BioLogos Attempts To Use Secular Ecumenism For Science

A special interest organization known as “BioLogos” was founded by Dr. Francis Collins, a physician and geneticist who was nominated by President Obama  to be the director of the National Institutes of Health at the Department of Health and Human Services.

This summer they are conducting a workshop which is not free, states the following…

“A unique opportunity to explore questions at the intersection of science & faith. In this inaugural BioLogos workshop, held on the beautiful campus of Gordon College on Boston’s historic North Shore, participants will explore the compatibility of evolution and Christianity. Thee three-day program will be led by the senior staff of the BioLogos Foundation — Peter Enns, Darrel Falk and Karl Giberson.”

Ecumenism has been used threw the centuries to unite all religions under one. The Second Vatican Council (1961-1965) is today’s major player in the movement. Secular ecumenism is also part of it, it’s objective is to unite the Scriptures with evolution! Both are opposed to the strict fundamentals of the Bible…

The NCSE another branch of secular ecumenism…

“In public discussions of evolution and creationism, we are sometimes told by creationists and opponents of religion alike that we must choose between belief in creation and acceptance of the theory of evolution, between religion and science. Is this a fair demand? Is the choice that stark? Can one believe in God and accept evolution? Can one both accept what science teaches and engage in religious belief and practice?”

What they two groups fail to realize, evolutionary theories do not go by basic science concepts which state, “systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.” For example, claims of what supposedly happened millions of years ago cannot be observed nor experimented with. Thus, it’s not a scientific method but faith-based on speculation. It’s a fact that evolutionary theories have been falsified thus revised many times over…

Another example would be a fossilized eleven-foot-long snake which was discovered, the animal preyed on titanosaur eggs for food. Titanosaurs are massive!  However, the fossils were dated according to the rocks they are in, which were dated by the fossils they contained.  Observations show the fossils to be below the lava layer in a feeder or sheeted dike, known as Deccan Traps.

This indicates the fossils were in a period of massive volcanism, along with continent-covering water (Noah’s flood) rather than in a slow and gradual process! The millions of years belief in itself doesn’t make practical sense using the scientific method because India supposedly detached from Africa about 148 million years ago and moved across to Eurasia which supposedly took 100 million years to accomplish.

One would expect to find evidence for such a massively long trip, but no fossils of organisms were discovered that indicated the land of India was isolated for any substantial time! Rather, discoveries were made that showed the fossils were common among other continents as well!

The biblical account is verifiable and makes more sense without the storytelling that goes on with evolution which doesn’t go by strict scientific observation…No BioLogos and NCSE, the Bible and Evolution are not compatible!

10 thoughts on “BioLogos Attempts To Use Secular Ecumenism For Science

  1. “The biblical account is verifiable (*) and makes more sense without the storytelling that goes on with evolution”

    Q: How was Noah able to fit two each of EVERY animal onto the Ark, especially considering all the different species of beetles alone?

    A: You see, not only was the Ark super-duper big (in very large units of cubits), but Noah took only juveniles that didn’t take up as much space. Also, he only took two of each “kind” of animal, such as the dog kind, horse kind, etc., so there weren’t that many animals to deal with.

    Q: What happened to the dinosaurs?

    A: They fell overboard.

    Q: So, in the few thousand years after the Flood, these surviving animal “kinds” super-ultra-quickly-evolved and bred massive litters in order to get the population sizes and diversity of today?

    A: Uh, no. They didn’t “evolve” really. Due to the Adam and Eve’s sin, the world and all the creatures in it began to degenerate. What you see today as variety within the animal kinds is really just the various degenerated versions of the original animal couple from the Ark. The two animals of each kind had all the genetic variety within them. Due to degeneration, the offspring lost parts of their parents’ genetic code (which was written by God Almighty) and thus we get the so-called different species within each animal kind.

    Q: How were animals with specialized diets (such as the koala) able to survive after or even during the trip on the Ark?

    A: Just like how T-rex was able to eat coconuts before the Fall, koalas and such were able to eat a non-restrictive variety of foods. It’s due to degeneration that they lost this ability.

    Q: How did kangaroos and koalas make it all the way to Australia after the Ark landed on the mountain top?

    A: Mats of floating vegetation helped them across the water. Plus, they might have had help from Noah’s descendants as well.

    Q: Why are there records of Chinese and Egyptian civilizations going about their daily lives as if nothing was amiss during and after the time of the Global Flood?

    A: Big mistake in dating, that’s how. Why do these “scientists” still use ONLY C-14 carbon dating is beyond me. No, don’t try to correct me, I’m still talking. Also, the Egyptians were probably the descendants of Ham who were ticked off on being cursed, so they made sure to not mention Noah and his heroism.

    Q: Where did all the Flood water go?

    A: Some evaporated back into the atmosphere, but mostly what happened was God Almighty used his Almighty power to raise parts of the land (to make mountains) and push down other parts of the land (to make ocean basins). You see, if you flatten out the current land, you get a water level more than a mile high. Yes, the pre-Flood world was much flatter, and God came in to make it all bumpy and craggy.

    Q: Why do we not see human fossils buried with dinosaur fossils?

    A: Dinosaurs are heavier and sink in water while humans bloat up and float around, so of course the dinosaurs will sink down far below where human bones are found after the waters calmed down.

    Q: Why do we see insect fossils in the same layers as dinosaurs, then?

    A: The Flood was catastrophic, so of course there will be a lot of mixing.

    Q: But you just said-

    A: Next question, please.

    Q; Why are you contradicting yourself?

    A: I have no idea what you’re accusing me of and your ad hominem attacks are rude and offensive. This Q&A is over.

    (*) Were you there?

  2. Poe’s law kicks in again! Monimonika’s parody is so close to actual creationist Lying for Jesus(tm) fables that it’s hard to tell the difference.


    In other old news, here is a fourth request for Michael*—

    Eelco has again called your bluff about readership of your blog. (Feb. 18 comment to your Feb. 5 post)

    You also owe me your qualifications to discuss any kind of science. (Mar. 5 comment to your Feb. 27 post)

    You can run, but you can’t hide.

    *—Third request was on March 10.

  3. Thank you., Michael for new additions to the list of your stock phrases that substitute for actual thought in your posts.

    Michael: “A special interest organization known as ‘BioLogos’….”

    Why is this blog by a noted biologist a “special interest” anything? Your criteria seem to be only that Collins opposes your views, and special-interest is a dirty word. How about, A special interest organization, “New Discoveries & Comments About Creationism,” was founded by the True Bible Believers Church to explore questions at the intersection of falsehood & delusion.

    This stock phrase will be added to the list as the following template: “A special-interest group is trying to cram xxx down our throats.” (xxx = secular ecumenism, cold dark matter, hot chicken soup, etc.)

    This stock phrase fits well with stock phrase #3: “This group is funded with millions/billions of our hard-earned/tax dollars for research into xxx.” (xxx = cosmic background radiation, evolution of hangnails, hot chicken soup, etc.)

  4. Monimonika: ” ‘The biblical account is verifiable (*) and makes more sense without the storytelling that goes on with evolution’ ”

    (*) Were you there?”

    Monomonika, Michael was not there, and therefore cannot be proven to be a human being.. He himself can trace his ancestry only to his great-grandparents. These ancestors’ memories of previous generations are hazy and unreliable. We cannot perform any present-day experiment or observation to determine that Michael actually had human ancestors, or that the fifteenth generation on his maternal side were not three-toed sloths. (Note his small, beady eyes, pointy nose, and a tendency to see the world upside down.)

    Michael may make up all the fairy tales he likes, but science, by Michael’s definition, cannot verify his human origins.

    There is hope, however. If he would but convert to the evolutionary faith, scientists could trace him back to mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosome Adam. How about it, Michael?

  5. Olorin,

    Of course it’s hard to tell the difference. I paraphrased the vast majority of my comment on actual creationist answers given to these questions. Only a teensy-weensy part (maybe) is due to my creative (*) license.

    (*) No pun intended.

  6. Michael would love the soi-disant survey I received in the mail today. Sample question:

    “3. Should the federal government continue to spend hundreds of billions of dollars of your hard-earned tax dollars to bail out self-dealing Wall Street companies, fqiling banks, and th4e union controlled automobile industry? Yes (_) No (_) Undecided (_).”

    So now we know where Michael plagiarized his stock phrase #3.

    I suggested another question, to wit: “Would you approve a plan to sell poor children and grind them up to feed the wealthy? Yes (_) No (_) Undecided (_)”

    But then I found that Johnathan Swift had beaten me to this idea by almost three centuries.

  7. The general theory of evolution is not only incompatible with the teaching of the Holy Bible, it is also incompatible with scientific evidence.

    Neither point prevents proponents of Naturalistic philosophy demanding their speculative opinions, ideas and flights of fancy be described as factual.

    Such a humble, rational, intellectually honest bunch you see.

  8. Dom: “The general theory of evolution is not only incompatible with the teaching of the Holy Bible, it is also incompatible with scientific evidence.”

    Again Brother Dominic weighs in with the usual unsupported claims.[1] Dom, please list the specific scientific evidence that evolution[2] is incompatible with. Remember that gaps in knowledge are not incompatibilities.


    [1] Recall that Dom is the one who grossly misrepresented Karl Popper’s statements on evolution. If we can’t even trust him to get the facts straight, why should we accept his opinions? (See Michael’s post dated Feb. 21, 2010; Dom comment on Feb. 21, error exposed in Olorin comment Feb. 22.)

    [2] Taking evolution broadly as common descent from one or a few ancestors (Darwin’;s words). Since Dom is a literalist, he denies common ancestry. Thus we may charge him with this broad definition.

  9. DOM: “The general theory of evolution is not only incompatible with the teaching of the Holy Bible, it is also incompatible with scientific evidence.”

    Yet, somehow the tale of the World-Wide Flood is completely compatible with physical evidence because Almighty God of the Bible is magically able to do anything, including twisting the laws of physics, thus explaining away any incongruence to physical reality as mere “miracles”.

    Refer to how God is responsible for rapidly shaping Earth’s crust by pushing it up to form mountains and stamping down to create ocean basins right after the Flood. That’s a lot of magic used there in order to correct for today’s water levels.

    If God did all that major meddling with the Earth’s crust, how come small things like the Grand Canyon and such are considered features left by the Flood itself?

    Why the missing human fossils despite there being fossils a plenty for dinosaurs, marine life, etc.? God must have specifically targeted human (and mammal) carcasses for extra special destruction. Because they pissed Him off the most for some reason.

    Let’s just cut to the chase. Absolutely anything written in(to) the Bible (whether it be the original meaning, mistranslation, bad editting, outright fraud, divinely inspired addition/subtraction, drug-induced addition/subtraction, in-joke, whatever) can be shown to be within the realm of possibility as long as God is there to invoke magic wherever an impossibility/pardox/contradiction/just-plain-silliness occurs. God fills in all the plot holes of the fictional story that is creationism, and people like Dom and Michael try to shove the book into the shelves of the non-fiction section.

  10. One of Michael’s recurring themes is “Consensus In Science Does Oppose New Discoveries” (post dated
    March 10, 2010).

    Several examples to the contrary were set forth in comments there. Here’s another instance where mainstream scientists encourage skeptics to a consensus..

    Today, Larry Moran, one of the staunchest and most vocal opponents of creationism, begins a multi-part series by a biologist who opposes the 70-year-old New Synthesis as disconnected from the evidence.[1] The title refers to a previous comment by Alan Orr concerning “a curious disconnect between the verbal theory that sits at the heart of neo-Darwinism and the mathematical content of most evolutionary genetics”.[2]

    The author proposes series of articles over then next half year, comprising 15 topics The topics include “Then, in The Big Questions, we’ll consider the scope and explanatory power of evolutionary theories (and be humbled by the results),” and “In Scientific Creationism, we’ll poke fun at the recurring phenomenon of scientific origin theories that push all the interesting stuff so far back in time that the theory has no useful implications.”

    Bon appetit, Michael.


    [1] Arlin Stolzfus, “Introduction to The Curious Disconnect,” at the Sandwalk blog on March 19. The author is He is a Research Biologist at NIST, and a Fellow of the Center for Advanced Research in Biotechnology

    [2] Michael’s complete ignorance of evolution limits him to nattering about small problems at the edges of evolutionary theory. The really significant problems entirely escape his notice. For example, the fact that population genetics employs tow different, mutually incompatible, models—phenotypic and genotypic.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s