Yes. He won’t even say he believes his own idea.
Actually, he did, and then he didn’t, and then he did.
Keep any eye on becomingadam.com if you want to read a real review.
I think you have misunderstood the Biologos effort. They are building a set of long-term resources for the church (and, yes, the world), and have only existed for a decade. It is far too early to say what the long-term result will be.
I think Joshua’s thesis is very useful, and I believe that it will be helpful. How helpful? Still too early to tell. I’m really glad he’s published his book, is going on a book tour, and runs a good forum.
Best,
Chris
3 Likes
" Biologos has largely failed in its effort to get bible-believing Christians to accept evolution as described by “mainstream science"
I agree that this is a mis-statement of BioLogos’ efforts. BioLogos seems to concentrate more on getting EC accepted in the Christian community as a faithful position to hold. I think some inroads have been made, though there is still work to do in that regard. It also works to provide a community framework to assist those navigating rough waters in their journey.
2 Likes
Personally, I struggle with this approach for personal and philosophical reasons. But before I slam my gavel down and take off my wig, please could someone help me understand Joshua’s motives? What is his hoping to a achieve by not outlining his own theological commitments?
Congratulations and best wishes to Dr Swamidass and to you, Mr Moore. May the book bear the fruit that God intends.
2 Likes
So do a lot of folks. Like population geneticist Graham Coop, for instance:
It's a neat parlour mathematical trick and a mathematical true that genealogical CAs exist. However, saying that this reconciles science w. the idea of Adam and Eve, sweeps a lot of stuff under a very patchy, ugly carpet. 5/n
— Graham Coop (@Graham_Coop) October 6, 2019
Swamidass identifies as TE/EC in this old post from 2016. “I, for one, am a theistic evolutionist (evolutionary creationist) that (sic) beleives (sic) in a historical adam and eve (sic). So does John Walton too. … So there you have. I just defended a YEC. =)”
He stopped identifying as EC because … well, who knows? I suppose because it was inconvenient for marketing a book on 6000-yr-old Adam to YEC.
1 Like
Absolutely, and all of that has worked and been very valuable for me. I appreciate BioLogos’s resources that are aimed at educators and homeschool teachers, which acknowledges some of the many ways that lay-level women like me help to shape this multifaceted conversation. It’s not all about scientists and theologians. Still, I do hope this book helps people and gets them asking questions they may not otherwise have asked.
4 Likes
I agree. Biologos has been uniquely helpful for me, too. I encourage those who can to join me in supporting it financially, as able, too. https://give.biologos.org/give/245868/#!/donation/checkout
3 Likes
A great observation. Thanks for the remiinder.
1 Like
My guess is that his goal is to break down barriers within the church, and that identifying with a specific theological position on this question would trigger tribal loyalties. But I don’t know – why don’t you ask him?
3 Likes
C S Lewis, “Mere Christianity”–one of my favorite works. 
–is an example of that type. Great point!
Ah, so you imply that my review is not real? Great way to convince me, and a good example of what I am talking about when I say Biologos has largely failed to convince people. (I realize that Jay does not speak for Biologos,)
I may have. Perhaps I should have said “mostly failed so far”. But I also think a key to continuing on with any endeavor like this is a little self-reflection and adjustment on how it can be done better.
1 Like
You can post links to your stuff in any thread, just not in an OP.
1 Like
Josh offers an account of his motivations of his motivation here. Read and judge for yourselves
2 Likes
Thanks that is helpful.
How would I go about doing that? I’ve seen the book in passing (it was on pre-pub at Logos not that long ago) but in truth in this is the first I’ve heard of the author (as far as I can recall).
1 Like
He’s got a discussion forum, https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/. There’s even a pinned discussion thread about the excerpt from the book (but I’d suggest reading the excerpt before going forward).
2 Likes
Thank you for that clarification.
I figure a part of it is to stay “honest broker” of a dialogue, which is hard to do as someone on one of the teams. A big danger is that it will just become another “team” instead of true facilitator. BUT based on my own sorry nature I always assume that even the best motives of others are mixed. So instead of attempting to scrutinize their motives, I just try and evaluate their arguments. I figure if I want to scrutinize the motivational purity of anyone deeply enough I can always find an excuse to not hear what they are trying to say- but that would be me sealing myself off from ideas I don’t want to consider. IOW my own motive in doing that may be worse than whatever flaw in their motives I am using to shield myself from having to consider their ideas. Maybe that’s just me, but I doubt it.
2 Likes
Yeah… 
evolution and science are doing this fine all by themselves. The real role of Biologos is provide a way for this not to equate with a rejection of Christianity.
2 Likes