A friend sent me an
article [reporternews.com] the other day about the similarity between Intelligent Design (ID) theories and conspiracy theories. And I just read an
article [newscientist.com] this morning about legislation allowing ID to be taught in Louisiana public schools.
I could say a lot about these articles, but I'm not that bored, and neither are you. I refuse to contribute to the noise. Speaking as a card-carrying physicist and seminary-trained theologian, I've read my fair share of material on this subject, and I get frustrated with attempts at having this discussion in a scientific context because doing so can only confuse the issue.
Confusion About Science
First, it confuses the world because ID is a philosophical rather than scientific question. Debating it in a scientific context reveals as much about the church's ignorance of what science is as it does about the world's ignorance of who God is. If we teach ID in a public school, it ought not be in science class. I'm not saying that Intelligent Design is wrong. It's not that God isn't `scientific,' or that we shouldn't hold science accountable to Scripture, or even that we shouldn't teach ID, but that the question is simply of a different type --- a type science is ill-suited to address.
Confusion About Faith
Second, it confuses the believer because it sends the impression that we believe in ID because it is somehow scientific or reasonable to do so. It isn't. The author of Hebrews tells us, ``
By faithwe understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible'' (Heb 11:3, emphasis mine).
Creation a la Intelligent Design is a matter of faith, a conviction of
things not seen. That statement itself by definition removes the discussion from the realm of science, which is based on the observable. 1 Corinthians 2:14 reminds us that no amount of cleverness on our part will ever convince the world of such a reality. It is spiritually discerned by faith, not rationally discerned by the scientific process (though you would never know that by most the teaching in our churches on the subject).
This is why I question the value of teaching ID in a public school science class. If something is understood by faith, how can it be taught by teachers, most of whom are without faith, to students, most of whom are without faith? Do we really want Genesis 1 taught to our children by teachers who, ``Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things'' (Rom 1:22, 23)?
Since it is a matter of faith, I want my children to be taught about Intelligent Design as they grow in the Lord (two of my children are believers, and we are still praying for the third). But if they don't know it, it's not their seventh grade physical science teacher's fault. It's mine. And their mom's. And the church's. It's not the public school's job to grow our children up in Christ.
Confusion About the Gospel
Finally, it confuses everyone because it diverts attention from the gospel (1 Tim 3:16, 17 notwithstanding). When I --- on very rare occasion --- have this discussion with someone, I usually cede my position and ask, ``So what?'' Let's say Genesis is to be understood poetically and that God created the heavens and the earth over billions of years however science says it happened. Now what? You're still a sinner, dead in your trespasses, irrevocably separated from a holy God. Christ, though his substitutionary atonement, is still the only way, truth and life. You still need to be born again to enter the kingdom of heaven. Faith is still the only way to please God.
You see, as with most of these `hot button' topics, we have it tragically backwards. Understanding creation does not bring people to faith; but rather faith brings people to understand creation. People don't need to disavow evolution, they need to know Christ! And yet, which message is more loudly proclaimed in our churches and our discussions and in the Christian media? Which is more likely to get you riled up: evolution or evangelism?
I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it or think about it. We should. It's biblical and we should strive with one another to understand it. But we need to think about how we do it, and when we do it, and where we do it, and with whom, and whether all our clamor advances the gospel or empties it of its power (1 Cor 1:17).
Press on!
Greg