Apparently the scholars at Answers in Genesis share similar concerns as the scholars at Reasons To Believe regarding the Intelligent Design movement.
"The Intelligent Design Movement: Does the identity of the Creator really matter?" by Georgia Purdom, Ph.D. (May 2, 2006)
[T]he major problem with the ID movement is a divorce of the Creator from creation. The Creator and His creation cannot be separated; they reflect on each other.They also seem to have a second concern:
In today's culture, many are attracted to the ID movement because they can decide for themselves who the creator is—a Great Spirit, Brahman, Allah, God, etc.
The current movement focuses more on what is designed, rather than who designed it. Thus, leaders in the movement do not have problems with accepting an old age for the earth or allowing evolution to play a vital role once the designer formed the basics of life.This is interesting because many Christians don't pick up on the subtle endorsement of theistic evolution that is embedded within the ID movement. One of the pillars of the ID movement Michael Behe, for example, is self-described theistic evolutionist. In fact, his latest book explores the boundaries between design and evolution.
So then, the obvious question in my mind is, why is ID more readily accepted into many churches than Reasons To Believe even though RTB takes an explicitly creationist stance? Meanwhile, secular scientists frequently reject ID because they perceive it to be closet young-earth creationism. Ironic, huh?