Popular in these categories:

#1 in Books > Science > Evolution > Organic

#1 in Books > Professional & Technical > Engineering > Bioengineering > Biochemistry

#1 in Books > Professional & Technical > Professional Science > Agriculture Sciences > Biochemistry

What makes this forbidden fruit so much more attractive than books touting Evolution?

Popular in these categories:

#2 in Books > Science > Evolution > Organic

#2 in Books > Professional & Technical > Engineering > Bioengineering > Biochemistry

#5 in Books > Professional & Technical > Professional Science > Agriculture Sciences > Biochemistry

Or is it more of those negative reviews making an impact?

The creationism conflated with ID uses the lower-case “c”.

And creationism is an evolving state of Creationism.

Think of it as a wild-card.

When debating an IDist and ID is gaining ground, just toss it on the table you have been pounding on.

Bada-bing, bada-boom, you win the argument by default. Imagined default, but default non-the-less.

: a doctrine or theory holding that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing and usually in the way described in Genesis …

Case closed. The word creationist/ creationism has a wrong connotation when used with ID.

By that “logic” Darwin was a creationist:

“There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one;…”

Last page, last paragraph 6th edition of “On the Origins of Species…”

How did I get trapped into this nonsense? Answer that.

You ran your mouth- or rather mananged to type and post nonsense.

IOW you are responsible for this.

What the anti-IDists don’t seem to realize is that there is only ONE reality behind our existence.

Science is only interested in reality- regardless of what that is.

BTW my copy of “The Edge of Evolution” arrived today. (along with Wells’ “Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and ID”)

“the doctrine that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed.”

…would rule out someone like Behe.

In principle I don’t mind being labeled a creationist. The problem is that it causes confusion since it doesn’t recognize the significant distinctions.

Mankind has always been interested in investigating the relationship between God and nature. At times, philosophy defined the debate; at other times, science seemed to have the upper hand. What has always mattered in this discussion is in which DIRECTION the investigation proceeds. Does it move forward, that is, does it assume something about God and then interpret nature in that context; or does it move backward, that is, does it observe something interesting in nature and then speculate about how that might have come to be? If the investigation moves forward, as does CD, it is faith based; if it moves backward, as does ID, it is empirically based.
Each approach has a pedigree that goes back over two thousand years. We notice the forward approach, in Tertullian, Augustine, Bonaventure, and Anselm. Augustine described it best with the phrase, “faith seeking understanding.” With these thinkers, the investigation was faith based. By contrast, we discover the “backward” orientation in Aristotle, Aquinas, Paley, and others. Aristotle’s argument, which begins with “motion in nature” and reasons BACK to a “prime mover,” is obviously empirically based.

To say then, that Tertullian, Augustine, Anselm (CS) is similar to Aristotle, Aquinas, Paley (ID) is equivalent to saying forward=backward. It has nothing to do with subjective interpretation.

His creator may not be the biblical God, but it [Behe's designer] is still a creator.

By that measure Darwin was a Creationist and the ToE a Creationist theory:

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone circling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.

Last sentence in the 6th edition of “On the Origins of Species…”.