This would be helpful for you to address too, Mark, as you’re the “non-theist” in the room. It would seem that you see “evenhandedness” at BioLogos, whereas others see otherwise, is that correct? I wonder if you also see Walton straying “out of his lane” into philosophy? Walton’s text referred to by Craig shows that Craig is correct about this.
In this case, Walton vs. Lennox wrt the philosophy involved isn’t unreasonable, as I see it. It could be a very interesting conversation at BioLogos! Walton’s dependence on de Vries’ mangled & confusing ideological (he’s was a philosopher ethicist & admin at Wheaton at the time) notion of MNism is a big problem with his position. I agree with @cewoldt about that, even while disagreeing with him about YECism. Can John Walton’s “philosophy” be called out, explored and openly questioned at BioLogos, or not?
Should I be painted as a “horrible actor” for that, Mark, just because anti-ideological MNism disagrees with a BioLogos moderator (or two)? I’d rather speak freely, without the incessant naysaying and painting. That’s how it “feels” sometimes posting at BioLogos, for those of us who aren’t “theistic evolutionists” or “evolutionary creationists”. Thought you should know about this in case you didn’t, even though you’re not one either. 