Saturday, July 07, 2007
Is ID the Rodney Dangerfield of Creationism?
First, only three of the nine no-hope Republican candidates for president raised their hands to say they doubted Darwin at the first debate -- and two of those rushed to "clarify" their views in the ensuing uproar.
Then Ken Ham goes out and raises $27 million to build his Creation Museum and brings all the biblical stuff the Discovery Institute has worked so hard to keep hidden-- you know, Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden, Noah and the Flood, the Ark and its dinosaurs -- back into the news, and sucks up all the PR oxygen in the process.
Then the Institute for Creation Research comes out with a paper that accuses ID of pushing God away: "The Bible has answers to life’s big questions. Likewise strict naturalism has consistent answers, although quite different. ID has no answers at all which satisfy."
The Bible, adds ICR, "insists that God receive glory for His majestic handiwork, and it is not likely that He will bless or grant lasting success to any effort which chooses to omit Him from their thinking."
Discovery, it seems, can't get no respect.
Then Ken Ham goes out and raises $27 million to build his Creation Museum and brings all the biblical stuff the Discovery Institute has worked so hard to keep hidden-- you know, Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden, Noah and the Flood, the Ark and its dinosaurs -- back into the news, and sucks up all the PR oxygen in the process.
Then the Institute for Creation Research comes out with a paper that accuses ID of pushing God away: "The Bible has answers to life’s big questions. Likewise strict naturalism has consistent answers, although quite different. ID has no answers at all which satisfy."
The Bible, adds ICR, "insists that God receive glory for His majestic handiwork, and it is not likely that He will bless or grant lasting success to any effort which chooses to omit Him from their thinking."
Discovery, it seems, can't get no respect.
