The debate raging around ID is not one of scientific fact versus religious faith. The real clash is an ideological one in which scientists are seeking to maintain the intellectual and cultural dominance of the humanist/atheist worldview.

In this article, we will review the contemporary status of the design theory and examine some of the major criticisms leveled against it.

This article explores the usefulness of the idea of intelligent design in the context of modern (scientific) efforts to understand nature. Among the questions to be considered are whether intelligent design is a necessary inference from the properties of nature, and whether its incorporation into science would improve our ability to explore and understand nature.

There is more to design than complexity. I am proposing that it is time to advance beyond an analysis of complexity, fruitful though that has been. We are able to expand the scope of design arguments to include the existence of beauty, which points to design of a different kind.

The position taken in this paper is that much environmental degradation stems ultimately and cumulatively from the outlook, attitude or worldview – effectively religion – of individuals. Therefore one might reason that an effective solution must include changes to individual attitudes and worldviews – some would say, we must change our religion.

While Christians may be convinced that design in nature points to a Creator-God, the general scientific community has not been persuaded. Perhaps more scientifically respectable work on intelligent design of the kind done by Behe and Dembski will encourage evolutionary scientists to look beyond purely naturalistic mechanisms to explain the complexity and meaning of life.

The molecules of life suggest no need for Christians to become sycophants to materialistic philosophy posing as science. On the contrary, science liberated from the artificial constraints of materialism provides an elegant mechanism for study of the creation and logically points to a wonderful Creator.

God created the earth “to be inhabited” (Isaiah 45:18, NIV). This means that our earthly habitat is not a fortuitous accidental phenomenon of little worth, but rather, it is one to be highly valued and preserved.

It could be the remnant church that the Lord has given chance to lead others in the restoration of the dignity of the physical environment for the common good of the entire earth.

Trilobites are complex, elaborately segmented forms with jointed appendages and swimmerets, antennae, compound eyes, and cephalized, or head-to-tail, nervous systems.

Seventh-day Adventist schools and colleges were founded by a church concerned to provide an education that did not alienate its children from their Biblical beliefs and Christian worldview. I believe that Adventist educators must become evangelists for Biblical theism.

Zoology and genetics are required courses for biology majors. Both subjects are usually structured around the theme of the theory of evolution. A careful examination of the scientific basis of these disciplines shows that the evolutionary framework doesn't fit with a lot of their fundamental aspects, however. Some of these topics even constitute strong evidence in favor of intelligent design.

Stewardship of the environment is a peripheral subject in Adventist thinking. The aim of this paper is to; 1. Point out some impediments that have contributed to Adventist's lack of high level of awareness and commitment to environmental care; 2. Give reasons why Adventist should view themselves as key players in matters of the environment. 3. Examine three working relationships between humans and the environment.

The complex and vitally essential ecology and biodiversity we find in nature today, at the top of the structural hierarchy of nature, suggest that many interacting organisms would have been required right from the beginning. Only a short-term creation would provide such ecosystem requirements.

If the stranglehold of naturalism can be weakened enough for open discussion of the philosophical issues, the resulting open-minded discussion of design vs. chance will be very beneficial to science. There is a great need of this openness in science. Science should be an open-ended search for truth, rather than a closed system that will not consider certain ideas.

The severe ecological crisis in which we live has been identified as a crisis of the present society values. The aim of this essay is to discuss the historical roots of the modern ecological crisis and its consequences in terms of paradigms that base Environmental Education actions.

Science/religion issues are important because they have to do with ultimate realities, with whether to "worship" the Creator or the creature (creation), with whether a supreme being is above the creation and can supernaturally intervene.

Could not God have used the process of natural selection to create living organisms? What evidence might one use to answer that question? Published in Origins v. 25, n. 2.

Ecology, or environmental science, is multidisciplinary. As such, it allows ecology to be integrated with other disciplines. It also allows us to tie it to faith.

As biological knowledge has increased, the argument for design has been revived and expressed in more sophisticated ways, such as the argument from “irreducible complexity.” The existence of certain features that could not survive in intermediate stages is evidence of a Designer. It is also evidence of a Designer God who created by special intervention—Creation—and not through a continuous process such as evolution.