Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

The BioLogos Project: A program of unwarranted assumptions and irrational claims.

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

As everyone knows, the BioLogos Community is on a passionate mission to Darwinize the Christian world. Oddly, though, the zeal that drives that mission is not the product of a disinterested search for the truth. Unlike ID proponents, who begin with rational principles and follow the evidence where it leads, BioLogos members begin with a faith commitment and lead the evidence in that direction.

Rather than sit at the feet of nature and learn her secrets, they try to remake her in the image of their faith commitment. For them, there is one apriori truth that must never be denied: God used the random mechanism of Darwinian evolution to produce His intended outcome of homo-sapiens. This absurd proposition, which defines the entire BioLogos project, is a direct assault on reason itself. Only a designed or purposeful process can produce a specified outcome; a random process can produce only indeterminate outcomes (surprises).

A practical example should make the point clear:

[a] Designed process: I load the dice such that the number 7 will appear with every roll.. In other words, when I throw the dice, I can guarantee the outcome because it is the only one that is possible—all others have been closed off. If I had not closed them off, I could not guarantee the result.

[b] Random process: I use fair dice, in which case there are eleven possible outcomes. This is an open ended process that will allow any number from 2 to 12, including 7, to appear. On any given roll of the dice, I cannot guarantee that I will get 7 because I did not close off all of the other possibilities.

It is, therefore, logically impossible for any Creator, human or divine, to guarantee an outcome using a non-interventional, random process. In effect, Theistic Evolutionists violate the law of non-contradiction by trying to have it both ways: When they speak of God’s providence, they claim that evolution is purposeful, but when they speak of the process itself, evolution is random.

The broader point is that they have a firm and non-negotiable starting point. An omnipotent God, we are told, would never design nature by progressive stages since He could easily program nature to “create itself.” Thus, ID’s scientific evidence, which allows for a tweak or two, is inadmissible because it makes God busier than He needs to be.

This is nonsense because any world view is equally vulnerable to these kinds of speculations. One could just as easily argue that evolution is false because an all-powerful God doesn’t need to wait billions of years to achieve His goal. Note, also, that God spoke to the BioLogos Community about this matter many years ago: “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Declare, if you have understanding.”—Job 38:4

Still, it is the unfailing faith in Darwin’s random mechanism that drives the BioLogos project. Occasionally, someone in the that camp will begin to sense the absurdity of it all and search for ways to bridge the gap between chance and purpose, following the lead of “divine action” theologians.

Yes, they say, the evolutionary process is random, but perhaps God provides the needed direction by tweaking it behind the scenes through trillions upon trillions of quantum events. Remarkable! They rejected ID’s hypothesis because it allows for a small number of tweaks, and now they have God tweaking every nanosecond. Already, they have forgotten about their impertinent command to God: Thou shalt use secondary causality and nothing else.

They have also forgotten something even more important. If God must tweak or steer a “random” process to keep it on course, then God, not the process, is calling the shots; the process has merely come along for the ride and plays no role in the outcome. But according to Neo-Darwinism, it is the natural mechanism, acting alone, that determines the outcome. That is why BioLogos members refer to the “science” of evolution and rhapsodize over the “beauty” and “creative wonders” of natural selection.

Clearly, the BioLogos project is a program of unjustified assumptions and irrational claims. Whether their mixed messages are intentional or not, the facts remain: They use the language of design, teleology and purpose, but they argue for chance, randomness and chaos. I encourage everyone, Christians and non-Christians alike, to reject this unprecedented assault on reason and common sense.

 

Comments
SB, great to see you in action. KFkairosfocus
December 6, 2017
December
12
Dec
6
06
2017
09:57 AM
9
09
57
AM
PDT
MatSpirit @10
Matthew 7:3
Titus 3:10 Reject a factious man after a first and second warning, knowing that such a man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned. Roman’s 16:17 Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them. Galations 6:1 Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted. 2 Thessaloinns 3: 15 Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.StephenB
December 6, 2017
December
12
Dec
6
06
2017
08:18 AM
8
08
18
AM
PDT
MatSpirit Habakkuk 2:4 The game is throwing out random Bible verses that have nothing to do with this post or the comment string, right?Barry Arrington
December 6, 2017
December
12
Dec
6
06
2017
05:50 AM
5
05
50
AM
PDT
So God used natural selection to create biological complexity? The closest we could get to that would be to say that God used differential survival rates. Does anyone believe that natural selection is differential survival rates? Did Huxley say "Differential survival rates! How stupid of me not to have thought of it."? No. Darwin's golden insight -- such as it was -- was not that differential survival rates exist but that they can double for the creative act of selection. In a case where God intervenes, the survival rate may be natural but the selection would be supernatural. The whole point of Darwin's crucial premise is that natural selection eliminates the need for teleology. That is an inference from atheism.hnorman5
December 6, 2017
December
12
Dec
6
06
2017
12:59 AM
12
12
59
AM
PDT
aap, ID proponents believe that an act of intelligence can be detected in nature. TE's at Biologos do not believe so. I've argued with them about it. They are terrified of the idea. I think there may be more distance between old-earth IDers and TEs than your estimate would suggest. cheersUpright BiPed
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
10:23 PM
10
10
23
PM
PDT
I would suggest that many of the IDers who hold to the old earth position aren’t that far behind TEs.
Excuse me...Upright BiPed
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
08:24 PM
8
08
24
PM
PDT
"Unlike ID proponents, who begin with rational principles and follow the evidence where it leads, BioLogos members begin with a faith commitment and lead the evidence in that direction." Matthew 7:3MatSpirit
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
07:50 PM
7
07
50
PM
PDT
Thanks Stephen you have hit the nail on the head with respect to BioLogos community and all theistic evolutionists. Their thinking process is based on the worship of scientific materialism with all of is false assumptions and therefore fallacious conclusions. Tragically as it is written “Although they claimed to be wise, they have become fools”. It is mind boggling that they cannot recognize why it is irrational to believe that any process cannot be both random and directed simultaneously. TEs for the sake of pride and acceptance into the club of the self-ordained intellectual elite, have divested themselves of rational thinking, and when confronted with both the logical and theological absurdity of their position usually run and hide. However, I would suggest that many of the IDers who hold to the old earth position aren’t that far behind TEs. While the old earth IDers aren’t willing to sell 100% of the store to the materialistic evolutionists, many are willing to give them 99.9%, believing that random evolution will account for most of the assumed three billion year evolutionary process. There is no scientific evidence, known mechanism or theory that can explain even the most basic aspect of the transformation of a one celled organism into a functioning reproducible two celled organism, not to mention a 50-100 trillion celled human. All observable and experimental scientific data declares unequivocally that every kind of creature can only reproduce after its own kind, with variations based on the genetic information already present and epigenetic changes resulting from the interaction with the environment. The irreducible complexity of every aspect of life of every kind of creature requires GOD’S direct control through His infinite knowledge. Humanity cannot create a single product that has the ability to reproduce itself and neither can any chance processes. I believe many in the ID community have been deceived by the false assumptions and therefore fallacious conclusions used in the dating game played by those who hold to scientific materialism. It is time for IDers to reconsider the assumptions and conclusions of the whole dating scheme. Of course, then you will be called creationists, but Christians have and are being called much worse.aap
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
07:49 PM
7
07
49
PM
PDT
StephenB@5 I ask this question over and over. Most answer 1. No one answers 2.buffalo
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
06:13 PM
6
06
13
PM
PDT
God: Heads I win. Tails you lose.Mung
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
05:58 PM
5
05
58
PM
PDT
UB, Greetings. I appreciate hearing from you.StephenB
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
05:49 PM
5
05
49
PM
PDT
buffalo @2, Those are, indeed, good questions. Alas, it appears that our friends at BioLogos are not willing to address them.StephenB
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
05:47 PM
5
05
47
PM
PDT
mike @1, Among other things, I was hoping to stimulate a theistic evolutionist to enter into a substantive discussion. That they are terrified at the prospect of being scrutinized suggests to me that their confidence does not match their enthusiasm.StephenB
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
05:35 PM
5
05
35
PM
PDT
Thanks SB.Upright BiPed
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
05:17 PM
5
05
17
PM
PDT
My favorite two questions: 1. Did God know what Adam would look like? 2. Did Adam look as God had planned?buffalo
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
04:52 PM
4
04
52
PM
PDT
I'm afraid someone else beat you to the punch in describing what Biologos is about and did it more succinctly "having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof" Biologos is content to even rewrite the Bible if it gets them to a non supernatural God. Why? Because its more palatable to a materialistic world. A "God" that is limited to acting by random natural means is a weak enough to not ruffle feathers. The problem is - he is also weak enough to no longer be considered "God" but a bystander. Same source agrees with you though "From such turn way"mikeenders
December 5, 2017
December
12
Dec
5
05
2017
04:19 PM
4
04
19
PM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply