I have to ask, am I the only Christian who is very uncomfortable with recent works such as this, Unapologetic Apologetics, God is Great God is Good, and others, which convey something of a courtship between Christian apologetics and the ideas of the ID movement?
As a Christian and an evolutionist who finds his religion defensible, I do not feel this state of affairs is healthy for the intellectual presentation of Christianity. While I don't expect all Christians to agree with me on the issue of evolution, can we not be more ecumenical in our presentation of this matter? Why slant the discussion of creation toward the views of IDists? With all due respect to my pro-ID brethren, I do believe that such only tarnishes the image of Christian apologetics as a whole for those with sympathies toward evolution but are otherwise fence-sitters on the matter of religious belief. And that's a shame because when it comes to other issues scholars like Ben Witherington, Craig Blomberg, and philosophers like W.L. Craig have many good ideas and arguments in support of Christianity that deserve a hearing.
The reason why there is such rabid disagreement is, in large part, due to the visceral attacks made by leading evolutionists. While it is logically possible for evolution and theism to be compatible, the evolutionists refuse to allow it. Any time a theist suggests that God used evolution to achieve His goals, the vast majority of evolutionists do not take the theist seriously as a scientist since, in their view, the theist is offering a theory of causation that doesn't actually cause anything. In their view, material causes are all that exists and if the evidence shows otherwise, that simply indicates we have insufficient evidence.
That being said, there are tremendous problems with neo-Darwinian evolution which the evolutionists simply do not take seriously in public (although they do attack the problems very seriously behind closed doors . . . that really is where the scientific work is being done). The ID folks are not "creationists" in the young earth sense (although they can have a home in ID too). In fact, ID can allow for theistic evolution. The problem is that the professional evolutionists deliberately downplay the different ways ID can be interpreted and instead cast it as a bunch of young earth creationist Bible thumpers. Simply put, they are not and such characterizations are disingenuous at best as professional evolutionists try to protect their turf.
This is not to say that there aren't people on the creationist side that contribute to the problem. I'm just saying that when creationists do try to create any sort of dialogue or meet evolutionists half way, they have routinely got the short end of the stick.