Why not all Christians agree with "intelligent Design"

Christians all agree that God created each one of us, and that we are each giving a unique set of qualities, that we call gifts, that make us each unique. We are each a unique object of God's love.

But a recent proposal called "intelligent Design" (ID) promoted by some Christians is not accepted by all. The general idea behind ID is that at the biochemical and organelle level in living organisms, there are structures and biochemical processes that are so complicated that they could not have evolved according to the rules of Darwinian evolution, but must have been created by an intelligent creator. The ID theory does not say evolution does not occur, nor that the universe was created only a few thousand years ago.

Because of this, ID lies half way between the strict and literal view of the Bible where the world was created about 6000 years ago (5766 years ago according to the Hebrew calendar) in 6 days, and that any appearance of greater age was also created, and the completely atheistic view that the universe was not created by any God, but formed and changes strictly due to action of natural laws.

Since a good many Christians believe in the strict literal view of the Bible, there is by no means universal acceptance of ID among Christians. Also, many Christians take another view of the Bible, also highly respecting its authority as the Word of God, but interpreting the Genesis story as metaphoric, dealing not with the question "how did the world come to be?", but rather
"why did the world come to be, and what is our relationship as creatures, to God, the Creator?" These Christians do not seek to find literal concordance between the science of biology and the Word of God, because scientists seeks to answer different questions than those God is answering in the Scripture.

So adding the two types of Christians together: the Bible as Scientific Fact Christians and the science and Bible are not required to be identical Christians, you may end up with quite a large majority of Christians who do not accept ID.

As science, ID has one major shortcoming. The statement "because I cannot explain some complex biochemical process without assuming God, God must exist" is a logical fallacy. In the future, a discovery may occur that does not require God to be the source of the biochemical process. If such a proof is found, it does in no way disprove the existence of God. Because I cannot disprove the existence of God in this way, I did not actually prove the existence of God in the first place. I would need to first prove that not only can I not explain the biochemical process without assuming God, but that it is impossible that anyone will ever be able to do so. That proof that has not made.

Finally, many Christians feel that scientific proof of God is not attainable, because God's plan for the salvation of humanity requires faith, and faith, by definition, requires belief in things that cannot be proved (or disproved.)