You keep repeating this as if you were trying to make it true. Can you point to even just one place where Biologos claimed this?
You say you oppose lying - and rightly so. Yet you keep bearing false witness about others by falsely attributing to them words that they do not own. The only place I’ve only seen that claim coming from is you. Why do you trample on the word of God by ignoring its imperative not to bear false witness about your neighbor?
Read this post and all the replies in it. See Jammycakes in particular - and I’m not the only one responding to his accusations.
JammyCakes is intimately connected to Biologos and even if I wasn’t referring to Biologos as the organization ( I wrote “website” ) it essentially boils down to the same thing. Your choice of interpretation but that’s fair to me.
This isn’t the BioLogos website. That would be here: https://biologos.org/
This is a discussion forum hosted by BioLogos and open to anyone who shows up. It is moderated to keep people from descending into poop flinging, but BioLogos exercises no editorial control over what gets posted here.
I wrote what I wrote. Please see the illogic of your reply - how else would I get onto this particular forum if it wasn’t via the Biologos website? You seem to want to disassociate this forum and its contents from the official website?? That doesn’t make sense to me.
No, I want people to understand how the internet works and the difference between articles BioLogos publishes on its website (solicited and vetted in an editorial process) and comments on a comment board by anyone who cares to contribute. It is dishonest and willfully ignorant to identify something you read on a comment board as “published on the BioLogos website,” though that doesn’t stop DI and and AIG from pulling that kind of stuff all the time.
I will not continue to discuss this small item. Suffice to show you the URL : https://discourse.biologos.org/
How does it read to you? The domain anchors anything that is contained in it and the way to get to your biologos website is www.biologos.org.
What more can I say? I rest my case.
It reads as a Discourse forum, which everyone who knows anything knows is a comment board.
By all means, continue to be dishonest and willfully ignorant if that’s how you roll.
By your own logic, Kevin, everything that you have written speaks for BioLogos, and you are intimately connected with BioLogos, because your words appear on the BioLogos forum. Therefore, by your logic, your standards and your judgment, you are guilty of heresy and false teaching and you are a liar because of your guilt by association.
You don’t sound like you’re speaking anything in love to anyone, Kevin, and what you are speaking certainly isn’t truthful. You sound aggressive, bullying and Pharisaical. You’re weaponising your small-b bible to try and bully Christians into believing and endorsing blatant falsehood, misinformation and hostility to science. You sound exactly like the kids I had to put up with when I was twelve who would give me grief for being good at science and maths and bad at sports. It’s people like you who are turning their churches into an adult version of the school playground. The only difference is that kids at school who have to suffer all that garbage can’t leave those toxic, bullying environments. Adults in churches, on the other hand, can and do.
Dear Beagelady, I don’t know if you are a born again Christian, but if you claim to be one I sincerely hope you read and understood the message I wrote. IT tells the truth - straight from the bible - whether you believe the earth is flat or round, fixed or not, in orbit around the sun or not. The truth stands and by it all will be judged - including you - as to whether you obeyed the gospel of God or not.
I have seen your concern about the website’s reputation and taken note that you are greatly moved when you perceive an attack on it. Hence, to put your mind at rest I have gone and changed the words I used - putting in the title of the page as it hovers over the content and stating it’s in the discussion area. I hope that allays all your fears regarding the reputation of the Biologos website.
It really is no skin off my back - I was using the words as an indicator of LOCATION - e.g. “where did you see this?”
Which words in the bible are blatant falsehood: Genesis 1, Exodus 20:8-11 or Exodus 31:17.
Please tell me.
The blatant falsehood is only in your small-b bible, Kevin. It is not in the Bible with a capital B. Your small-b bible weaponises these verses to insist that the earth is six thousand years old and cannot be interpreted any other way, no matter that the whole of creation screams with every fibre of its being that it is nothing of the sort. The Bible with a capital B tells us that these verses are wide open to interpretation; that what we see in creation is an accurate portrayal of reality even to the unbeliever, and that your small-b bible’s dogmatic denial of objective reality is the letter that kills while the Spirit gives life; it is tying up heavy loads on people’s backs without lifting a finger to help; and it is nullifying the Word of God with your tradition.
@jammycakes has been insisting on scientific authenticity and accurate measurement. Much of scientific progress comes down to improvement on the sensitivity and range of measurement. What is your problem with that?
Maybe the part where he drifts off his “scientific points” and ends up condemning those who disagree with him as liars going to hell…???
Pot, meet kettle.
You’re the one who started it by telling us that a young earth was a salvation issue.
No, you have done this before Jammycakes, without having anyone talking about any salvation issue.
Which message? Please point me to your message as this thread is long.
Sure, people have been interpreting all kinds of things to suit their own agendas. In this case the evolutionary creationists have chosen their own. What can I say?
Hey, go ahead, suit yourself. ONLY Your interpretation is the absolute truth and any other is not valid.
Please, just because you reject the help coming from AIG, CMI and ICR doesn’t mean that Bible believers are pharisees. Quite the contrary in fact because the evolutionary viewpoint requires people to leave the bible, get some very informed scholars to help them understand the text…they can’t do it by themselves - far too heavy for them - especially that part in Genesis 1 that deals with day and night in consecutive order - that part needs humungous and deep education. Reminds me of keeping the bible in Latin.
YEC is essentially devoted not to pursuit of knowledge, but dissemination of rhetoric; not to understanding of nature, but to construction of a narrative. Because the dissonance from scientific reality, much of which is part of the public consciousness in a technological and informed society, is so pervasive, in response the YEC meta reality has become ever more elaborate and layered. Some basic themes thread throughout however.
There are two great underpinnings to the narrative. One is that the conflict with science is actually a spiritual battle. The second is that there is equivalence between YEC and science, that researchers are atheists and atheism is a religion, and that YEC is valid as science. The object of this equivalence is to transfer the focus from empirical research to the rhetorical, and from data to proof texting and quote mining.
In keeping with this, YEC wants to present a clear dichotomy, and prefers to deal with evidence which is in the public square and ignore contrary facts which constitute the bulk of the data. Why invent yet another fantasy argument when your audience is unlikely to ever dig enough to even gain awareness to begin with? Just do not call attention. In keeping with this strategy, creationist organizations have preferred to downplay and avoid discussing Christian organizations which are open to scientific understanding, such as BioLogos or the American Scientific Affiliation. It does not fit the creationist narrative that there are many Christian scientists who accept an ancient universe, and many secular scientists who would not consider themselves to be atheists. The YEC audience tends to assume that, with few exceptions, that Christians who are scientists are generally YEC. That is not at all true. Most Christians who are active researchers understand that the data is compelling towards the mainstream view.
The harsh tone of the Calvin Smith AiG article indicates something has changed. I expect that what has shifted is that it has become impossible to ignore the substantial and growing impact the BioLogos and other platforms has had on adherents, at least among those who care about origins and are therefore targeted by creationist organizations. The message that science can be compatible with faith is an existential threat to the conflict dichotomy which animates the entire YEC enterprise, and that is what accounts for the recent vitriol from Answers in Genesis.
OK here’s the deal, Kevin.
Go and get a university degree in science.
Then go and work for a decade or two putting what you’ve learned into practice in situations where getting it wrong could get you fired, or worse, could kill people. Such as, for example, searching for oil or developing vaccines.
Then come back and tell us that we are “suiting ourselves” or “interpreting all kinds of things to suit our own agendas.” Or that what is coming from AIG, ICR and CMI is “help.”
Because until you have actually got some real-world experience working with science in situations where getting it wrong has real-world consequences for which you would be held personally responsible, you are not qualified to point fingers and make accusations against people who have. And if you are weaponising your small-b bible in order to do so, I’m sorry, but that is Pharisaism, end of story.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.