From Theistic Evolution to Intelligent Design: Why I changed my mind

Michael Behe, the godfather of intelligent design (ID) theory, was in conversation in 2020 with computational biologist and physician Joshua Swamidass. On Unbelievable? they discussed the history of intelligent design and how it continues to be a controversial topic in scientific and theological circles.

It was a wide-ranging conversation, but the part I found most compelling was the discussion about the strengths and limitations of theistic evolution and intelligent design as vehicles to unite faith and science. Swamidass doesn’t label himself a theistic evolutionist, but he seems to share its favorable stance towards evolution and its opposition to intelligent design.

Swamidass was raised a young earth creationist but was eventually convinced by his scientific work that evolutionary science offered the best explanation of human origins. He had some agonizing moments as he contemplated the potential family and career repercussions that would ensue once he made his views known but bravely went forth and published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal outlining his stance. He recounts the details of this journey in a recent blog which I would encourage everyone to read.

Cold War

I was raised in the Lutheran church and have always had a place for God in my life, but that was exactly my problem: I had a place for God in my life. I had foolishly built a cute little bungalow on my personal property for the almighty God of the universe to dwell in when in reality, I was just lucky to live in a mud hut in His Kingdom.

Part of the reason I compartmentalized my faith was because I was a science guy and science told me I was just an evolved chemical. I, like many of my medical colleagues, uncritically accepted evolutionary theory and failed to see our hypocrisy as we did very un-evolutionary things like caring for extremely premature babies on the edge of viability and repairing infants with congenital birth defects.

I felt that my faith was important, but instead of reconciling the two, I adopted Stephen J. Gould’s concept of non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA), where religion and science are acknowledged as sovereign powers but never allowed to establish embassies within each other’s borders. Unfortunately, rather than creating a warm sensation of peace, I shivered with cognitive dissonance at the thought of a magisterial cold war where I knew that at any minute one side or the other could push the red button and transform my life into a mushroom cloud of despair. I realized I could no longer just hide under my desk every time a mental alarm went off, but had to pursue détente or risk mutually assured destruction.

Intellectually Fulfilled Christian

As I struggled with my warring magisteria, I came across a scripture passage that I had read many times before, but which took on a deeper meaning:

“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.” (Romans 1:19–20)

I finally realized that I lived in God’s world, He didn’t live in mine. God had created a world where everything that “had been made” was designed to reveal “his eternal power and divine nature”. Science was Theology!

God wasn’t just a divine being who slapped my hands when I stuck them in the cookie jar, but was the Creator of a scientific candy shop where I was free to feel like a kid. Scales fell from my eyes and I was able to see how every scientific discovery uncovered one more of God’s thoughts.

As I explored the various ways scientists had tried to combine science and faith, I realized that the only one that allowed me to truly “perceive” God’s “eternal power and divine nature” in the “things that had been made” was ID. I realized that if I lived in God’s world, the evidence for His handiwork should be everywhere. He built it and sustains it, so the problem hadn’t been a lack of evidence but rather my inability to adequately perceive it.

Richard Dawkins famously said that Charles Darwin made it possible for him to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist, but I found that ID made it possible for me to be an intellectually fulfilled Christian.

Coming up in Part 2: Can nature itself speak? And what happens when science tries to silence the very creation it was meant to study?

Erik Strandness is a physician and Christian apologist who practiced neonatal medicine for more than 20 years and has written three apologetic books. Information about his books can be found at godsscreenplay.com.