to a question about real issues from a Presidential candidate. ID is creationism all dressed up to try to fool people.
And proponents of ID would claim it is some kind of science (why else would they want it in a science classroom?), but yet the science part can never be nailed down. It’s like trying to get a direct answer to a question about real issues from a Presidential candidate. ID is creationism all dressed up to try to fool people.
.
