« A Rare Sight on Site
Main
Avraham Biran Dead at Nearly 99 »
September 15, 2008
Creationism and Intelligent Design
according to the British and Foreign Bible Society:
The British and Foreign Bible Society has just released "The Bible Style Guide." It's targeted at journalists and broadcasters to assist them in answering basic questions about the Bible and related topics. I haven't reviewed the whole document but they highlighted "Intelligent Design" in the introduction and that led me to check out what they had to say on the subject. The reference given in the introduction, which seems to have a problem (it says page 19 but I think it should read page 12), is to the "Creationism, Creationist" entry. The entry ends with these words.
It’s also worth noting that creationism is not an equivalent term for Intelligent Design (ID).
Well, let's delve into that a little deeper. Here's how they define creationism at the beginning of the same entry:
The idea, claiming a biblical and scientific basis, that all species came into being as the result of separate acts of creation by God, rather than via a long process of evolution. There are two variations of this concept. Young-earth creationism is the most widely held and high profile version. This is the idea that the world and the life-forms within it were created by God in a literal six days and that the earth has only existed for a few thousand years. Old-earth creationism is the idea that creation happened over a longer time-span. The days of creation as described in the Bible are understood to be either many years in length or a non-literal framework for the story.
At least, that's what they tell us creationism is. I don't like their reference to a possible "scientific basis" for creationism. Creation science is, at its best, a pseudoscience that attempts to force, by less than scientific means, scientific evidence into conformity with religious dogma. And I'm not sure what to think about the claim that young earth creationism is the most "high profile version" of creationism. But the definition is still better than some I have read.
So what does The Bible Society actually say of intelligent design in the "Intelligent Design" entry?
The idea that the universe and the species within it are far too complicated to have arisen by complete chance. The order and organisation throughout the universe is understood to point strongly to the existence of an intelligent designer, identified as God. The underlying thinking for this could be broadly described as biblical, although the drive to emphasise the idea over against the theory of evolution is a modern phenomenon.Reference is sometimes made to certain biblical texts that illustrate aspects of the idea, such as Romans 1.19, 20 and Hebrews 11.3. Particularly within the United States, although increasingly in the UK, the promotion of the concept within schools has become controversial. Some view the concept as fundamentally unscientific, while others maintain that it is a legitimate counterbalance to what they see as the often unquestioned teaching of evolutionary theory.
That sure sounds like intelligent design is a form of creationism to me. The intelligent designer, aka God, did it. They don't bother to mention that "chance" is only one of the contributing factors to biological evolution. I find the reference to intelligent design under the "Creationism, Creationist" entry, cited first above, more than a little disingenuous. Then California is not equivalent to the United States either. But it sure is one of these United States. Why didn't they include "intelligent design" as a third variation of creationism or as a sub-variation of old-earth creationism rather than saying it "is not an equivalent term" to creationism? Even with the references to Romans and Hebrews, I see no way that intelligent design can be "described as biblical" even broadly. But if it could, so what? And the idea that intelligent design is somehow a "legitimate counterbalance" to anything is just plan nuts. With apologies to all turtles, intelligent design is creationism all the way down.
I was glad to see that The Bible Society did say that intelligent design advocates identified the intelligent designer with God. Most professional intelligent design advocates want to lie about this rather obvious fact.
Posted by Duane Smith at September 15, 2008 2:36 PM | Read more on Religion |
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telecomtally.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2634
Comments
I think they bought into the ID movement's propaganda. The whole point of Intelligent Design was to create a creationism which could pretend it wasn't creationism.
Posted by: mwg at September 16, 2008 5:44 AM
Well, to be fair, the style guide (as you quoted it) doesn't actually say that creationism has any scientific basis, but that its adherents claim a scientific basis.
Posted by: Christopher Heard at September 18, 2008 9:33 PM
mvg,
They sure did buy into it.
Chris,
In a narrow philological sense, you are correct but the larger context led me to believe, perhaps falsely, that the authors endorsed the claim as part of a proper definition of creationism.
Posted by: Duane at September 19, 2008 7:12 AM
Post a comment
Please read Abnormal Interest's Comments Policy.