@pevaquark,
I’m a little surprised that you allowed the discussion to go sideways the way you did here.
Of all the Creationists or Old Earth Creationists I’ve “tangled” with, @Marty is one of the nice ones.
You certainly know that I’m not known for coddling Creationists, or even necessarily treating them with too much TLC… so for me to defend any particular Creationist … I think that makes for a pretty strong endorsement for a Creationist’s sincerity and/or good intentions.
So… what is this you are doing here? You object to the phrase “Atheist Evolution”? And yet you and I have read it over and over again from all sorts of Creationists types. And it is isn’t exactly an incoherent phrase. So why are you treating the phrase like its an oxymoron or something?
In discussions with Creationists, I quite frequently have to insist that they understand that i’m discussing God-Guided Evolution, or sometimes God-Governed Evolution… and I even have a neat acronym: E.G.G., which inverts the syntax a little: “Evolution, God-Guided”!
The Mission Statement of BioLogos goes out of its way to distinguish between notions of Evolution that involve God, and notions of Evolution that exclude God.
So why would you say this bizarre sentence: “It is a nonsensical term and I wish that you’d stop using it.”
Really? You think it is a term that is nonsense? YIKES.
Let’s look at Statement #9 in the BioLogos page “What we Believe”:
.
.
.
“… we reject ideologies that claim that evolution is a purposeless process or that evolution replaces God.”
@Pevaquark, perhaps you were temporarily confused the day you had this discussion with @Marty
If you are a moderator for BioLogos, and you must somehow keep things straight between what BioLogos endorses and what it REJECTS, wouldn’t a phrase like “Atheist[-ic] Evolution” actually be virtually essential for you to know when someone was stepping into an ideological footprint that BioLogos rejects?
By insisting that @Marty should discontinue the use of the phrase, isn’t that going to create endless confusion and disputes over what is being discussed?
Of all the people I thought would have gotten along with @Marty (other than me) I would have expected you to have been an even better fit.
Do you care to explain what transpired in this part of the discussion? I’m absolutely bewildered by your stance, and would want to know if most of the other BioLogos moderators share your position!