WRT the “NPR style” demeanor of BioLogos contributors. 
I clearly need to up my game because I don’t think I’m quite there yet.
4 Likes
Theistic evolution or evolutionary creationism is not a form of science. The science is the same if you are a atheist, Christian, Buddhist, someone who worships Damballa or you’re a member of the druid cult of Thorn. But the terms exist because right now in the world there seems to be to generalized beliefs. You’re either an atheist who believes in science or a creationist ( Christian ) ( YEacist ) who believes in the Bible. But the reality is that there is a lot more to the world
Of Christian’s than YECism. So the term evolutionary creationist brings attention to that issues. It does not allow Christians or atheists to just place us in a box different from them.
3 Likes
It’s lovely to read thoughtful, well-informed, edited, reasonable prose in contrast to all the raving and provocation that surrounds us. Any more that just elevates writing to “NPR style.” Carry on.
4 Likes
I, personally, believe in the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the physical resurrection and ascension of Lord Jesus Christ.
What I do not is: the way YEC presents a Pseudoscience and wraps it as truth and accuses anyone who a disagrees as non-believer.
6 Likes
AiG never realizes how much Young Earth Creationism costs Christians in developing nations.
They can never be honest with the way they present the truth.
They, deliberately, manipulate data and reasoning to justify their end.
Even if the end is the truth, they should admit, on the first place, that they do not have much evidence to support what they believe as reality.
Lastly: they do not allow for replies or comments on their articles. If they believe that YEC is the truth, why don’t they open a room for discussion?
9 Likes
I have three main points: First, wooden literal belief in derivative ANE texts makes God a terrible, heartless thing, second, it strips from His Son the purpose of the cross, and third, it removes from us His people our dignity as image bearers.
1 Like
This is a significant part of a larger package of reasons why so many of us here have long seen the writing on the wall, Fernando. This “debate” isn’t won over this or that specific talking point or piece of evidence (as significant as the accumulation of all that is!) But the clincher for me too is the observation of how conversations unfold and which side is the first to lapse either into silence or dogmatic retreat, leaving 90% of all the devastating realities unaddressed that have been brought to their attention … repeatedly. And yet there is not one yec argument or response I’m aware of that has remained unaddressed by knowledgeable and faithful Christian thinkers attentive to science. [There are always unanswered questions for “merchants of doubt” to find - but none that threaten consensus science as much as desperate detractors hope it will.] That still-mounting accumulation of failure on the part of yecs speaks volumes - not proof - mind you. But one cannot keep ignoring reality and truth and yet somehow maintain integrity in the handling of God’s word. Falsehood will always end up making itself known.
7 Likes
I think we need to have a discussion or at least an online meeting with them.
I’ve always wanted to tell them: I don’t hate them, YEC is dangerous for Christians’ future…
Look: Imagine a world where every Christian believe in YEC, who will develop vaccines, surgery methods, health technologies that are directly related with Evolutionary Biology?
Christendom will be dependent on Chinese, Japanese, and other Non-Christians who don’t have the disadvantages YEC bring.
1 Like
Note that many Chinese and Japanese are Christians.
Also, many non-Christians make significant contributions in medicine. e.g. Jonas Salk was Jewish.
1 Like
Also, many Christians, usually Evangelicals, are opposed to vaccines.
1 Like
The C-14 dating method is invalid for Young Earth Creationists.
AiG is an echo chamber.
BioLogos welcomes everyone to post and to comment.
This is not merely a theory, the facts are there.
There are solid evidences.
7 Likes
They’re not open for open discussion and dialog…
YECs think that radioactive nuclide half-lives can change willy-nilly – they ignore this:
They also cannot comprehend this, apparently, about extinct radioactive atoms (it is not about radiometric dating):
“Radioactive Atoms — Evidence about the Age of the Earth” Ken Wolgemuth
4 Likes
They also think that the physical laws and constants are so finely tuned for human life that changing them just a little tiny bit will destroy all life in the cosmos. And yet, they see nothing wrong with radically changing the constants for nuclear forces in order to get different decay rates (not to mention other changes, like the speed of light). Go figure.
4 Likes
No, and they have big spats with fellow creationists.
1 Like
Despite all its “research” into BioLogos writers, AIG doesn’t seem to realize that agnostic philosopher of science Michael Ruse once wrote a series of articles for BioLogos. Ruse believes that Christianity and science are compatible. I recall that all these militant atheists come over and attacked him in the comments!
2 Likes
34 posts were split to a new topic: How can ECs call themselves Christians?
Well, Randy, they noticed and I guess I have you to thank for my lifelong goal of being quoted by AIG. 
I definitely did not intend my informal forum post to be construed as some sort of official BioLogos response to AIG, but other places don’t always distinguish between conversation on the forum and published articles that have gone through an editorial process. Oh well, what can you do.
10 Likes