The central reason I left is that they asked me to leave, because they disagreed with the science I presented on universal genealogical ancestry, and insisted (even after clarification) I was “naming others as sub-humans.” They were deeply offended by this article: http://henrycenter.tiu.edu/2017/06/a-genealogical-adam-and-eve-in-evolution/, and raised this specifically as the reason they were angry with me, and one of the key reasons they wanted me to leave.
I would have probably tolerated quite a bit, justifying it by telling myself (and others) that “they do tolerate me and my position,” but after being kicked out, that no longer applied.
Then, I decided to make this public when they insisted on arguing that the de novo creation of Adam was anti-science: In Defense of Tim Keller. They still have not retracted their claim, even though it has been soundly dismissed. I do not think there are even any scientists in BioLogos that think that is correct any more, yet they have held on to this for over a year now. I was glad when Deborah Haarsma finally made a comment that they are considering changing their position: A Flawed Mirror: A Response to the Book “Theistic Evolution” - #9 by Swamidass - Faith & Science Conversation - The BioLogos Forum, however, my comment in response (it seems) got me banned from the BioLogos forums.
At the moment, they are more intent on promoting a particular theological and hermeneutical approach, that is totally opposed to something like a Genealogical Adam. Science, right now, is subservient to that agenda, so it seems.
Thankfully, Jeff Schloss, Jeff Hardin, Ted Davis, and Darrel Falk got involved, and helped them come to terms with the science I was presenting, and stop calling it “racist.” However, they were very clear they wanted nothing to do with me after this. Notice that they have not acknowledged any of their errors, or genealogical science, or me this last year.
That is their choice, even as I’ve offered them olive branches over and over again (and will continue to do so). I’d love to get on the same page with them. It seems, however, that they are not interested. They would rather I just went away.
Ultimately, they do not have to like me, or what we are doing. They can choose to continue opposing traditional theology. However, it crosses a line when they use their scientific errors against others. That I am not okay with, and I am one of the few people with credibility to defend people from that sort of behavior. So, that unfortunately leaves me in a situation where I feel obligated to say things that they very much dislike (e.g. defending Buggs, and Keller).
At the moment, I just hope that they could stop using science against positions that are not in conflict with science, and let go of their anti-traditional theology agenda. For me to return to BioLogos, I’d have to be invited back as more than a person they intend to silence and ignore.