Does the Biologos foundation here intend to put out ir even train scholars interesting in apologetics? I think YEC has done not a very good job on the apologetics spectrum so i think some EC defenders of the faith would undo this. Are you in favor of a such thing? What are your toughts?
The only apologist, theodicist of any initial use is Jesus. First. And foremost. And from Him why does one have to go to any creationism (and I’ve never understood what evolutionary creationism could possibly be) at all to loop back to impossibly further validate Jesus?
If you cant answer the question without trying to be “sophisticated” then theres no need to comment. This doesnt really help. But by all means feel free to share your “answers” . Take care!
Apologetics is not really BioLogos thing, though there is an element of such when the blog and podcasts present how God acts though our natural world. It is not a direct argument, however.I am sure that Covid-19 has played havoc with the speakers bureau BioLogos had to send out to interested venues. Hopefully if things get back to normal there will be opportunity to reach out to appropriate audiences.
I kinda disagree though. Since this site is mostly about asking questions and engaging in coversation with people i think it is. Most questions here are about the bible or have to do around Christianity
I guess it depends on how you define apologetics. Certainly, BioLogos is all about strengthening and supporting people in their faith, but not so much developing logical arguments of defense for Christianity in general, focusing on defending accepting scientific findings as a faithful choice for Christians. Maybe that is apolologetics in a way.
Nothing ‘sophisticated’ about it. And there’s every need to comment. That there would be no fully autonomous natural world without God, which works otherwise without His intervention at all, would appear to be BioLogos’ modal position, with which I concur.
I am happy to find that Francis Collins avoid making this a personalised ministry mission, considering the fallout at RZIM. I think the site gives sufficient training and resource material out for free https://biologos.org/resources/gods-word-gods-world , without running as a corporate institution.
Key to end the fear of religious adherents to Genesis is to reassure them that as the religious interpretation of Genesis is a good match with the scientific account of evolution and that survival fitness is the ability to obey the law, e.g. to love thy neighbour like thy own, e.g. to contribute to creation in general as much as to your own kind, as selfishness leads to elimination by the system. Altruism is not a consequence of evolution but its foundation as it is the feedback loop regulating the process for creating stable systems.
Staff here, Phil is correct, we do not really call ourselves “apologetics,” as that is the notion of “proving God.” We are here to show that faithful Christians can support the findings of mainstream science, not that mainstream science points to a God (that seems more like an ID notion).
Hope that helps, @NickolaosPappas
I know thats not the intention yes,but i was curious if you were willing to train seperately a group of people for that particular thing since EC has not many representatives at that field.Thanks!!
We do have a speaker’s bureau, as Phil mentioned, that ascribe to what BioLogos believes that do events!
I personally cringe when some topic has become apologized in the same sense as when some topic becomes politicized it now becomes a matter of my team vs. your team.
For example, the topic of abiogenesis can get apologized as such:
- Christian claims atheists have no explanation for the origins of life, therefore God supernaturally formed first organisms from nothing
- We come to understand some portion of this giant puzzle, atheists use it as evidence against God. Christians reject our increase in understanding, and still point out we don’t have a comprehensive theory.
- Repeat ad nauseum
In this apoligitization of some topic, we can’t actually come to understand God’s creation more as Christians, because the Christian-side is basically anti-science, rejecting any progress towards the problem of how did life begin on Earth. On the other hand, sometimes atheists are afraid then to admit that we don’t understand something because they’ve been tricked into thinking if we can’t understand or explain something, it means it becomes evidence of God’s supernatural involvement.
Thats not always the case though.I would argue that the case is actually:
Both “teams” use arguments and valid points for their position addresing why agree or disagree with the other group. Same thing here when someone ask a question.Does your argument apply to here then as well?
Since science is blind to test the supernatural either way, then I still especially cringe when any science topic gets apologized. With regards to the topic I described, no evidence increases or decreases the likelihood that God created or did not create the first life on Earth.
But apologetics can be used for other christians not just atheists. And not science related but much rather historical or theological
I guess it depends on the exact use of apologetics. It seems what you’re asking is does BioLogos have any plans to create a series of courses or classes to train Christians to combat YEC. It seems like the response is that’s the wrong paradigm. It’s not that different from their knowledge and goal, but is coming at it from the wrong mindset.
The goal seems to be to do as it’s doing and provides resources for Christians to study through to draw their own conclusions but opens up the dialogue over Christians being able to see genesis in light of being open to accepting science , and specifically evolution.
BioLogos is doing a good job as providing resources for Christians to pursue a deeper and wider understanding of genesis and how it ties into accepting science as opposed to YEC.
BioLogos is publishing a curriculum for use with students that will help equip people to discuss lots of topics where Christians have differing perspectives. At some point, hopefully, we might re-format some of the units for use with adult small groups.
The Evolutionary Creation unit was just released.
Evolutionary Creationism is not a religion. Creationism shouldn’t be either… though that it what they make it when they make opposition to evolution a required part of their religion. The only religious defense here should be for Christianity. There is no claim around here that creationists are not Christian. I certainly make no such claim. The defense of science is an entirely different matter that doesn’t overlap at all. Science and Christianity stand on two entirely different sets of legs.
I often compare science with chess or football, having its own method and rules having nothing to do with the Bible. It is just a human activity. No need to worship it with any allegiance or loyalty. Science wouldn’t know what to do with such things if you did. Turning science into a religion is a huge distortion and does a disservice to science itself.
Like all good analogies, it’s imperfect. But I do like this.