theistic evolution

Here’s the trailer for the new book, Theistic Evolution, with a foreword by sociologist Steve Fuller, who studies ID professionally. The Problem with Theistic Evolution from Crossway on Vimeo. Here’s the outline of chapters. Amazon is currently offering a 28% discount (November 30). Note: News posting will be light till this evening due to other deadlines. See also: Do claims about “front-loading” design make theistic evolution viable? An engineer offers some thoughts. and Physicist Lee Spetner weighs in on the Adam and Eve controversy Adam and Eve have never been so hot since the days everyone went to church. At least not to judge from the current Bottleneck War in genetics. Keep your scorecard handy.

From blogger at Wintery Knight: Is belief in a creator/designer compatible with belief in Darwinian evolution? One of the ways that theistic evolutionists try to affirm design is by insisting that the design is “front-loaded”. The design for all the information and body plans is somehow embedded in matter. … I attended a Wheaton College philosophy conference where Dr. Michael Murray read a paper advocating for this front-loaded view of design. I raised my hand to ask him a question, “hey, philosophy guy, did God front-load the information in that paper you’re reading, or did you write it yourself?” But the philosophy moderators must have known that I was an engineer, and would talk sense into him, because they never Read More ›

We didn’t predict this one and it’s not the story you think. Recently, geneticist Richard Buggs defended the possibility in principle that a human population bottleneck could consist of one fertile couple. At the Zone (founded by former UD commenters among others), Vincent Torley writes: Geneticist Richard Buggs, Reader in Evolutionary Genomics at Queen Mary University of London, has just written an intriguing article in Nature: Ecology and Evolution (28 October 2017), titled, Adam and Eve: a tested hypothesis? Comments on a recent book chapter. It appears that Buggs is unpersuaded that science has ruled out Adam and Eve. He thinks it’s still theoretically possible that the human race once passed through a short, sharp population bottleneck of just two Read More ›

Against theistic evolutionists who insist that a single human pair is not biologically possible. Recently, British plant geneticist Richard Buggs posted a letter he had sent in May to BioLogos’ Dennis Venema, taking issue with the claim that a population of 10,000 is required, as stated in Dennis Venema and Scot McKnight, Adam and the Genome. Buggs never got an answer and he has since posted further thoughts at Nature: Ecology and Evolution (community): Does genomic evidence make it scientifically impossible that the human lineage could have ever passed through a population bottleneck of just two individuals? This is a question I am asked semi-frequently by religious friends. With my current understanding of the genetic evidence, I can’t state categorically Read More ›

Foreword by sociologist Steve Fuller: Interesting in light of the recent “Adam and Eve and Mustn’t Believe” fracas at BioLogos: Here’s the outline: Theistic Evolution: A Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Critique Edited by J. P. Moreland, Stephen C. Meyer, Christopher Shaw, Ann K. Gauger, Wayne Grudem Expected: Nov 30, 2017 Retail Price: $60.00 About Theistic Evolution The debate about biological origins continues to be hotly contested within the Christian church. Prominent organizations such as Biologos (USA) and Faraday Institute (UK) insist that Christians must yield to an unassailable scientific consensus in favor of contemporary evolutionary theory and modify traditional biblical ideas about the creation of life accordingly. They promote a view known as “theistic evolution” or “evolutionary creation.” They argue Read More ›

From David Klinghoffer at Evolution News & Views: BioLogos is the theistic evolutionist advocacy group founded by Francis Collins. For years they have been gravely advising their fellow Christians that science rules out belief in a historical first pair of human beings. That evolutionary view, posing a seemingly heavy theological challenge to traditional Christian faith, has taken a couple of hits in recent days. … It’s painful when friendships fall apart in front of your eyes. Here, though, I won’t tell you I feel terrible about it. It’s not that I have a stake in the fight per se. I’m not a Christian, nor, obviously, a theistic evolutionist. Discovery Institute takes no position on how, or whether, you should read Read More ›

Adam and Eve have certainly been in the news a lot lately. Recently, Joshua Swamidass distanced himself from Christian evolution group BioLogos over their insistence that Adam and Eve could not possibly have existed. Meanwhile, British plant geneticist Richard Buggs posted a letter he had sent in May to BioLogos’ Dennis Venema, taking issue with the claim that a population of 10,000 is required, as stated in Dennis Venema and Scot McKnight, Adam and the Genome: I was a bit surprised that you categorically state in your book that the past human effective population size has definitely never dropped below 10,000 individuals and say that this is a fact of comparable scientific certainty to heliocentrism. Most people working in the Read More ›

A friend who watches these things notes that genomic medicine prof (and ID foe) Joshua Swamidass hasn’t been active at BioLogos recently and doesn’t seem to be on their speakers’ list. The flies on the wall whisper that it relates to his willingness to entertain the idea of separate creation of Adam and Eve. Recently, he took issue with BioLogos head Deb Haarsma’s comments Haarsma:At BioLogos, our views on human origins are centered on essential biblical teachings about human identity and origins. We join all Christians in affirming that humans are made in the image of God, that humans have an elevated place in the created order, and that humans have a unique relationship with God. To this extent we Read More ›

Here, 7:00 pm EST Toronto Michael Shermer and Alister McGrath: Is God a Figment of Our Imagination? Our dialogue brings together two leading thinkers who have thoughtfully wrestled with this question, each not only having embarked on a personal pilgrimage, but each bringing a lifetime of erudition, experience, and insights to bear on this theme. Alister McGrath, the athiest who would become a theist, and Michael Shermer, the theist who would become an atheist. And both have written on issues around origin and evolution of life. See also: Dialogue: Rupert Sheldrake vs. Michael Shermer and Oxford profs respond to and refute new atheist claims

Here: In this wide-ranging conversation, they discuss how the doctrine of creation makes sense of human dignity, racial equality, true peace and justice, purpose and meaning in life, and more. They also consider recent debates over the historicity of Adam and Eve. See also: Michael Chaberek: Darwinian theory is past its best-before date

Laszlo Bencze writes to say, Michael Chaberek. I’m currently reading Catholicism and Evolution, by Michael Chaberek. It would be easy to assume that the book deals in esoteric matters of interest to Catholics only. However, I’m finding that it offers one of the best summaries of the history of evolution that I have ever read. It’s scope strikes me as broad and it’s tone is scholarly but in a highly readable style. It is also extremely ID friendly and proposes ID as far superior to theistic evolution as a way of understanding biology. Here’s an excerpt, from a section explaining what ID is up to: A proposition for the improvement of an outdated theory. The proponents of intelligent design are Read More ›

From Robert Larmer at Sophia: Contemporary Thomists, by and large, have been very critical of the intelligent design movement. Their criticism raises two important issues; the first being whether such criticism is well-founded, the second being whether it is consistent with the views of St. Thomas, from whom they claim to take their direction. I shall argue that their criticism typically misses the mark and that they are mistaken in their representation of Thomas’s views as regards intelligent design. (paywall) More. Readers unfamiliar with philosopher and theologian Aquinas (1225–1274) should read his views on the mind at First Things and ask whether he sounds in any way like a typical Christian evolutionist anxious to accommodate naturalism at any cost. Nothing Read More ›

Crossway is publishing a mammoth (over 600-page) anthology critiquing theistic evolution , with a wide range of contributors from science to theology. From the publisher: The debate about biological origins continues to be hotly contested within the Christian church. Prominent organizations such as Biologos (USA) and Faraday Institute (UK) insist that Christians must yield to an unassailable scientific consensus in favor of contemporary evolutionary theory and modify traditional biblical ideas about the creation of life accordingly. They promote a view known as “theistic evolution” or “evolutionary creation.” They argue that God used—albeit in an undetectable way—evolutionary mechanisms to produce all forms of life. This book contests this proposal. Featuring two dozen highly credentialed scientists, philosophers, and theologians from Europe and Read More ›

BioLogo = mostly Christian for Darwinism. From Wayne Rossiter, at Shadow of Oz: She derives all of this is a most specious and disingenuous way. The poll contains data dating back to 1981. But, Haarsma cherry picks convenient dates spanning small periods of time in order to make her case (specifically confining the span of interest to just three years: 2014-present). If we simply look at the entire pattern from 1981 to the present we see a very different reality: In 1981, the number of people ascribing to the YEC view was 44%. Today it is 38%. In 1981, the number of people ascribing to the “theistic evolution” view was 38%. It’s exactly 38% today. No change over the last Read More ›

From Robert H. Nelson at the Conversation: The question of whether a god exists is heating up in the 21st century. According to a Pew survey, the percent of Americans having no religious affiliation reached 23 percent in 2014. Among such “nones,” 33 percent said that they do not believe in God – an 11 percent increase since only 2007. Such trends have ironically been taking place even as, I would argue, the probability for the existence of a supernatural god have been rising. He offers five reasons God probably exists, but that’s not new. This is: As I say in my book, I should emphasize that I am not questioning the reality of natural biological evolution. What is interesting Read More ›