Well, I’ve read up on the case some time ago, but I haven’t read the textbook itself, so perhaps I missed something important here. Or perhaps you’re reading things into what I’m writing that I don’t intend, or perhaps misunderstood. Let’s keep both options alive, ok?
You seem confident that OPaP “started with Scripture.” Ok, then, could you please specify “which Scripture” was used in promoting “Intelligent Design” theory in OPaP? The research has dug up the edits, right? I’d just like to restrict my interest in case you’d like to stick with the “started with Scripture” part because it doesn’t seem to me that Thaxton, Bradley, Olsen, though motivated by Scripture, certainly, yes, did not “start with Scripture” when they "formulated’ (that’s debatable) their earliest known “modern theory of Intelligent Design”. But it could be that Davis & Kenyon (eds. Thaxton, Dembski, Wells) indeed “started with Scripture”. I’ve just never heard which verses.
You seem to be saying “ID theory started with Scripture.” It does not seem to me that is accurate or true history, though it makes an obvious rhetorical device when challenging ID people. Please list which Scripture verses ID theory started with. That way, this will be sorted out for the record.
“ID was started as a way to get creationism back in the public schools.”
That is not the case, though, if ID theory differs fundamentally from creationism, right? And that indeed appears to be how BioLogos Common Questions section sees it. Should I accept your version, or theirs?
The history of Discovery Institute & its motivations seem more multifaceted than you are suggesting with wikipedia backup. Johnson promoted ID theory as a “way to get naturalism out of the public schools”, as much as to get ID thinking into public schools. He was a lawyer, & that was part of the “wedge” that he used as an evangelical anti-Darwinist.
Aside from Johnson & the DI, or ID theory generally, meanwhile given the naturalism vs. theism spectrum, it seems to make sense to allow for some voices among evangelicals against naturalism, even if they support limiting natural sciences to using methods that study nature only. Anti-naturalism seems to be pro-theism in many peoples’ philosophical approaches these days. I wonder what the ratios are on this spectrum of ideas at BioLogos.