BioLogos: House of Heresy & False Teaching (AiG says the nicest things about us)

I’m just looking forward to when I can tell people , “ hey I know that heretic from BL I talked to her before.” Lol. There will be an AIG post about “ cockatoo or serpent and when the animal last talked” lol.

I remembered that like a year ago someone on a AIG based Facebook group called me a Franklinknight and after a few times I asked them and they said that they were Christians becsuse they followed Christ and I was a Franklinknight because I follow Franklin and I was like whose Franklin and they were confusing Francis Collins for Franklin lol.

4 Likes

Repent: A Response to BioLogos’ Critique of ‘BioLogos: House of Heresy & False Teaching’

So repent, you miserable offenders!

1 Like

That gave me a good laugh. I can only dream.

3 Likes

The venom is absolutely amazing. I may just need to disappear for a while (how long would that be???). I have found Biologos such a refuge of sanity, particularly the podcasts and videos during lock down, and many of the discussions are really encouraging for this lit and language liberal arts person, who respects science but only has a (very old) robust high school and under grad background. Having all this AIG poison coming over here is more than I want to deal with right now. I don’t want to be in the frying pan or the fire right now. Just hang out with folks I can learn from and engage with in an encouraging way.
Reading the latest attacks from AIG just keeps the wounds bleeding. Wow.
Really this reply is so much to you, beaglelady, but rather the whole thread and related ones. Just ugh.

10 Likes

I have to break every now and then too. It will settle down so don’t stay away. Except for the drive-by shootings, it is not a bad neighborhood.

7 Likes

Drive by shootings is exactly what this lookslike.
Thanks for the encouragement.

2 Likes

Part 3 of the Joel Edmund Anderson response has been posted:

Calvin Smith of AiG has BioLogos in his Crosshairs (Part 3 of my look of his recent attack on BioLogos…with Steve Martin and Derek Zoolander making a guest appearance!)

I hope Biologos has secured movie rights to this feud.

AIG doesn’t get along with other young earth creationists, either.
Trouble in Paradise

2 posts were split to a new topic: Believing the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation

A post was merged into an existing topic: Believing the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation

These types of comments and the 8 likes (so far) are a big part of why critically thinking Christians fail to take any organization like this one in a serious fashion. You commit a false analogy fallacy by comparing interpretation of scientific data with a scientific law, a branch of physics, a table of scientific data, and a branch of mathematics. Then you use another fallacy to insult a group of Christians by falsely accusing them of belonging to a cult.

What does this have to do with the topic?

This is not an issue of semantics. It is an issue of interpretation. Interpretation of The Bible and interpretation of scientific data. It has caused a serious division of brothers and sisters in Christ. A group of people who are commanded in John 17 to unite as one family in order to show the lost who their God is. It is not logical that both sides can be right in an argument. Either both sides are wrong or one side is right and one side is wrong. If we use critical thinking skills we must yield to what the authority of The Bible as God does not make it clear about the mechanisms used to create the universe. We can logically deduce that it could not be death as He is Life and makes it clear that death is from the kingdom of satan. Jn 5:26; Jn 6:48; Jn 8:51; 1 Jn 5:12; Rom 8:2; Rom 8:6; Heb 2:14; 1 Cor 15:21; 1 Cor 15:26; Lk 1:79; Rev 1:18; Rev 21:4

Tough to figure which is worse, cultist or heretic. Speaking of serious division of brothers and sisters, are you comfortable with the Calvin Smith article?

1 Like

The Bible does talk about those in terms that you have over looked. He commands us to study the universe and discover the secrets He has hidden there (genetics is a perfect example).

Mat 16:2-3 “He answered them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’”
Job 37:11;17 “He loads the thick cloud with moisture; the clouds scatter his lightning.”; “you whose garments are hot when the earth is still because of the south wind?”

What’s the point of that remark? Putting @Christy in her place? Suggesting that the Forum shouldn’t discuss the AIG attack? Just getting something off your chest? Do you understand that you sound like a pretentious someone from senior management venting your spleen to a subordinate?

For all I know, you are senior management, but if you’ve got a point to make then you failed miserably here.

As far as “slagging” is concerned, if feel that some writers are “slagging” (and perhaps you would include me among the “some”), then direct your remarks to those writers. You’ll find that it is far more effective than sailing in, making a couple of pretentious “we can do better than this” remarks, then sailing out never to be heard again.

The article raises valid concerns that should be directly addressed and not waved away with arguments of semantics and subjects that have nothing to do with Calvin Smith’s accusations. I do not know all the details, but his approach is not appropriate for a public arena. Unless attempts to resolve this privately were made which it would then be appropriate for the family of Christ to know all of the details of the debate. We must keep in mind that all of God’s family still make mistakes and extra effort from both sides to forgive is required. However, the divisions must be resolved. I have proposed multiple times that all of the scientists and theogists from both sides should lock themselves in a meeting place until they can come to an agreement (much like a sequestered jury). If no agreement is found then the evidence must, at a minimum, be presented equally to all Christians to make a decision for themselves (the whole debate should be recorded, of course). Ideally, if no agreement is achieved then The Bible’s exactly terminology and the ancient Christians’ beliefs should be honored and no more ‘in-fighting’ should be observed by unbelievers.

And you commit a fallacy by ignoring the fact that interpretation of scientific data has rules. Interpretations must be mathematically and logically coherent, factually accurate and of satisfactory quality, and so too must challenges to those interpretations. Attempting to challenge interpretations in ways that fudge measurements, make invalid calculations, quote mine, misrepresent or cherry-pick the raw evidence, or exaggerate or downplay sources of error is dishonest, and should be called out and corrected as such, especially when the fallacies, misrepresentations and fudging are blatant. And when such correction is met with accusations of “heresy” or “secular humanistic religion” or “false teaching,” I’m sorry but it is hard facts that are being denounced in those terms, and for that, the term “cult” is completely appropriate. I’m sorry if anyone is offended by me saying that, but if you don’t want to be called a cult then don’t denounce facts as heresy.

3 Likes

Agreed.

There is just a disagreement over how critical thinking skills relate to the questions at hand. I and others would say the Bible is not the only source of knowledge that must be evaluated as we are trying to come up with answers.

1 Like