Search
-
Recent Posts
- Before knowing your enemy recognise his enmity 19/03/2026
- Christendom has its advantages 14/03/2026
- The many-faceted Israel (2) 08/03/2026
- The many-faceted Israel (1) 06/03/2026
- Christian Replacement Zionism (or something) 03/03/2026
Recent Comments
Post Archive
Category Archives: Creation
Evolutions and their Creations
This is an expansion of a theme I brought up in a discussion on BioLogos. Ever since evolutionary theory became an intellectually preferred way to view the Universe (long before Darwin and any persuasive scientific evidence – we have to go back at least to Buffon and the Enlightenment philosophy of the eighteenth century) it has been tempting to some to recast theology in the light of evolution. This is still, sadly, routinely done in theistic evolution, as the conflicts that occasionally surface at the ASA, CiS or BioLogos show to those with eyes to see.
Posted in Creation, Science, Theology
4 Comments
Divine action hiding in plain sight?
Leaving the question of a possible metaphysical makeover for science, fielded in my last post, hanging for now, I’ll follow gravity in returning to the matter of divine action. In any case this was the spin George Brooks put on my article in his flagging of the post at BioLogos, and it has also been discussed recently in another thread there.
Posted in Creation, Science, Theology
7 Comments
Why Evolutionary Creationists Need to Be Specific, or, Why George Brooks is Wrong
On BioLogos today, a frequent and apparently well-meaning poster, George Brooks, wrote the following: God COULD arrange an entire Cosmos at the very moment of creation. Or God COULD nudge and prod during the entire course of the Cosmos. It could work either way. And the difference in one scenario or another is based on premises that might be embraced or rejected by an entire denomination …. or by individuals within a denomination. Trying to compel BioLogos to BE SPECIFIC is a diversion … and not productive … when faced with Christian real estate that varies completely depending upon time and place…. and doesn’t really matter to the BioLogos mission. … Continue reading
Posted in Creation, Edward Robinson, Science, Theology
20 Comments
The danger of dualism in theistic evolution
I’m continuing the theme here, from the last two posts, that origin of life questions may require not just new knowledge, but a new scientific paradigm – perhaps one that integrally includes God. This is counterintuitive to many Christians most involved in science, and who are comfortable with methodological naturalism as the only alternative to a crude supernaturalism. But I’ll try to justify it from a remark made to me by Joshua Swamidass on BioLogos.
Posted in Creation, Philosophy, Science, Theology
17 Comments
Lamarck’s Zoological Philosophy
The epigenetic revolution has reintroduced the idea of the inheritance of acquired characteristics into evolution, to the extent that some of Darwin’s devotees are trying to spin the story that Darwin believed in it all along, and that orthodox science never denied it. Which is tosh, of course – acquired heredity was the epitome of heresy throughout my lifetime, at least. As I wrote in a zoology essay in 1968, referencing Jean-Baptiste Lamarck: There is no evidence that body cell characteristics can be transferred to reproductive cells. Well, that ought to have settled the matter! But with Lamarck beginning to be mentioned in polite company again without the customary sneer, … Continue reading
Posted in Creation, Science
4 Comments
Kenosis or pleroma?
A few days ago I wrote about the claim that Scripture is “underdetermined” even about a central Christian doctrine like providence, a doctrine on which depends not only the nature of Creation, God’s government of human history and his promises for the future, but even the fundamental practical matter of prayer. I criticised the tendency of even highly-trained academics to cherry-pick Scripture references (and the erroneous “even-handed” suggestion that for every text for a particular position, there are others against). As the old Reformers used to insist, what matters is the whole counsel of God in Scripture.
Posted in Creation, Theology
3 Comments
Consensus science, fringe theology
BioLogos was ostensibly, as far as I can see, constituted to deal with one main problem. And that is, the problem that Evangelicals, especially in America, did not accept evolutionary theory. This was perceived to lead to two main problems. Firstly, in apologetics, Evangelical Christianity was in danger of being intellectually sidelined, unnecessarily alienating the educated community by denying the evidence of science. Secondly, pastorally, Christians brought up in Creationist churches were liable to be stumbled on encountering the strength of the evidence for evolution when they studied science, thus leading unnecessarily to abandonment of their Evangelical faith.
Posted in Creation, Science, Theology
9 Comments
Some further thoughts on black pepper
I just want to expand briefly on some strands in the updated peppered moth story that I didn’t follow through in the last post.
Posted in Creation, Politics and sociology, Science
Leave a comment
Laws, damned laws, and statistics
One key part of the argument John Wesley brings for there being particular providence (see previous post), as against only general providence, is that the latter necessarily consists of the sum of the former: You say, “You allow a general providence, but deny a particular one.” And what is a general, of whatever kind it be, that includes no particulars? Is not every general necessarily made up of its several particulars?
Posted in Creation, Science, Theology
2 Comments
The root of Wesleyan views on providence
The Sermons of John Wesley – Sermon 67 On Divine Providence [extracts] “Even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.” Luke 12:7.
Posted in Creation, Theology
3 Comments