Can a Christian be an Intelligent Design advocate?

by David Asfour

On many occasions in times of war, two opposing sides will make uneasy alliances in order to defeat the common (and usually more threatening) enemy. In World War II, the allied forces comprised of capitalist countries like the U.S. and the U.K. which teamed up with a communist country like the USSR. In the science fiction movie, X2: X-Men United, the opposing mutant forces from the first film joined forces to defend themselves from a common enemy. At the onset of such alliances, both sides acknowledge their differences and are wary of each other because they know that under different circumstances, they’d be opponents. Such uneasy alliances took place in the Bible as well. Canaanite nations in Joshua 9-11 joined forces against the nation of Israel and likewise the Israelites joined with the Gibeonites to counter that alliance. Jehoshaphat and Ahab became allies in 1 Kings 22 in order to defeat Syria. In many such instances in the Bible, the nations or people groups that joined together could have been, or in fact were, enemies under different circumstances. In the battle for science in our culture today, another such alliance has been made – Intelligent Design and creationism.

With the onslaught of humanism and naturalism in today’s mainstream culture, anyone who believes in the supernatural is marked as an intellectual troglodyte. One only need doubt naturalistic evolution to be labeled an outsider in academia. With such hostile environments, its easy to quickly embrace anyone who shares your viewpoint in the matter…even if that’s the only viewpoint shared. In my own personal quest to find allies in this battle, I stumbled upon documentaries like “Unlocking the Mysteries of Life” produced by Illustra media. I was awestruck and a bit star struck with the scientists and philosophers interviewed. Evolutionists would constantly attack the credibility of anyone who doubted the “fact” of evolution and it seemed as though they had all the intellectual heavyweights on their side. The fact that the scientists in this video were so brilliant in their individual fields and also so committed to attacking evolution caused me to become an instant fan of what they called Intelligent Design. The name sounds benign enough to one who has believed in the Bible their whole life and views intelligent design as common knowledge. It wasn’t until a few years after my first introduction to these ID proponents that I began to realize that their anti-evolutionary position on the origin of life was pretty much the only position they had in common with the creationist worldview.

I later read a book titled The Case for a Creator written by Lee Strobel, a proclaiming Bible believing Christian of The Case for Christ fame. In his book, he interviews many of the same scholars from the Illustra media documentary. Stephan C. Meyer is one such scholar. Dr. Meyer is a Philosopher of Science and the Program Director at the Discovery Institute, the “flagship” of the ID movement. In chapter 4, Strobel interviews Dr. Meyer. They discuss science, philosophy and a little bit of theology, but before the interview was over, Strobel wanted to delve more into Dr. Meyer’s personal spiritual life. On page 90 and 91 of the book, Strobel comments regarding Dr. Meyers’ mention of the word God. He writes:

“[Meyer] stopped at that. It was a safe answer, but I could tell he was weighing whether he should risk more. I sensed he would be the kind of person who would be more comfortable extolling the virtues of microbiology than opening up about something as personal as his own relationship with God. But as I sat quietly and listened, he was about to prove me wrong.”¹

Meyer went on to mention how his own struggle with submitting to the will of God was like the “intellectual rebellion” that the apostle Paul spoke of.

“Even in my Christian thinking today, I find a tendency to slide back into what Paul refers to as the natural mind. And here’s what the scientific evidence for God does for me: it realigns me.”¹

Meyer professes to be a committed follower of Jesus Christ and makes a statement which I believe to be very similar with my own spiritual walk:

“I remember thinking at one point that if the Jesus of the Bible weren’t real, I would need to worship the person who created the character. Jesus is so beyond what I can comprehend! And the evidence for God in nature constantly challenges me to a deeper and fuller relationship with him. My study of the scientific evidence isn’t separate from my life as a Christian; it’s marbled throughout that experience.”¹

“Looking at the evidence – in nature and in Scripture – reminds me over and over again of who he is. And it reminds me of who I am too – someone in need of Him.”¹

Wow! I was seriously impressed that one of the men who I truly admired confirmed his belief and submission to Christ as Lord and Savior. In my opinion, he was a Bible believing Christian soldier in a field that I thought was devoid of any strong spiritual presence. I thought that if any more men in the ID field felt and believed what Dr. Meyer believed, it was only a matter of time before ID (and thus, Biblical creationism) totally ousted Darwinian evolution from its throne of power. One uncertainty still plagued my mind though – not one time in Strobel’s book did I ever hear him defend the first eleven chapters of Genesis. I’ve scoured his website reading and watching every resource he has to offer. I’ve heard him valiantly and brilliantly defend every aspect of Christ’s life, from the virgin birth to the resurrection. He defended the validity of Scripture and the fact that Jesus wasn’t just a good prophet, but the Lord God Himself in human flesh. Still, I was not and am not satisfied until I know where Strobel and Meyer stand on the issue of the first words spoken by “The Word made flesh”. As of yet, I have not found any evidence to support that Strobel, Meyer or any other ID proponent claiming to be a Christian believes in a literal six day creation and a global catastrophic flood. That is my litmus test. If someone takes the Bible literally in the first eleven chapters, they will most likely believe every chapter from that point to be literal and infallible. If anyone does not take the first eleven chapters as literal truth, it doesn’t matter how intelligent they are; they are still susceptible to heretical teaching that will damage their witness, testimony and even their faith.

Evidence of this can be found in a later quote by Dr. Meyer from the video adaptation of The Case for Christ bearing the same name. The video is produced by Illustra media as well and uses many of the same interviews and even some of the same footage as the “Unlocking the Mysteries of Life” video produced a few years before. In one of the topical discussions found in the special features segment of the DVD, there is a clip defining the word Intelligent Design. Dr. Meyer again is the scholar of choice used and is quoted as saying:

“Intelligent Design is not opposed to the idea of evolution per se in the sense of change over time or modest adaptational variations; things we see taking place in living systems all the time. But it is opposed to the strictly Darwinian view of evolution which says that life is the result of purely indirect processes and that the appearance of design in living organisms is illusory or merely an appearance. That’s where we part company with evolutionary biologists.”²

Even though creation scientists hold that change over time and, in Dr. Meyers’ words, “modest adaptational variations” are not evidence of “goo to you” evolution, it’s still unsettling that a man who in one interview states his need of Jesus as Savior, doesn’t assert his total belief that his Savior’s words regarding the origin of the universe as recorded in Scripture are infallible. Until I find evidence otherwise, I can only categorize Strobel and Meyer as old earth creationists for the time being. I hope and pray that such great intellectuals in the battle over science are also scholars and believers of God’s Word from the very first verse to the very last.

This example of Strobel and Meyer’s discussion presents both the positive and negative aspects of the ID movement. The potential of the ID movement to take back mainstream science and academia from the secularist, humanist religion is encouraging, but the apparent inconsistencies in each individual ID advocate’s beliefs could prove dangerous not only to the ID movement itself, but to any worldview that aligns itself with them in this battle. There is no consensus in the ID movement as to the identity of the creator and, in fact, it almost seems taboo to even delve into the topic. The Discovery Institute is an organization that is the front runner in the ID movement. Their website defines their organization as “a secular think tank”. On their Q&A page, they come right out and state that ID not founded on the Bible and is not the same as creationism. They state that, “unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design is agnostic regarding the source of design and has no commitment to defending Genesis, the Bible or any other sacred text”³. Based on this definition of ID from proponents themselves, the Bible believing Christian should take note and be mindful when using and referring to ID promoters and scholars. When a group of scholars ranging from mainline Protestant, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Jewish, and agnostic belief systems come together to discus teleological evidences of nature and how they could have originated, their differing views are bound to butt heads. In most academic circles, such differing views are encouraged because they promote new ideas and are the essence of science and philosophy. But if your goal is to be light and salt to a dying world, a unifying and spiritually fulfilling message is required. Such a unified message is absent from the ID movement.

This is not to say that Biblical creationists and Christians should completely slight ID arguments in our defense of Biblical creationism. As a Christian and creationist, I view ID as a tool against humanism, methodological naturalism and evolution. It can be used to convince an atheist or agnostic that the evidence for design is all around us. Michael Behe is an ID advocate who is, at best, an agnostic. His research on the bacterial flagellum coined a phrase and a concept that has been a weapon of choice to many a creationist – irreducible complexity. Using this and other ID arguments, we can bring an atheist, agnostic or skeptic to an understanding that it is more intellectually sound to believe in a supernatural creator than it is not to. However, to stop there leaves your argument and Christian message vulnerable to questions regarding dysteleology, or “the apparent purposelessness in natural structures”⁴. Examples of dysteleology are pathogenic microbes, carnivorous animals, disease and death. ID is helpless to explain why such things exist if nature is the result of intelligence. Either the creator is incompetent or he/she/it is malicious. In fact, other aspects of the universe besides biological systems show sign of decay and destruction. How is all of this explained? More often than not, once a skeptic’s scientific attacks against ID or Creationism are batted down, the inevitable question is posed: “how could a loving and/or intelligent God ____?” Any number of examples of disease and suffering of the helpless and innocent are used to fill in the blank. If one doesn’t have a literal view of Genesis, they are helpless to explain the reason why such things exist. The God of the Bible becomes a malicious boy with a magnifying glass standing over an ant hill. The explanation of the origin of the universe and living systems is not complete without the explanation of the origin of death and suffering – sin.

The Discovery Institute’s Q&A web page states that, “Honest critics of intelligent design acknowledge the difference between intelligent design and creationism”³. I believe this to be something a Creationist must make clear as well. If this is done, I believe that the arguments posed by ID can be powerful tools in pointing out the examples of design that are found in biological systems. Such arguments and examples should be supplemental with Genesis as one explains the history of our world from the Biblical vantage point. ID is insufficient by itself to answer our world’s greatest questions about who we are, where we come from and why things are the way they are. So, can a Christian be an advocate of Intelligent Design? They most definitely should be; but only if the identity of the designer is discussed and how we can have a personal relationship with Him. Without such discussion, ID isn’t “Christian beliefs in a scientific disguise” as evolutionists would claim, but rather “pluralistic beliefs in a Biblical creationist disguise”.

References

1. Strobel, Lee, The Case for a Creator, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, p. 90, 91, 2004.

2. The Case for a Creator. Dir. Lad Allen. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer. Illustra Media in association with Carmel Entertainment Group, LLC, 2006.

3. Center for Science and Culture, Q&A. Discovery Institute. 06 Jan. 2007

4. The Free Dictionary. Farlex. 06 Jan. 2007