Is Intelligent Design Compatible with Christianity?

            A discussion about the origins of the universe and life can be a deeply contentions conversation, even within the Christian community.  It is a discussion that tickles deeply held beliefs and is nuanced by unshakable convictions, but for many Christians the question remains, and for some is already answered, is Intelligent Design compatible with Christianity? 

Intelligent Design (ID) is compatible, and in fact fits quite well with Christianity.  It provides a Christian with a scientific platform to speak about the biological origins of life, makes no stand in any way that contradicts the Bible or Christian metaphysics, and is perfectly compatible with a God Who is involved in the history of the universe and life on Earth.

            ID is a scientific pursuit to find where the origins of biologic life give evidence of being designed, as opposed to the idea that the origins of biologic life came about by chance through natural processes.  William Dembski says it like this, “Intelligent Design merely says that intelligent action was involved at some points with the origins of various aspects of biological life.” 

As it is true that there is no claim that the Christian God specifically was the “designer” or that He is directly involved in every aspect of biological processes; it does not deny that it was God.  The assertion, of some Creationists, that since Intelligent Design does not make a claim that it is God Who is the “designer” makes, in itself, ID incompatible with Christianity is an all or nothing argument that does not stand to reason.  Although ID does not claim to be a Christian position this, in itself, does not make it incompatible with Christianity.

Christianity makes the claim, based on the Bible, that God Himself is responsible for the origins of life, and that God inserts Himself as responsible for the direction and order of the systems that are in place and observed in nature.  Without making a claim that it was the Christian God specifically, ID is in full agreement with this position. 

            ID begins its argument from a scientific platform.  It looks through the lens of the scientific process to find where “design” is apparent.  “Creationism typically starts with a religious text and tries to see how the findings of science can be reconciled to it. ID starts with the empirical evidence of nature and seeks to ascertain what inferences can be drawn from that evidence.”  Creation Science, then, begins with belief systems that are interpreted from the Bible, and it looks to insert scientific discovery into this belief.  This historically has created problems for many Christians who wish to enter into the scientific conversation, as the Creation system begins with religious belief rather than scientific study.  This, in itself, is not wrong.  The Bible is the book that Christian belief is based upon, and if it is necessary for a Christian, based upon their conscience, to engage all aspects of interaction through the filter of what they glean from its teaching, then so be it.  But it is not necessarily the case. 

Often times the passage in 2 Peter 1:3 is used to give the scripture a foundation for our faith in God.  The passage, “His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence,” (ESV) is used in such a way as if it were speaking directly of the scripture, but it is not.  Specifically, it is speaking of the “knowledge of Him,” of which, the Bible is an authority, but the Bible itself says that this knowledge is not gained specifically through the words on the page.  The “knowledge of Him” is gained through His Spirit.  For instance take Ephesians 1:17, “that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him,” and, in addition, John 14:26, “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” (ESV)  It is the Holy Spirit Who inspired the writing of the scripture, and, according to reason, the authority of the Holy Spirit supersedes the authority of the scripture in establishing that knowledge within the conscience and imagination of an individual.  This is not a discussion on the proper view of the authority of scripture or that a specific doctrine of the authority of scripture is a prerequisite to being a Christian, but the point is that the Bible does not need to be viewed as the only avenue in which to see the evidence and work of God in creation.

Romans 1:19 and 20 says, “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.”  This passage gives Biblical president for coming to the “knowledge of Him,” through the power of the Holy Spirit, from a scientific perspective like ID, as this is the assertion of Intelligent Design, from a Christian perspective, that design is evident in nature and observable through the scientific process that ID employs.

ID makes no stand in any way that contradicts the Bible or Christian metaphysics.  Christian metaphysics can be clearly drawn out of 2 Corinthians 5:19b, “in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself.”  God, being the “I AM,” is as He is, God, Who through Christ engaged in a creative work of reconciliation, and, in that creative work, returning a fallen world back to Himself.  Therefore, reconciliation implies that creation finds ownership in God.  God created it, but then creation was subject to corruption due to man’s decision to attempt to be god in himself.  God then, through Christ, engages in returning creation to Himself.  Man finds purpose in the recognition of God as “I AM,” and as a result is compelled to worship.  ID does not deny this as the truth; it simple does not engage to this depth in the Biblical doctrine.

What ID does is very much in support of Christian metaphysical belief, by implication.  Dembski says that, in response to Darwinian religious belief, “By showing that design is indispensable to the scientific understanding of the natural world, intelligent design is reinvigorating the design argument and at the same time overturning the widespread misconception that the only tenable form of religious belief is one that treats purpose, intelligence, and wisdom as byproducts of unintelligent material processes.”  This presses the reality of the fact that within creation there is observable evidence of design by intelligence beyond blind chance through natural process alone. 

Even in an apologetic argument the first step in convincing a skeptic of the existence of God is to establish the possibility of life being the result of a “creator,” and from there to establish that the “creator” is in fact God.  So, in this way, Intelligent Design is an avenue to the spreading of the Gospel, especially when, in many cases, the skeptic has no respect whatsoever for the authority of scripture.  It is then rational to approach the conversation first from the same playing field. 

When Behe speaks of “irreducible complexity” he is in full support of Christian belief.  He says, “By irreducibly complex I mean a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning. An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced directly (that is, by continuously improving the initial function, which continues to work by the same mechanism) by slight, successive modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional.”  This idea of observable systems, that with any single part within the system itself being out of adjustment or somehow missing becomes inoperable, provides powerful credence to the creative engineering of God.  By showing through scientific process that not only is it possible that “intelligence” is behind the biological systems that are studied, but that it is probable, Christian metaphysical belief is supported.  And in the same way, the false idea that the naturalistic perspective is the only reasonable position in which to approach scientific understanding of life is called into question.  This only supports our cause and it in no way stands in the way of people coming to the right understanding of God being sovereign over His creation.

Intelligent Design is perfectly compatible with a God who is involved in the history of the universe and life on Earth.  One of the issues that some Creationists have with the theory is that it makes no definite claims about God’s specific intentions, for what He designed, in the past.  “However, because the intelligent design took place in the past, ID theorists can only detect the design in the biological realm after it has happened.  They cannot know the specification, or desired target before the design occurs.  However, Dembski does note that, "a pattern corresponding to a possibility, though formulated after the possibility has been actualized, can constitute a specification."  In other words, by observing things in the present, we can deduce the specified target of the designer in the past.”  As it is true that ID takes no clear position on God’s purpose in history; it in no way takes away or contradicts the Christian belief of what God’s purpose was in creating life and man.  This is outside of the scope and conceivable limitations of scientific study.  For ID to make an assertion on the purpose of the “designer” in what He “designed” the theory would have to claim that there was evidence of an observable interaction with the “designer.”  This is not possible through the scientific process, but the point remains that Intelligent Design makes no claims in objection to there being purpose in the “design.”  ID affirms the presence of purpose without presuming to establish what it is empirically.

Finally, ID is compatible with Christianity and stands in support of it, although, at times, unwittingly or unintentionally, as some ID scientists are not professing Christians.  Rationally speaking, you do not have to be a Christian to prove its beliefs to be true.  Furthermore, ID is pressing hard against the naturalistic worldview of Darwinist with empirical evidence that has them scrambling to discredit it as unscientific.  This only supports the sad reality of Romans 1:19 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.” (ESV)  By proving empirically that design and therefore purpose in what is created is not only possible but probable, Intelligent Design is supporting the spread of the Gospel, and the Darwinists, if they choose to ignore the evidence, are left to “by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.”