“I’m still waiting for a discussion of this evidence that we’re hiding from.”
Notice the “we won’t be bullied to hide evidence”. It still sounds like that’s what you’re doing, Mervin, as only “certain evidence” counts for you and your fellow “evolutionary creationists”. Other evidence, including books, articles, etc. somehow seem banned from your consideration and discussion.
BioLogos is hiding from or conveniently avoiding the Evolution Institute, the subfield of “evolutionary religious studies”, and ideological evolutionism. The 3rd one is hidden because it would inevitably throw shade on “theistic evolutionism” and no surprise, BioLogos doesn’t want to do that. You understand that, right Mervin? BioLogos is hiding from ERS because it is focused elsewhere, likewise with the Evolution Institute. The question is: should it finally close this major gap in their offering?
Isn’t it more than a bit ironic that BioLogos won’t even outline their official position about ERS or evolutionism (just two sentences!), given that the audience they’re trying to attract to ECism is highly worried about evolutionism, and especially with the claim that “religion evolved naturally into existence without any Creator God”. ERS & evolutionism exemplify the problem those evangelical Protestants are fighting against, yet BioLogos remains almost totally SILENT about ERS, evolutionism, as if the care and concern of YECists about “naturalistic explanations for religion” were unbiblical? It just makes no sense.
Up thread, your fellow moderator, misframed the conversation, pitting ideology against science, instead of ideology against ideology or science against science. It’s a chronic error among “evolutionary creationists”, Mervin, but if you are one, it might be harder for you to notice. And you wouldn’t want to correct yourself if you agree with that misframing either, would you?
“There is no real scientific debate over creationism vs. evolution”
Yet there’s a lot of “debate” in collaborative science, philosophy, theology about evolutionary theories and Divine Creation. Unfortunately, not much of it happens at BioLogos because they frame it as ideology (creationism) vs. science (evolution). It shouldn’t then be a surprise if with that “vs.” one gets a wrong answer, should it Mervin?