Oftentimes, proponents of Darwinism confuse creation science with intelligent design. And, almost every time, both creationists and the ID movement respond with a negative. They are not the same thing. Now, creationists do believe in design. And, the ID movement has definite theistic implications (just read Signature in the Cell to find out).
The other day, one of my coworkers brought up the subject of origins. Now, both of us are Christians. Neither of us was debating whether God created, or how. We're also both Young-Earth Creationists (that's really the only position the Bible allows). He brought up the fact that I had been reading a lot of Intelligent Design literature. I affirmed it. He asked why. I told him that I had been reading a lot of Intelligent Design literature rather than Creationist literature because Creationist literature is often written toward the layperson that doesn't necessarily have a background in science. But, most ID literature presumes at least some background in science (especially those books actually published by the Discovery Institute). I prefer to read the more challenging and technical literature. He rejoined with a comment about not believing in ID. This seems to be common objection among Christians. I responded that yes, I do believe in ID. Why shouldn't I?
There are several reasons why a Christian can (and should) accept Intelligent Design:
1) We as Christians believe that God created everything. Because God created everything, He also would have had to design it as well. God is also intelligent. Therefore, I should see evidence of Intelligent Design: and I do.
2) The theory of Intelligent Design is merely a scientific theory. It presupposes no metaphysical or philosophical beliefs before detecting design in nature. However, the metaphysical and philosophical implications of ID often lead to theism (the late astronomer, Allan Sandage, and the biologist, Dean Kenyon, are perfect examples). Intelligent Design has such broad implications that fitting it into creation science is relatively simple (but, remember, they're still distinct modes of inquiry!).
3) Finally, ID seeks to tear down the paradigm that Darwinism has created for science. In some ways, ID is more qualified to do this than Creationism because it doesn't come with any religious underpinnings. Scientists are more prone to doubt Darwin than accept creationism. And, we can't convert them to creationism (and Christ) without first making them doubt Darwin. ID accomplishes this. Also, because ID is hostile toward Darwinism, it tends to be rather benign towards creation science. Of all the anti-evolution theories, ID is the one that has not attacked creation science. In fact, in some ways, ID has found an ally in creation science.
These different reasons give indication that ID is compatible with creation science. Now, obviously, not every person in ID is a Young-Earth Creationist. Some believe in the Big Bang (which Young-Earth Creationism normally opposes), common descent, and a very old Earth. But, as a creationist, I can believe in ID, because I do believe that God marvelously created this wonderful universe that we live in.
