The truth is Creationism and ID are 2 completely different things. People try to say that ID is just a watered down version of Creationism, it is just a political way to slide in Creationism....well frankly both of these are just plain false!
The truth is Orthodox Christians are not ID proponents, I am not. Most Christians honestly do not even know what ID is about!!!!!
And the for the ID proponent's sake....most of them are NOT Christians or religious at all!
True Christians cannot nor will not support ID. Scientologists are more likely to support it than Christians are. In fact Richard Dawkins is more likely a supporter of ID than a your informed practicing Christian.
What is ID? (well Expelled did not do so good at explaining terms...for any term, really!)
1. "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection".
2. It is a modern form of the traditional y and philosophical arguments for the existence of a designer
3. that designer could be anything, not necessarily even "god"
4. supported by The Discovery Institute (which is NOT a Christian Institution) Sure they take money from Christians (wouldn't you?) who want to support it and Christian Apologists have worked with the Discovery Institute on projects but the they are 2 independent groups with 2 independent views and beliefs.
What are the differences between Creationism?
Intelligent Design adherents believe only that the complexity of the natural world could not have occurred by chance. Some intelligent entity must have created the complexity, they reason, but that "designer" could in theory be anything or anyone.
Creationism comes in many varieties, from the strictest biblical literalism to the theistic evolutionism of the Catholic Church . Between those extremes, there are "Young-Earth" and "Old-Earth" creationists, who differ over the age of the planet and the details of how God created life. But in all cases the Designer is the Christian God. They are based out of the Bible.
At a recent completed trial Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board:
Creationism they claim, is inextricably linked to the creation story in Genesis. ID, by contrast, is a solid scientific theory resting upon a firm foundation of biological fact. And while theological inferences could certainly be drawn from it, such inferences are unrelated to the theory itself.
This is key!
People are adding theological implications that are not necessarily being claimed by the ID supporters...Why?
"the easiest way for Darwinists to discredit intelligent design is to push it off as a theory or political theory for "creationism." It is a rhetorical strategy on the part of Darwinists to delegitimize ID theory without actually addressing the merits of its case. It is laziness.
The scientific method (for ID) is commonly described as a four-step process involving observations, hypothesis, experiments, and conclusion. Intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI). Design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. Scientists then perform experimental tests upon natural objects to determine if they contain complex and specified information. One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures to see if they require all of their parts to function. When ID researchers find irreducible complexity in biology, they conclude that such structures were designed.
Where does one draw a line between science and religion?
According to intelligent design network people should and can be objective when studying science. People can make their own personal decision on religion but all sides can be taught equally and p in a politically correct fashion at our schools. This is part of academic freedom. That we should fight for!
Like I said I am not a ID proponent, I am a Creationist. I believe in the Bible and that God created all that is in 7days, but I can and will support and express this view in more detail at a later date. But I am all about academic freedom and letting people be free to study all sides of the debate.
