Creation
From WhyNotWiki
Contents |
[edit] For: The philosophical/probability angle
Do you think the world we live in today and all life on this planet just happened?
So you're telling me that more conscious thought went into some graffiti on the wall than into the amazing complex designs in nature?
Was life on this planet just an accident that happened by chance? (Do you know what the chances are of that happening?)
I don't think so!
Humans are more than just masses of matter that operate according to chemical and physical laws. We were created. On purpose. We're not here by accident.
I haven't heard an evolutionist explain the miracle of consciousness yet, but I don't see how the concept of consciousness can coexist with the evolutionary theory of our origins. If you claim that life here on earth happened by chance and that everything (even your brain) just follows the laws of science, then you have to admit that even your very thoughts are pretty inconsequential and meaningless: determined by completely by laws of nature running their course for millions of years -- thus effectively by chance and not by an act of your will.
[edit] Criticism of Intelligent Design
http://mediamatters.org/items/200607070010 Media Matters - Ann Coulter's "Flatulent Raccoon Theory"
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/coulter1.cfm Talk Reason: arguments against creationism, intelligent design, and religious apologetics
[edit] origins.org
The site overall looks kind of out-of-date, but still has some excellent articles...
http://www.origins.org/articles/wells_pepmoth.html - "Second Thoughts about Peppered Moths", 2003-02-06, Jonathan Wells, "Copyright (c) 1999 by Jonathan Wells. All rights reserved. International copyright secured. Used by permission of Access Research Network."
more (has about 30 articles)
http://www.origins.org/articles/00site_ourfocus.html.
[edit] Where are you coming from (the underlying presuppositions of this site)?
Origins.org focuses primarily on the scientific theory known as Intelligent Design and reaches one logical conclusion: that the universe and life show verifiable signs of intelligent creation because there is an intelligent Creator. Some of our resources deal with scientific data exclusively and some take the defensible position that the data point to and support the Biblical claim of Divine Creation. We let the resources speak on their own merits.
[edit] Why this focus?
Intelligent Design keeps the issues of origins on middle ground and ensures open discussion. For instance, whether the earth was created eons ago or thousands of years ago, evidence is mounting that it was created by an intelligent designer. Intelligent Design provides a testable alternative theory to Darwinian macro-evolution. This leaves room for discussion at the table of reason, whether one is starting from Scripture or the laboratory, a Recent-Creation or an Old Earth position.
[edit] What about the Bible?
For Christians, the date of Creation is not a primary issue of faith and should not be regarded as such. Trusted orthodox Bible scholars allow freedom of interpretation on the age issue. What is crystal clear from Scripture is who created.
Romans Chapter one claims the Creator is evident from the Creation itself.
"That which is known about God is evident within them [people]; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse." (Romans 1:19-20)
http://www.origins.org/articles/00site_ourfocus2.html.
[edit] What is Our Focus?
This web site identifies with the "Intelligent Design" approach to origins, making use of the ideas of many leaders in this movement, such as Phil Johnson, Mike Behe, and Bill Dembski. Our primary goal is to make the case for design--that the universe and life appear to be designed by an intelligent creator. We believe the primary issue of contention in science and our culture is not when or how God created, but if God created--is there a Creator at all other than blind natural forces.
[edit] Intelligent Design and the Age Issue
Intelligent Design theory does not depend on an old or a young earth; it contends that the universe and life have such complex and highly specified information that they must have been designed and could not have happen by blind, naturalistic forces given any length of time. By focusing on the difficulties and weaknesses of evolutionary theory, we avoid the questions regarding scientific dates versus biblical dates, questions which divide many Christians. If we show that evolution could not happen in 4.5 billion years, then it could not have happened in 10,000 years either! Most contributors to this web site use the scientific dates (a 15 billion year old universe and 4.5 billion year old earth) as a working hypothesis, believing that the age question is a secondary issue. Most contributors who do have difficulties with the scientific dates believe the issue can be solved after first establishing the validity of Intelligent Design as a paradigm of the origins of the universe and of life.
Some scientists in the Intelligent Design community of scholars are "young earth creationists," and many are not. However, all of these scholars recognize that the first priority is to concentrate on breaking the domination over science held by naturalistic philosophy--the view that materialism/atheism is the only rational perspective.
[edit] What about the Bible and the Date of Creation?
For Christians, the date of creation is not a primary issue of faith and should not be regarded as such, because the Bible does not specifically state a date of creation. [...] This fact is further noted by many biblical scholars who are committed to the inerrancy of Scripture, such as Dr. Francis Schaeffer: "If anyone wonders what my own position is, I really am not sure whether the days in Genesis 1 should be taken as twenty-four hours or as periods. It seems to me that from a study of the Bible itself one could hold either position" [No Final Conflict, p. 30]. Therefore, we believe Christians are free to follow the scientific evidence, minus hostile philosophical assumptions like naturalism. The age-issue should not be a basis for breaking fellowship or a test of doctrinal purity. As Dr. Walter Kaiser, president of Gordon-Conwell Seminary and Old Testament scholar, stated, "It is a secondary issue to our Lord and should be to us."
[edit]
| “ | Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin. | ” |
|
—John von Neumann, [1] |
||
| “ | Anyone who considers arithmetical methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin. | ” |
|
—John von Neumann, [2] |
||
[edit]
Aliases: Creation
