We could post about ID every day, and perhaps we should. Here’s a link for today: A Godspy interview with Dr. Michael Behe. Behe is a biochemistry professor who brought questions about evolutionary theory into the popular mind years ago with the publication of his Darwin’s Black Box. Angelo Matera interviews him:

Still, you’re theorizing about an intelligent designer, which is uncomfortably close to God for some theologians, especially some Catholic theologians, who believe that ID proponents are trying to reduce God to material processes. In your review of a book by John Haught, a theologian who is a critic of ID, you say that such believers have nothing to fear from ID, that ID is compatible with their view of God’s action in the world…

I run into this a lot, people say that you’re making God into an engineer, into someone who makes bacterial flagellum, and I say no, that’s not it at all, anymore than George Lemaitre was saying that God was just the source of the Big Bang. Certainly, God is much more than a designer of structures of life, but what a Christian scientist with my point of view says is that he is also, somehow, a designer of these structures. It doesn’t take away one iota from God at all, but just gives us an understanding of the world that he made.

Some critics of ID—especially secular ones—point to flawed structures in nature and claim that if God is the designer of life, he’s incompetent. But you’re not presenting a simplistic image of God as master-builder, literally constructing the universe as if playing with Legos, or Sim City on his computer, right?

No, not at all.

Would it be compatible with ID to say that the design in the universe, or in human life, is, in some way, a reflection of the Logos?

Yes, that’s perfectly compatible with ID.

You’re just saying that there is evidence of design, or order, there, that can’t be accounted for by materialism?

Right. You’re just saying that somehow, somewhere, intelligence was involved in the design of these things.