About the BioLogos Forum
Favorites
The BioLogos Forum is designed to foster a serious and comprehensive discussion of Christian faith and the sciences. We believe that charitable engagement of different perspectives within the Church helps sharpen our thinking and deepen our commitment to the truth that is hidden in Christ. So while many of the articles and videos under the distinctive Forum banner come from BioLogos staff and Senior Fellows, we feature a range of voices, including those that disagree with us and with each other. Unless otherwise noted, views expressed are those of the authors, not necessarily of The BioLogos Foundation. You can read more about what we believe here, and join the conversation in the comments section at the end of each post.
Science and the Bible: Intelligent Design
In this series, Ted Davis identifies the history, core tenets and assumptions about the Intelligent Design view.
Favorites 
Science and the Bible: Intelligent Design, Part 1
The term “intelligent design” has been used since at least 1847, in reference to “the theory that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by a designing intelligence.” However, the term itself has an interesting history...
Science and the Bible: Intelligent Design, Part 2
Keep in mind the basic idea of ID, “that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.”
Science and the Bible: Intelligent Design, Part 3
Is methodological naturalism equivalent to atheism? That’s the rock bottom question here, and there simply is no consensus—neither among Christians nor even among atheists, for that matter.
Science and the Bible: Intelligent Design, Part 4
Our discussion of Intelligent Design resumes with some conclusions we might draw about it.
Science and the Bible: Intelligent Design, Part 5
As we’ve already seen, ID is a “philosophical critique of the explanatory efficacy of Darwinian evolution”, not an alternative “theory of everything.” In my opinion, the inability of ID to offer an alternative history of nature counts crucially against its acceptance by the scientific community.