I guess my reading of Francis Collins’ book “The Language of God” made me aware of BioLogos. I guess this is a tentative foray for me into the world of social media for a topic of interest to me - the interaction between Science and the Christian faith. I do not have a Facebook account, nor Twitter or TikTok or Instagram or anything else. Unless I find a good reason to participate in those platforms, I will not sign up (recognizing that many people use those platforms for good purposes). I generally prefer one-on-one discussions with trusted friends.
I have learned that it is possible to have deep discussions with new people, who have a desire to be intellectually honest, and treat others with respect. Kudos to the moderators of the BioLogos Forum for your part in keeping it that way. But it takes honesty and humility from all participants. I really appreciate the BioLogos Podcasts, hosted by @jstump and Colin Hoogerwerf. I thought the series “Uniquely Unique” was really excellent work.
I’m not sure I can put my finger on a specific humorous thing on the website, but several people add some humour to their postings, which I appreciate. I can read academic papers (and I do), but I like humour too. Humour is frowned upon in academic writing . (Although I know great scientists that slip humour into their writing, but maybe only the giants have that freedom).
Just went back to read your account again. I must say you lack any trace of condescending bully about you now. But I do get a sense that your gift for sarcasm must be on par with my own and @Mervin_Bitikofer’s. Of course I imagine that must be standard issue with the national culture of wit of the UK. While there I came across this by @Jay313 :
Philosophically, there is no requirement that God’s involvement “will and must be recognizable.” Simply put, for his own reasons God may have intentionally designed a system in which his involvement is ambiguous. Now, if you insist that God’s involvement must be evident, then the unbeliever would ask why God didn’t make that fact even more evident, such that it could not be missed. In short, clear proofs of God in nature would be destructive of faith, not beneficial. It requires no faith to believe in gravity. The evidence is “finely tuned” by God so that there is enough light for those who only wish to see, and enough darkness for those of the opposite disposition. (Pascal again. Sorry.)
I appreciate the light being kept on low as it leaves more for the imagination. I’ll give you there is something more and I think that it is wrestling with that which develops character. If you’re brought up with God as the name of the something more you’ll tic the box and carry on. But even without a convenient box to tic, the recognition of what is more is beneficial even without a ready backstory to render it as a fully articulated concept held in common by a community.
From my direction, the movement is from easy dismissal toward the faint recognition and to a gradually more articulated sense of what is more. For Christians I suspect the movement is from a well articulated, received image of what is more to an ever clearer recognition that the cultural image is more to help you relate than to imagine you have its full measure. The ideal is somewhere on that continuum.
I remember reading about the the website and forum when I read Dr. Collins book way back when, and looked at it but lost interest for a while, probably because life was busy and hectic for me. I then returned to the forum in January 2015 and after hanging around awhile, was asked to be a moderator. I see I have visited 2.7K days, and viewed 192K posts. Which is both impressive and sad.
What have I learned? Hopefully to be a little more patient and give a little more grace but am still a work in progress. I think what I have learned more recently is that I don’t have to have the last word and am fine with someone having the last poke as it does not threaten my security.
The most humorous thing? I love the humor thread, so thank you for that, Randy. it is usually where I first click when visiting the site. Especially if there are flags to deal with. But, also amusing is to see the different personalities on the site, not only to see how much we differ, but how much we are alike.
Hey at least you have the excuse that you have a job to do. I showed up in May of 2018, have visited 1.7 K days while viewing 3.3 K posts and I have neither a job nor the right tribal affiliation. If this is sad for you it is pathetic for me, or would be if I didn’t enjoy it and get something out of it.
I was debating evolution with people on all the forums I was on and was just getting beaten down left and right because I just didn’t have the knowledge. Somewhere along the way I found out about theistic evolution on Wikipedia and as a way to square all the beatdowns I was getting I kind of started to think that maybe I was on that track. I didn’t fully complete the switch until I heard Francis Collins on NPR one day and I remember saying to myself, “I believe in evolution,” and then a peace just came over me. I felt like God was saying, “It’s okay. Who cares? I don’t!” From then on, I became a Francis Collins fan and eventually a Biologos fan when I found it!
Google search initially, but the scientific outreach within the Christian community is what made me stay.
I have discovered that there is more nuance within the theistic view of evolution than I had expected. Evolutionary creationism and theistic evolution discussions aren’t as common as they once were, but I am glad that there is a healthy and varied discussion of how science and theology intersects.
“Every person who confuses causation and correlation ends up dying.” Quote from the humo(u)r thread.
I had been doing some research on the compatability of evolution and the Bible, when I came across an article from here. I read through it and agreed with quite a lot of it, I enjoyed it, so I kept it in my head. Few days later, I remembered it again and went back to it. I was kinda disappointed with the limiting questions they had in there, feeling like there weren’t enough (like no questions to certain topics I was looking for. In fact, I wonder if they have a feature where you can ask them questions, like GotQuestions?), until I saw “forums” and realized that they had a community based discussion page. Well, that was much better as now I could find questions much easier and ask them too.
For me, I found Biologos when I was struggling several years ago with the strict idea of the Fall, that all suffering came from it. I felt it was not just; and wondered if it could be differently interpreted. Just searching on the internet, I came up with some videos by Pete Enns (made by Biologos, when he directed it; this was soon after he left). Some of them led to more reading on Biologos. I wound up understanding more after reading Enns’ book “Evolution of Adam”–both the Jewish and Christian interpretations. It certainly gave me a more nuanced view. However, there are many in the Reformed tradition on the website (and it’s run by Deborah Haarsma, who is also Reformed), and I appreciate the discussion and nuance. I have more respect for the position, too, after reading on Biologos and its discussion board.
I also found the confidence with which Christians could accept science and evolution without picking and choosing, very heartening. I remember telling my wife of my excitement when I found the Biologos website!
The most important things I learned:
I think it may have been @beaglelady that directed me to Denis Lamoureux @DOL 's free Coursera online, “Science and Faith 101,” a subject that he also teaches on a university campus in Canada. Denis Lamoureux, Instructor | Coursera
The concept of the divine accommodation without concordism freed a lot of headaches up for me.
I enjoyed many of the questions on faith and racial reconciliation
The Internet can be difficult to communicate on. Without seeing each other’s faces, we can offend each other accidentally. Altruism is much more difficult. However, the word “sorry” still works on the Internet–a great encouragement!
I think that the cartoons from Calvin and Hobbes and The Far Side have given me the greatest chuckles lately.
One I like a lot is
Well…For quite a while, I have been a staunch YEC’ist. ICR, CMI, etc. Not long ago I came across Stephen C. Meyer and the Center for Science and Culture and Hugh Ross and Reasons to Believe. I’ve been reading their books and listening to their podcast, learning day/age, ID and evolutionary creationist’s views and ideas. I learned about BioLogos through RTB and have been following you on Twitter. I really like the union of Christian faith and science (though I have even noticed a few atheist posting) on the forum. I’m still having a hard time accepting much of the evolutionary views I’ve read (may never), but I’m really enjoying listening to the Language of God podcast and the articles on the website and so much of it makes sense. I’ve really learned a lot.
They don’t bite (the ones I know of anyway…). In fact you’re probably more likely to get bitten by some of us Christians around here! It just goes to show that truth remains truth and falsehood remains falsehood regardless of who the messenger is. We really like having a variety of perspectives around here as long as people don’t mind it when their contributions get poked, prodded, and even tackled. Steel sharpens steel, and learning and growth happens all around.
Sounds like you’re on an adventerous learning journey of your own. I’m glad you’ve found some things of value here.
Absolutely. I apologize if that sounded malicious. That is one thing I like about the forum…the wide variety of viewpoints. I’ve been a believer long enough to know that we Christians can “bite” as bad as anyone.
It’s also worth observing that science and engineering types can “bite” the hardest of the lot. This is because we spend all our working lives dealing with exact subjects based on factual data that is tightly constrained by logic and rules. Very often in situations where getting it wrong could put us out of a job. Or where we have had to deal with the consequences of other people getting it wrong. That sort of experience makes you kind of hypersensitive to bad arguments, falsehood and sloppy thinking.
And just to be clear, I didn’t have science and engineering types in mind when I wrote that. But you are correct that it can feel like an attack when one is on the recieving end of firm correction. But this is only due to an insufficiency of humility on the part of the one needing correction, and not because those concerned with truth are necessarily the “biting” types just for insisting on truth.
. (Although I know great scientists that slip humour into their writing, but maybe only the giants have that freedom).
