Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
2 Timothy 2:15
"BioLogos is the theistic evolutionist advocacy group founded by Francis Collins. For years they have been gravely advising their fellow Christians that science rules out belief in a historical first pair of human beings. That evolutionary view, posing a seemingly heavy theological challenge to traditional Christian faith, has taken a couple of hits in recent days.
....a young star at BioLogos, biologist Dennis Venema, came out with a book on the Adam-and-Eve question,....Buggs read Venema’s treatment of the subject in Adam and the Genome: Reading
Scripture after Genetic Science, and wrote him an email taking him to task for failing to understand some of the vital relevant science. Venema, who teaches at Trinity Western University, near Vancouver, did not reply,.....Meanwhile, BioLogos was in the middle of a parting of the ways with another young star in the theistic evolutionary firmament. Joshua Swamidass is a computational biologist at Washington University. He was on the BioLogos speakers list, then disappeared from it. He was a constant presence on the BioLogos message boards, then disappeared from there too. What happened? .... it had something to do with Dennis Venema and Adam and Eve.
Swamidass reviewed Adam and the Genome in a symposium at the website Sapientia. While recounting some of his own journey up from a youthful “trust” in intelligent design, “creation science,” and “anti-evolutionism” (these are all different things, but let it pass), Swamidass focuses on Venema’s contention that a fairly recent first pair of ancestors, a “genealogical Adam,” is ruled out by genetics.
Venema adopts a patronizing tone as he acknowledges, “I can certainly understand that these ideas may have appeal for some seeking to reconcile science and particular interpretations of the Genesis narratives.” Then the daggers come out. He attributes to Swamidass the “horrific” idea that “there are a few hundred thousand years of human history where everyone else is not made in God’s image.”
Do we really want a theology that names them all as subhuman animals until their lineage happens to encounter and interbreed with Adam’s (Eurasian) offspring? God forbid. Likely this was not Swamidass’s intent, of course, but it seems to me that models like these lead to this decidedly
unsavory conclusion.
Fast forward to last month. BioLogos president Deborah Haarsma chides prominent pastor and writer Tim Keller, an ally, for a video in which she says Keller defined as orthodox Christian belief the idea of a historical first pair, the “first humans and sole progenitors,” created “de novo,” meaning from no ancestral stock, even though “his scientist friends have explained to him the scientific consensus that the human race did not originate from only two individuals.”
Here’s where it gets really awkward. Swamidass says not only is the possibility of a historical first couple of this kind not ruled out, but this fact is known to BioLogos: “This unequivocal scientific fact is an open secret among many BioLogos biologists, including many of those on the Board.” This is a remarkable statement. They know the truth, he says, but deliberately broadcast a different message.
No, I’m not saying that BioLogos is on the verge of a crackup. But......."
David Klinghoffer EN&V
2 Timothy 2:15
"BioLogos is the theistic evolutionist advocacy group founded by Francis Collins. For years they have been gravely advising their fellow Christians that science rules out belief in a historical first pair of human beings. That evolutionary view, posing a seemingly heavy theological challenge to traditional Christian faith, has taken a couple of hits in recent days.
....a young star at BioLogos, biologist Dennis Venema, came out with a book on the Adam-and-Eve question,....Buggs read Venema’s treatment of the subject in Adam and the Genome: Reading
Swamidass reviewed Adam and the Genome in a symposium at the website Sapientia. While recounting some of his own journey up from a youthful “trust” in intelligent design, “creation science,” and “anti-evolutionism” (these are all different things, but let it pass), Swamidass focuses on Venema’s contention that a fairly recent first pair of ancestors, a “genealogical Adam,” is ruled out by genetics.
Venema omits important scientific information that materially affects the theological response. Compounding these omissions, the introduction articulates the “assumption” that Venema’s science is correct (p. xii). Consequently, it appears that McKnight believes genetics rules out Paul’s genealogical Adam, even though this is not the case. This scientific error seems to unduly shape his interpretive goals.Those are, needless to say, fighting words when directed at a close colleague. Venema responded a couple of weeks later.
Moreover, it is hard to endorse an after-science approach to Scripture; reading before or with science would be more grounded. The authors do talk of “dialogue” between science and theology, but the conversation in this book is one-sided. Missing key caveats, Adam and the Genome implies that evolution itself requires a dramatic “rethink” of Adam. Biblical exegesis appears subservient to an accurate but poorly delimited scientific account.
Venema adopts a patronizing tone as he acknowledges, “I can certainly understand that these ideas may have appeal for some seeking to reconcile science and particular interpretations of the Genesis narratives.” Then the daggers come out. He attributes to Swamidass the “horrific” idea that “there are a few hundred thousand years of human history where everyone else is not made in God’s image.”
Do we really want a theology that names them all as subhuman animals until their lineage happens to encounter and interbreed with Adam’s (Eurasian) offspring? God forbid. Likely this was not Swamidass’s intent, of course, but it seems to me that models like these lead to this decidedly
Fast forward to last month. BioLogos president Deborah Haarsma chides prominent pastor and writer Tim Keller, an ally, for a video in which she says Keller defined as orthodox Christian belief the idea of a historical first pair, the “first humans and sole progenitors,” created “de novo,” meaning from no ancestral stock, even though “his scientist friends have explained to him the scientific consensus that the human race did not originate from only two individuals.”
Here’s where it gets really awkward. Swamidass says not only is the possibility of a historical first couple of this kind not ruled out, but this fact is known to BioLogos: “This unequivocal scientific fact is an open secret among many BioLogos biologists, including many of those on the Board.” This is a remarkable statement. They know the truth, he says, but deliberately broadcast a different message.
No, I’m not saying that BioLogos is on the verge of a crackup. But......."
David Klinghoffer EN&V
