Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ideology is reliably replicable 07/11/2025
- My books on the cheap! 05/11/2025
- There are only two truths 03/11/2025
- Researching the rise of Pentecostalism in the UK 31/10/2025
- A time for everything 26/10/2025
Recent Comments
- Jon Garvey on Surreality and Messianism
- Levi on Surreality and Messianism
- Jon Garvey on A time for everything
- Jon Garvey on Hitting the Books
- Peter Hickman on Hitting the Books
Post Archive
Monthly Archives: January 2013
The teleology that dare not speak its name
I’m a bit remiss on posting at the moment – partly that’s because of music commitments, and partly, maybe, because I’ve lost the stimulus of BioLogos, which seems to have blocked all my comments since the start of the new year and which hasn’t responded to my querying e-mail. But there you go. There’s a textbook example in the popular press today of how things in biology make perfect sense without evolution, but it gets dragged in gratuitously anyway. I heard it on BBC news, and it’s in all the British dailies, though the original short article was published in Biology Letters as an MSc project. Its public appeal seems … Continue reading
Posted in Creation, Medicine, Science
2 Comments
Prof Stephen Clark at Cambridge Conference
Overall I think this was my favourite presentation at the Tyndale Fellowship Philosophy conference on design in nature last year. Quirky and original, it contains some fundamental ideas about the interraction of faith and science, and particularly the intellectual flimsiness of materialism. The video has also been posted at Uncommon Descent, but I know not all of you frequent that site. There’s a nice view of the back of my head around 1:04:40, just before Steve Meyer’s comment.
Genesis 1 as ancient cosmology
Thanks to Father Christmas I now have John H Walton’s academic treatment of Genesis in the context of ANE literature, which I find, as others have already said, to provide a much more solid case for a functional view of the Genesis creation story than his more approachable Lost World of Genesis One. But like the latter book, it should not be misunderstood as making the case for a non-literal interpretation of Genesis, but for a literal, though non-materialistic, account of creation.