Michael J. Behe              Phone:     610-758-3474
 Department of Biology        FAX:       208-293-6549
 Lehigh University            Secretary: 610-758-3680
 111 Research Drive           e-mail:    mjb1@Lehigh.edu
 Bethlehem, PA   18015

Letter to First Things
Tue, 09 Jan 2001 13:21:54 -0500
(unpublished)

In his review of Phillip Johnson's excellent The Wedge of Truth Edward
Oakes is correct that the argument to design does not get one to a
supernatural designer, let alone to the merciful God that Christians
confess. That's appropriate, since our faith is based on the living
works and teachings of Jesus not on some laboratory experiment. Still,
the design inference seems to have a lot more punch than Father Oakes
allows, at least as judged by the reaction of many who oppose it. It has
been my experience (and I have some) that Oakes' materialist rogues'
gallery, and their many colleagues, bitterly attack even the most
tentative suggestion of design in biology. Hume's assurance that the
design argument does not reach all the way to the God of Scripture
softens them not a bit.

On the other hand, the theistic claim that natural selection was God's
way of creating life (sort of) doesnt vex evangelical materialists much
at all. Why not? Perhaps they are being philosophically unsophisticated,
and will pay the price in lost prestige when the writings of Cardinal
Newman become more widely known. Or maybe they can recognize the kinds
of arguments that do and do not reach people (especially academic types)
in our science-soaked culture.

The inference to biological design is a modest argument that doesnt
penetrate to the mysteries of our faith. Yet it has its uses. In some
cases, for some people, it can suggest that the world may be more
complex than they had been led to believe. If the data support the
design inference, as I am convinced they do, Christians would be
neglectful not to point it out.