AiG criticizes BioLogos because Biologos welcomes Atheists and that Biologos has a lot of Christians who don’t accept AiG’s pseudoscience on evolution and human origins.
I wonder how they are going to deal with us!
From AiG’s perspective most of us here at PS are heathens, heretics, and blasphemers.
I tend to think of Ken Ham as a carnival barker, peddling his amusement parks.
Some nice press for @Joel_Duff in that article!!
“ However, his understanding does not keep him from misrepresenting creations’ beliefs. Consider this sentence from an article written in 2016, which Dr. Jeanson has extensively refuted:
“By acknowledging that speciation happens by God-ordained natural mechanisms, young earth creationists are, unwittingly, one step closer to recognizing that the mechanisms of evolution can be an amazingly powerful force for creation.”10
Duff has managed to misrepresent both creationists and evolutionists in one sentence. It does not necessarily follow from accepting today’s demonstrated natural selection, mutations, and genetic drift that molecules-to-man evolution happened in the past. Nor are the mechanisms of natural selection, mutations, and genetic drift enough for evolution to occur.”
Um where does Joel argue that it does? Are they redefining evolution as “molecules to man” so they can say their model isn’t evolution?
On his own platform, he featured Biologos prominently back in 2018 and in the same piece called Answers in Genesis founder and CEO Ken Ham a deliberate, manipulative liar who is profiteering from the Answers in Genesis ministries.
Sounds like the worst kind of atheist
Quite the hit piece!
Clearly you are a confused fool who has compromised the true faith by accepting atheistic science!
Not surprised, as this is AiG’s stance:
Ultimately, the controversy about the age of the earth is a controversy about the authority of Scripture. If millions of years really happened, then the Bible is false and cannot speak with authority on any issue, even the Gospel.
It’s all or nothing with them.
That’s where they get the science all wrong. Science is can’t determine whether or if God exists or doesn’t exist. The problem with AiG is the manipulation of scientific results and the honest hard working scientists. Here what I said about Jeanson at Biologos December 1, 2015 that got Ham and Jeanson fuming.
Jeanson may appear to be quite articulate, he is still dishonest in saying he is doing real scientific investigation. He reads the same genetic papers that I read. Granted he is more knowledgeable in genetics than I am as he has recent degrees in the subject and has published papers in the field. However, he takes the results of researchers who painstakingly worked years squeezing out new scientific knowledge from new genetic sequencing technology and dishonestly manipulates the data to correspond to Ham’s view of what the Bible says. That is not ethical scientific research and it is not science. He gets paid to do this dishonesty. He purposefully manipulates other scientists research results to fit his (an Ham’s) views. It is dishonest and borders on fraud. And can be harmful to society and individuals if anyone takes him seriously.
Thanks for posting that, @Patrick . I always wondered about the details of that legendary episode.
The Slippery Slope Argument fallacy.
Biologos is not about humility and gracious dialogue. In fact who in real life uses these terms.
They are there to promote a conclusion and attack creationists or rather biblical creationists and they don’t obey free speech concepts established by our nations long ago. they censor what they will or whim.
its not a welcoming place for biblical creationists. however thats nomal BUT they claim to be evangelical Christians!! Naughty, naughty.
As the article points out, thanks for the publicity, they smear YEC people.
i think its because they are envious/jealous of Ken Ham being such a winner in reaching large audiences of all ages and really famous and important.
So by attacking the top dog they gain something like the old gunslingers. they don’t.
If they had ability they would also reach audiences. They don’t.
biologos has NO INFLUENCE on evangelical christianity views on origins.
I always welcome any origin publicity but biologos must do a smarter job and have integrity and love.
Have they persuaded any Evangelicals or made a credible alternative? NO! They could also stop the inane censorship. Good grief already.
Agreed! I suspect they have similar opinions of all of us - professing Christ-follower or not!
Robert, there is a difference between what you find persuasive and what many other Christians find persuasive. It sounds like your argument is based entirely on your unsupported opinion. BioLogos and PS have both had a significant impact on many individuals interested in maintaining the authority of the Bible and discovery of God’s creation.
They did a pretty good job with this – you would do well to let it influence you:
While a lot of folks don’t know about BioLogos specifically, Francis Collins has made a pretty big impact on Evangelicals’ views on origins, from what I can tell.
Some of the finest Christians ever are here at PS. I say that sincerely.
I think PS has gone further along this path than Biologos. Biologos did try but they tried to hard to control the narrative. Here at PS, the narrative wasn’t tightly controlled. It gets rough and tumble at times (sometimes purposefully by me ), but eventually due to the strong determination of @swamidass, PS has become the place for serious dialogue on the front line of the science/religion cultural debate. Unlike Biologos, PS has had debates on the real tough issues, abortion, SSM, and racism. The latest scientific discoveries are discussed in detail with experts and by experts. I find PS extraordinary in the full range of viewpoints. The spectrum of viewpoints is much wider than any such website. I congratulate @swamidass for achieving what he set out to build. PS is a beacon of reason in the culturally polarized times we live in.
Patrick, when you say something (that clearly isn’t a joke), you can absolutely be trusted to be completely sincere! Thanks for the kind words, although I cannot help but think the description must be for others of similar faith
Despite the threads full of juvenile bickering (of which I am too often a participant!), this is what has truly separated PS from BioLogos in my mind. There are many examples of threads full of thought-provoking questions and comments and there are often experts here already, or invited here, to discuss these issues. PS has been extremely useful both for my scientific and theological understanding.
I agree and pray that it continues to be so.