I have been thinking about and watching the ID movement for a while. I have some hopes and some concerns about this movement. Unfortunately, the concerns outweigh the hopes…Let’s discuss:
ID attributes the creation of the world, universe, and everything that exists to an intelligence. It is left up to the thinker to decide the identity of the intelligence.
First, the hopes. It would be nice for schools to teach creation since that is indeed the truth. It is ridiculous to know that children are taught evolution that requires as much if not more faith than creation. I know that it is a great deal to hope for but it is still a hope. It would be nice to read a scientific journal that sought to explain the activities that occurred during the creation week and the magnificence of the God who did it all. That is also a pretty large hope and I am not holding my breath. I also hope for the wonder of creation to turn hearts and minds of the lost to God for His divine redemption in Jesus Christ. This is in God’s hands and that is an excellent place for it to be.
So much for hopes, let’s talk about concerns associated with the ID movement. First, I do not believe incrementalism accomplishes anything in the Christian world. In the Bible, I suppose the argument could be made that the church was built incrementally since it was put together over time from small fragments scattered across the known world. However, I do not believe the major power of the church was incremental in nature. God is totally complete and all-sufficient all of the time. When God does something, He does it…period. Sure much time passed but the formation of the church and the continuation of people being converted to Christianity is not an incremental process. The Bible is very clear about God being in control of drawing in the converts. He adds to His church by His sovereign will.
So, how could a movement that does not name God and honor Him with creation be a good step toward the truth? The ID movement was originated because several people in the scientific and intellectual community knew the overwhelming denial of creation by science is wrong and a disservice to humanity. They feel, however, that the best course of action is to keep identity of the intelligence ‘set aside’ for now since that will polarize the debate.
Is ID totally bankrupt? No, but I cannot really hold out much hope for God to back a concept that denies Him. Yes, to refuse to name our God as the creator is a mistake.
Second, to give credit for creation to an unnamed entity opens the door to all sorts of problems with “Thou shall have no other gods before me”. Every religious group on the earth could claim their entity of choice to be the creator under ID. This is a very large hole in the movement. Remember when the kings ruled Israel? Many of them worshipped other gods. This infuriated God. The Jews suffered much as a result. Even the good kings failed to destroy all of the implements of idol worship. God does not share the stage nor does He play second fiddle in the band.
Third, some in the ID movement claim they will ‘insert the part about God later once ID is established and accepted”. I do not buy this as being a viable approach. I do not think the seeker-friendly way of approaching people with the gospel works either. They try to draw crowds with entertainment and man-centered talk. They claim that they will ‘insert the Jesus information later’ which is absurd. If people do not want Jesus, they do not want His church… I believe the same thing goes with ID. If people reject God, they will not accept Him incrementally through a process of converting evolution into a design by an entity to be named at a later date…
Is ID a bad idea? No. It is flawed in its execution however. God is one and He is God alone. Let’s give credit where credit is deserved…