Editing Intelligent design (section)

===Religion and leading proponents===
Although arguments for intelligent design by the intelligent design movement are formulated in secular terms and intentionally avoid positing the identity of the designer,<ref name=IDstatementOnCreator group="n">{{cite web |url=http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=565 |title=Does intelligent design postulate a "supernatural creator? |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |website=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle |id=Truth Sheet # 09-05 |access-date=2007-07-19 |quote=... intelligent design does not address metaphysical and religious questions such as the nature or identity of the designer. ... '... the nature, moral character and purposes of this intelligence lie beyond the competence of science and must be left to religion and philosophy.'}}</ref> the majority of principal intelligent design advocates are publicly religious Christians who have stated that, in their view, the designer proposed in intelligent design is the [[God in Christianity|Christian conception of God]]. Stuart Burgess, Phillip E. Johnson, William A. Dembski, and Stephen C. Meyer are [[Evangelicalism|evangelical Protestants]]; Michael Behe is a [[Catholic Church|Roman Catholic]]; [[Paul Nelson (creationist)|Paul Nelson]] supports young Earth creationism; and [[Jonathan Wells (intelligent design advocate)|Jonathan Wells]] is a member of the [[Unification Church]]. Non-Christian proponents include [[David Klinghoffer]], who is [[Judaism|Jewish]],<ref name="Judaism">{{cite web |url=http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Issues/Science/Creationism_and_Evolution/ID_Prn.shtml |title=Judaism & Intelligent Design |last=Kippley-Ogman |first=Emma |website=MyJewishLearning.com |publisher=MyJewishLearning, Inc. |location=New York |access-date=2010-11-13 |quote=But there are also Jewish voices in the intelligent design camp. David Klinghoffer, a Discovery Institute fellow, is an ardent advocate of intelligent design. In an article in The Forward (August 12, 2005), he claimed that Jewish thinkers have largely ignored intelligent design and contended that Jews, along with Christians, should adopt the theory because beliefs in God and in natural selection are fundamentally opposed. |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140306170150/http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Issues/Science/Creationism_and_Evolution/ID_Prn.shtml |archive-date=March 6, 2014 }}</ref> [[Michael Denton]] and [[David Berlinski]], who are [[Agnosticism|agnostic]],<ref name="Agnostic1">[[#Meyer 2009|Meyer 2009]], "Michael Denton, an agnostic, argues for intelligent design in Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, 326–343."</ref><ref name="Agnostic2">[[#Frame 2009|Frame 2009]], [https://books.google.com/books?id=o-c1IZtSnoIC&pg=PA291 p. 291], "In contrast to the other would-be pioneers of Intelligent Design, Denton describes himself as an agnostic, and his book was released by a secular publishing house."</ref><ref name="Representation">{{cite web |url=https://www.discovery.org/id/faqs/#generalQuestions |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title=CSC – Frequently Asked Questions: General Questions: Is Discovery Institute a religious organization? |website=Center for Science and Culture |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle |access-date=2018-07-15 |quote=Discovery Institute is a secular think tank, and its Board members and Fellows represent a variety of religious traditions, including mainline Protestant, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Jewish, and agnostic. Until recently the Chairman of Discovery's Board of Directors was former Congressman John Miller, who is Jewish. Although it is not a religious organization, the Institute has a long record of supporting religious liberty and the legitimate role of faith-based institutions in a pluralistic society. In fact, it sponsored a program for several years for college students to teach them the importance of religious liberty and the separation of church and state.}}</ref> and [[Muzaffar Iqbal]], a [[Pakistani Canadian|Pakistani-Canadian]] [[Muslim]].<ref name="Muslim1">[[#Young & Edis 2004|Edis 2004]], [https://books.google.com/books?id=hYLKdtlVeQgC&pg=PA12 "Grand Themes, Narrow Constituency", p. 12]: "Among Muslims involved with ID, the most notable is Muzaffar Iqbal, a fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design, a leading ID organization."</ref><ref name="Muslim2">[[#Shanks 2004|Shanks 2004]], [https://books.google.com/books?id=mWn-AE6XLXIC&pg=PA11 p. 11]: "Muzaffar Iqbal, president of the Center for Islam and Science, has recently endorsed work by intelligent design theorist William Dembski."</ref> Phillip E. Johnson has stated that cultivating ambiguity by employing secular language in arguments that are carefully crafted to avoid overtones of theistic [[creationism]] is a necessary first step for ultimately reintroducing the Christian concept of God as the designer. Johnson explicitly calls for intelligent design proponents to obfuscate their religious motivations so as to avoid having intelligent design identified "as just another way of packaging the Christian evangelical message."<ref group="n">{{cite magazine |last=Johnson |first=Phillip E. |date=April 1999 |title=Keeping the Darwinists Honest |url=http://www.arn.org/docs/johnson/citmag99.htm |magazine=Citizen |location=Colorado Springs, Colo. |publisher=[[Focus on the Family]] |issn=1084-6832 |access-date=2014-02-28 |quote=ID is an intellectual movement, and the Wedge strategy stops working when we are seen as just another way of packaging the Christian evangelical message. ... The evangelists do what they do very well, and I hope our work opens up for them some doors that have been closed.}}</ref> Johnson emphasizes that "...the first thing that has to be done is to get the Bible out of the discussion. ...This is not to say that the biblical issues are unimportant; the point is rather that the time to address them will be after we have separated materialist prejudice from scientific fact."<ref name="Johnson-Touchstone">{{cite magazine |last=Johnson |first=Phillip E. |date=July–August 1999 |title=The Wedge: Breaking the Modernist Monopoly on Science |url=http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-04-018-f |magazine=Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity |location=Chicago |publisher=Fellowship of St. James |volume=12 |issue=4 |issn=0897-327X |access-date=2014-02-28}}</ref>

The [[wedge strategy|strategy]] of deliberately disguising the religious intent of intelligent design has been described by William A. Dembski in ''The Design Inference''.<ref>[[#Dembski 1998|Dembski 1998]]</ref> In this work, Dembski lists a [[god]] or an "[[extraterrestrial life|alien life force]]" as two possible options for the identity of the designer; however, in his book ''[[Intelligent Design (book)|Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science and Theology]]'' (1999), Dembski states:

{{Blockquote|Christ is indispensable to any scientific theory, even if its practitioners don't have a clue about him. The pragmatics of a scientific theory can, to be sure, be pursued without recourse to Christ. But the conceptual soundness of the theory can in the end only be located in Christ.<ref>[[#Dembski 1999|Dembski 1999]], p. 210</ref>}}

Dembski also stated, "ID is part of God's [[general revelation]] ... Not only does intelligent design rid us of this ideology &#91;[[materialism]]&#93;, which suffocates the human spirit, but, in my personal experience, I've found that it opens the path for people to come to Christ."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.designinference.com/documents/2005.02.Reply_to_Henry_Morris.htm |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120729035206/http://www.designinference.com/documents/2005.02.Reply_to_Henry_Morris.htm |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 29, 2012 |title=Intelligent Design's Contribution to the Debate Over Evolution: A Reply to Henry Morris |last=Dembski |first=William |date=February 1, 2005 |website=DesignInference.com |publisher=William Dembski |location=Pella, Iowa |access-date=2014-02-28 }}</ref> Both Johnson and Dembski cite the Bible's [[Gospel of John]] as the foundation of intelligent design.<ref name=dembski_logos/><ref name=PJC group="n" />

Barbara Forrest contends such statements reveal that leading proponents see intelligent design as essentially religious in nature, not merely a scientific concept that has implications with which their personal religious beliefs happen to coincide.<ref group="n">{{cite web |url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/day6pm2.html |title=Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District Trial transcript: Day 6 (October 5), PM Session, Part 2 |website=TalkOrigins Archive |publisher=The TalkOrigins Foundation, Inc. |location=Houston |access-date=2014-02-28 |quote=What I am talking about is the essence of intelligent design, and the essence of it is theistic realism as defined by Professor Johnson. Now that stands on its own quite apart from what their motives are. I'm also talking about the definition of intelligent design by Dr. Dembski as the Logos theology of John's Gospel. That stands on its own. ... Intelligent design, as it is understood by the proponents that we are discussing today, does involve a supernatural creator, and that is my objection. And I am objecting to it as they have defined it, as Professor Johnson has defined intelligent design, and as Dr. Dembski has defined intelligent design. And both of those are basically religious. They involve the supernatural.}} — Barbara Forrest, 2005, testifying in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial.</ref> She writes that the leading proponents of intelligent design are closely allied with the ultra-conservative [[Christian Reconstructionism]] movement. She lists connections of (current and former) Discovery Institute Fellows Phillip E. Johnson, Charles B. Thaxton, Michael Behe, [[Richard Weikart]], Jonathan Wells and [[Francis J. Beckwith]] to leading Christian Reconstructionist organizations, and the extent of the funding provided the Institute by [[Howard Ahmanson, Jr.]], a leading figure in the Reconstructionist movement.<ref name="ForrestMay2007Paper" />