From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 3/13/2025 8:23 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   > On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 11:43:35 -0500, RonO    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 3/12/2025 8:25 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   >>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 13:06:43 -0500, RonO    
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 3/11/2025 12:21 PM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   >>>>> On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 09:21:24 -0500, RonO    
   >>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 3/11/2025 5:06 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 17:20:56 -0500, RonO    
   >>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> [...]   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> They are still not abiding by   
   >>>>>>>> Saint Augustine's admonishment about not using the Bible to make   
   claims   
   >>>>>>>> about what we can determine for ourselves about nature, so my guess is   
   >>>>>>>> that their efforts can still fail to represent nature accurately   
   >>>>>>>> depending on how consistent with the Bible that they want to be.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> They are NOT in any way contradicting Saint Augustine's admonishment,   
   >>>>>>> they are following it perfectly.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> If you think differently then like MarkE, you haven't properly grasped   
   >>>>>>> the meaning of what St Augustine meant.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> They are trying to force biological evolution into conforming with their   
   >>>>>> Biblical interpretation.  As such what are they missing about biological   
   >>>>>> evolution?  Some of them are denying that natural mechanisms were   
   >>>>>> involved in some of that evolution.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Please give an example of that.   
   >>> ?   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You SNIPed it out.   
   >   
   >>>   
   >>> There is nothing in what I snipped that shows anyone denying that   
   >>> natural mechanisms were involved in evolution. On the contrary, as   
   >>> quoted by you from their website, they define one of their core values   
   >>> as affirming the established findings of modern science. Are you   
   >>> calling them liars?   
   >>   
   >> That obviously is not true.  Did you actually read what you snipped out?   
   >>   What were their other core values?   
   >   
   >   
   > Here is exactly what you posted from their site earlier::   
   >   
   > ====================================   
   >   
   > QUOTE:   
   > Evolutionary Creation (EC) is a Christian position on origins. It   
   > takes   
   > the Bible seriously as the inspired and authoritative word of God, and   
   > it takes science seriously as a way of understanding the world God has   
   > made. EC includes two basic ideas. First, that God created all things,   
   > including human beings in his own image. Second, that evolution is the   
   > best scientific explanation we currently have for the diversity and   
   > similarities of all life on Earth.   
   > END QUOTE:   
   >   
   > QUOTE:   
   > The Identity of BioLogos   
   > Core Values   
   > Christ-centered Faith - We embrace the historical Christian faith,   
   > upholding the authority and inspiration of the Bible.   
   >   
   > Rigorous Science - We affirm the established findings of modern   
   > science,   
   > celebrating the wonders of God's creation.   
   >   
   > Gracious Dialogue - We strive for humble and thoughtful dialogue with   
   > those who hold other views, speaking the truth in love.   
   > END QUOTE:   
   >   
   > ===============================================   
   >   
   > Where in that are they are denying that natural mechanisms were   
   > involved in some of that evolution?   
      
   They are like Behe and claiming that their god is needed to do a   
   specific thing that they claim the Bible tells them so.   
      
   What do you not get?  The reasoning is no different from Behe claiming   
   that some god is needed to create the flagellum.   
      
      
   >   
   >> They obviously have other feelings   
   >> about what are not "established findings of modern science."   
   >   
   > So what does it matter what they think about things outside of   
   > science, how is that contradicting science?   
      
   They are claiming that their understanding of science can be made to   
   conform to their literal interpretations of the Bible.  It is the same   
   claim that the ID perps make except they agree that biological evolution   
   is a fact of nature.  Some of them still think like Behe.   
      
   >   
   >> Not only   
   >> that, but as I indicated there are somethings about evolution that have   
   >> not been established because they claim to be tweekers like Behe, and   
   >> their god has been tweeking things in order to make humans into his own   
   >> image.   
   >   
   > I'm still waiting for an example of those tweekers. And why do you   
   > keep bringing Behe into it? He has nothing to do with Biologos or they   
   > with him. They actually have a lengthy article about his "Darwin's   
   > Black Box" book where they go through his arguments one by one and   
   > show how they don't stand up.   
      
   How do you expect god to have made man in his own image without   
   tweeking?  They likely even differ in what they think image means.   
      
      
   >   
   > https://biologos.org/common-questions/how-can-evolution-accoun   
   -for-the-complexity-of-life-on-earth-today   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>> The example was in their description of what they   
   >>>> believed.  They believe that the Bible is the "inspired and   
   >>>> authroitative word of God" and "First, that God created all things,   
   >>>> including human beings in his own image.".  You have to read their web   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)