<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0"
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
  xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
  xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">

  <channel>
        <title>Custom Feed &#45; The BioLogos Forum</title>
    <link>http://biologos.org/resources/find/any/Miracles,BioLogos/Video/sort&#45;by&#45;Newest?utm_source=RSS_Feed&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication</link>
    <description>This is a custom feed of BioLogos resources. Make a new feed at http://biologos.org/resources/find</description>
    <dc:language>en</dc:language>
    <dc:rights>Copyright 2013</dc:rights>
    <dc:date>2013-05-24T10:28:15-08:00</dc:date>    
    
    

            
            
        
      <item>
        <title>Growing in Faith</title>
        <link>http://biologos.org/blog/growing&#45;in&#45;faith?utm_source=RSS_Feed&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication</link>
        <guid>http://biologos.org/blog/growing&#45;in&#45;faith?utm_source=RSS_Feed&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication</guid>
        <description>As he endeavored to learn more, David was intrigued by Francis Collins book The Language of God because Francis did not present evolution as a rival theory to Christian faith, but as something that described God&apos;s method of creation.</description>
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[<br> </br>
<p>Growing up, David believed that Young Earth Creationism was <em>the</em> Christian position on origins and how God created.  As he endeavored to learn more, he was intrigued by Francis Collins book <em>The Language of God</em> because Francis did not present evolution as a rival theory to Christian faith, but as something that described God's method of creation. David studied biblical interpretation and found John Walton's scholarship to be tremendously helpful in understanding the original purpose and intent of the Genesis narrative.</p>

<p>Reflecting on his personal journey, David thinks that it is important that we don't oversimplify questions related to science and faith, but that we explore them deeply in order to understand science in a robust, Christian way. </p>]]></content:encoded>
        <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 12 05:00:28 -0700</pubDate>
        <dc:creator>David Buller</dc:creator>
        <!--<dc:date>Oct 12, 2012 05:00</dc:date>-->
      </item>
            <item>
        <title>Using Film to Catalyze Conversations on Faith and Science</title>
        <link>http://biologos.org/blog/using&#45;film&#45;to&#45;catalyze&#45;conversations&#45;on&#45;faith&#45;and&#45;science?utm_source=RSS_Feed&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication</link>
        <guid>http://biologos.org/blog/using&#45;film&#45;to&#45;catalyze&#45;conversations&#45;on&#45;faith&#45;and&#45;science?utm_source=RSS_Feed&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication</guid>
        <description>What are the best ways to spark productive conversations about science and faith? Certainly there are books, articles, blogs (like this one), and podcasts. But there are particular advantages to using film.</description>
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Like many other Christians who are scientists, I hope for healthy and robust conversations about science and Christian faith. How can we inform and stimulate such conversations on campuses among students, faculty and staff, or at our churches? These are essentially cross-cultural interactions, and often do not come easily. Yet there is much to be gained by crossing the barriers erected at the science-faith interface. </p>

<p>What are the best ways to spark productive conversations about science and faith? Certainly there are books, articles, blogs (like this one), and podcasts. Or we can host major events with a prominent speaker or panel. These are all good things, to be sure. But there are particular advantages to using film. Unlike books, articles, blogs, or podcasts, videos engage with both sight and sound. A single DVD is much less expensive than a dozen copies of a book for a group to read through together. A film is portable, flexible, quick, and easy to use. Participants don't need to prepare between sessions, nor do they require internet access. And you don't need to find a big-name speaker or organize a large-scale event.</p>

<h3>Test of Faith</h3><br>

<p class="caption-center"><iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/vO1wcYKe99Q" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></p><br>

<p>Unlike years ago, there are now high-quality and stimulating science-faith documentaries that are well-suited for engaging groups and stimulating conversations. The Faraday Institute for Science and Religion, based in Cambridge, UK, has put together an award-winning documentary, <em><strong>Test of Faith: Does Science Threaten Belief in God?</strong></em> This 2009 film is divided into three distinct 30-minute sessions, which can be further divided if desired. A wide range of topics are considered, including the age and origin of the universe, the possibility of other universes, evolution, care for the environment, the brain, free will, and bioethics. The trailer can be seen above. This film is a good choice if you are not looking to focus primarily on issues around biological evolution. It is also particularly well-suited for groups that include both skeptics and Christians, as one could imagine it being shown on a public television station such as PBS or BBC. Faraday now has quite a range of supporting materials around the film, including bonus footage, a rich website, a leader’s guide, a study guide for participants, and a book with autobiographical contributions from scientist-believers, <em>Test of Faith: Spiritual Journeys with Scientists</em>. Contributors to the film and book include Francis Collins, Alister McGrath, Ard Louis, Jennifer Wiseman, Bill Newsome, John Polkinghorne, Alasdair Coles, Rosalind Picard, and John Bryant.</p>

<h3>From the Dust</h3><br>

<p class="caption-center"><iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/23533521?title=0&amp;byline=0&amp;portrait=0" width="570" height="321" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe></p>

<p>Just this year, BioLogos partnered with Highway Media to produce a new documentary, <strong><em>From the Dust: Conversations in Creation</em></strong>. This film is just over an hour long, and is divided into four sections of similar length: “Faith and Science,” “Divinely Inspired,” “The Conversation,” and “Truly Human.” Some early clips from the film (prior to the final round of editing) and additional footage can be found in the <a href="http://biologos.org/resources/multimedia" (target="_blank") >multimedia resources</a> section of the BioLogos website, and the trailer is above. <em>From the Dust</em> has a firm focus on Genesis, creation, and evolution, probably the area of the most significant tension in our society today related to science and faith. Unlike <em>Test of Faith</em>, there is no narrative voice in From the Dust, and contrasting views are held in tension. It also focuses on theology more than science, so <em>From the Dust</em> may be a better choice than <em>Test of Faith</em> for some groups of Christians. While the <em>Test of Faith</em> film has a very modern and logical structure to it, <em>From the Dust</em> has more of a personal and emotional feel, and you feel that the people in the film are talking <em>with</em> you more than just talking <em>to</em> you. You see the cost that divisive positions on creation and evolution can have on Christians, even in the college classroom. While the film has a strong leaning towards evolutionary creationism and features N. T. Wright, John Walton, John Polkinghorne, Alister McGrath, Peter Enns, Jeff Schloss and Rick Colling, there are also significant contrasting voices from Answers in Genesis and Canopy Ministries. In my opinion, <em>From the Dust</em> is a good choice for many churches, small group Bible studies, or Christian student groups (e.g., InterVarsity, Navigators) to use. There are fewer supporting materials around <em>From the Dust</em>, due both to its new release and also its more inductive approach than that of the Faraday project. In addition to bonus footage, there is a <a href="http://fromthedustmovie.org/">website</a>, a list of sample discussion questions, and a <a href="http://biologos.org/uploads/static-content/From-the-Dust-Study-Guide.pdf" >group study guide</a> that I developed.</p>

<h3>Next Steps</h3>

<p>As you decide which film to use for starting conversations and how to use it, there are several things to consider. Will you show the whole film at once, or will you spread it out over several sessions? Will you provide additional structure or just have an open discussion after each viewing? How many days do you have available? How much time at each session? What are the worldviews of your audience? What is their level of biblical, theological, and scientific knowledge? How big is the group, and what is their age? What is their willingness to do homework and their level of interest in the topic? Is this a new group specifically convened to explore science and faith issues together, or is this a preexisting group that has been doing other things together and has varying levels of commitment to this new topic? What sort of expertise does the leader of the group have, or are there multiple leaders? All of these can affect the group dynamic and may influence the choices you make.</p>

<p>The groups I have worked with have been Christian students from secular colleges, Christian faculty and staff from secular colleges, a small group Bible study, and a general audience. I have found that <em>Test of Faith</em> worked well over three weeks with my Bible study group and with the faculty and staff group, though in these exclusively Christian groups I needed to add a bit of scripture, song or prayer in those settings (as is also recommended in the Faraday materials). The film was particularly good for a 30-minute screening at the general audience event, which also featured a panel for Q&A afterwards. It could likely be used in a college classroom, too, even at a secular institution. I had been considering strategies for using <em>Test of Faith</em> at my church as well, until I found <em>From the Dust</em>.</p>

<p>As I began thinking about ways to use <em>From the Dust</em> while it was still in the final editing stages, I screened it in two parts to three of the four audiences mentioned above (not the general audience). I asked several dozen undergraduates from local InterVarsity groups to give me their responses to the film and to tell me what questions it makes them want to explore more. I did the same with the Christian faculty and staff, and with my home Bible study group. Then I assembled a six-week curriculum (plus an opening session on setting expectations and sharing my vision), primarily aimed at Christian undergraduates. My students this summer loved it so much that we followed it with three-weeks on <em>Test of Faith</em>! Now I keep getting asked when I’ll do it next. But I am hoping that others, even my own students, will want to lead discussion groups like this. You don’t have to be an expert to start a conversation, and sometimes being a leader is the best way to learn.</p><br> </br>]]></content:encoded>
        <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 12 06:31:09 -0700</pubDate>
        <dc:creator>David Vosburg</dc:creator>
        <!--<dc:date>Sep 13, 2012 06:31</dc:date>-->
      </item>
            <item>
        <title>Series: Divine Action in the World</title>
        <link>http://biologos.org/blog/series/divine&#45;action&#45;in&#45;the&#45;world?utm_source=RSS_Feed&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication</link>
        <guid>http://biologos.org/blog/series/divine&#45;action&#45;in&#45;the&#45;world?utm_source=RSS_Feed&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication</guid>
        <description>In this talk, Professor Plantinga addresses the fact that many contemporary thinkers—including many theologians—believe that God cannot perform miracles, providentially guide history, or interact in the lives of people, as these activities would be contrary to science.   Plantinga, on the other hand, makes the case that this popular view is mistaken; excluding divine action in the world is not a central feature of natural science itself, but a philosophical or theological preference that has been added on to science (and can just as readily be removed).   Plantinga concludes that it is completely logical to accept the miracles of the Bible and support contemporary science.</description>
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My talk is entitled “Divine Action in the World.”  I want to talk about a certain kind of objection to Christian belief that some people raise. They claim that central thoughts, central doctrines of Christianity, are contrary to science, and therefore, are suspicious or incredible or such that one can’t sensibly hold them—can’t be rational in accepting them.</p>

<p>There are several different kinds of arguments that people bring along these lines; I want to talk about just one. So first… the Heidelberg catechism, one of the forms of unity of the church I go to (the Christian Reformed Church), says </p>

<blockquote>Providence is the almighty and ever-present power of God, by which he upholds as with his hand heaven and Earth and all creatures and so rules them, that leaf and blade, rain and drought, fruitful and lean years, food and drink, health and sickness, prosperity and poverty. All things, in fact, come to us not by chance, but from his fatherly hand.</blockquote>

<p>And part of the way it comes to us—not by chance, but from his fatherly hand—part of the way God has designed our world, is that there is a great deal of regularity and dependability in our world. Of course, if it were not for this regularity and dependability, we couldn’t do the things that we actually do. I mean, for example, if I just wanted to walk off the stage—if, for example, all the sudden those stairs over there suddenly turned into a ladder going up—well, that would make it really difficult.</p>

<p>If you are trying to build a house, for example, you have this hammer, but all the sudden the hammer turns in to a goose or a pigeon. Again, that would make things really difficult…or if the nail turned into a worm…or if you get in the car and turn the key and the car turns into a camel, things would be really hard, much harder than they are. This regularity and dependability in our world is an essential condition of our being able to live in the world in which we actually do.</p>

<p>If the world were irregular enough, we would not even be able to live in it, but there are also, according to classical Christianity here (the Heidelberg catechism, for example) there are also special divine actions; sometimes God does things specially. There are miracles in Scripture: the parting of the Red Sea, for example, Jesus walking on water, Jesus changing water into wine. There are miraculous healings: Jesus rising from the dead, Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead, and so on. And according to classical Christians, many of them, perhaps most of them, are special divine actions. God, for example, responds to prayers. He works in the hearts and minds of his children to effect sanctification. There is, what Calvin called, the internal testimony or witness of the Holy Spirit, and there is what Thomas Aquinas called the internal instigation of the Holy Spirit. So, these things are all special actions on the part of God. God constantly causes events in the world. Ok, so far fair enough—what is the problem?</p>

<p>Many theologians seem to think there is a science-religion problem here. I don’t think any of the theologians of Biola think this, (I don’t know, but I doubt it) but many theologians do. For example, Rudolf Bultmann says, “The historical method,” which of course he thinks that is the method we should use, “includes the presupposition that history is a unity in the sense of a closed continuum of effects in which individual events are connected by the succession of cause and effect. This continuum, furthermore, cannot be rent by the interference of supernatural, transcendent powers.”</p>

<p>That’s what he says. Alright, there is this continuum that cannot be rent by the interference of supernatural (that would be God) or transcendent powers. So, it is a little bit like the laws of the Medes and Persians. You probably remember Daniel. Daniel was a favorite of King Darius, and well, the other courtiers became jealous of Daniel (they didn’t like it that the king liked him so well). So, they came to the king and said, “Oh king, live forever, we think it would be a great idea if you passed an edict to the effect that you alone can be worshipped. Everybody has to worship you and nothing else.”  Well the king thought that over for a minute, and that sounded pretty good to him so he said, “I guess that it is a pretty good idea.” So he made this edict; he made this declaration: “Only King Darius is to be worshipped—no one else, nothing else.”</p>

<p>These courtiers knew that Daniel worshipped God, and they thought probably Daniel would keep right on worshipping God despite this edict. So they were watching Daniel, and he was, in fact, worshipping God. So they came to the king.  Now the penalty for worshipping something else was to be thrown into the lion’s den and they said, “Well, king live forever, looks like Daniel has been violating this edict. You have got to throw him in the lion’s den.”</p>

<p>Well, the king didn’t want to do this because he really liked Daniel. He thought this was a miserable way to proceed, and he didn’t want to do it, but then they said to him, “O king live forever, and remember a law of the Medes and Persians cannot be abrogated, even by the king himself.” So once it’s put in place, not even the king himself can change it or abrogate it or go against it.</p>

<p>That is sort of the suggestion that you get here from Bultmann. Bultmann thinks, “Maybe God created the world and set it up in a certain way, but once he did that, not even he can interfere in it”—he uses that word interference—“not even he can do anything in it. He just has to keep hands off.” It is like the law of the Medes and the Persians.</p>

<p>Another theologian who agrees is John Macquarrie, who says,</p>

<blockquote>The way of understanding miracle (and that would be one kind of special divine action) that appeals to breaks in the natural order and to supernatural intervention belongs to the mythological outlook, and cannot commend itself in a post-mythological climate of thought. The traditional conception of miracle is irreconcilable with our modern understanding of both science and history. Science proceeds on the assumption that whatever events occur in the world, can be accounted for in terms of other events that also belong within the world, and if on some occasion, we are unable to give a complete account of some happening, the scientific conviction is that further research will bring to light further factors in the situation that will turn out to be just as imminent and this worldly as the factors already known.</blockquote>

<p>Ok again, no room there for special action. And the third thinker here, Langdon Gilkey (still another theologian), says something similar, but I will pass. I will not read that one in the interest of saving a little bit of time, but these three theologians, plus many others want to assert that there is something wrong with the idea of God acting in the world, acting in the world in a way that goes beyond creation and sustaining, or creation and holding things in existence. So they think, “Ok, God created the world; God sustains it in existence”…that is ok with them, but anything beyond that, God performing any miracles, raising Jesus from the dead, or for that matter working in somebody’s heart and mind in a special way, that, they say, is a real problem.  The question is, what is the problem?</p>

<p>Well, the next little bit here…according to the Christian and theistic idea, God is a person; he has knowledge, loves, and hates. He has aims and ends. He acts on the basis of his knowledge to achieve his ends. He is all-powerful, all-knowing, and wholly good. Thirdly (noted above by the Heidelberg catechism), God has created the world. Fourth is God conserves and sustains and maintains in being this world he created, but fifth, at least sometimes, God acts in a way going beyond creation and conservation in miracles, but also in his providential guiding of history, his working in the hearts of people, his internal instigation of the Holy Spirit, and so on, and it is with that fifth category that these people have a problem. It is God’s special action in the world—action beyond conservation and creation—and miracles would be an example.</p>

<p>So we might think of these theologians as endorsing what we could call hands off theology. God has got to keep his hands off. God could create the world. God conserves the world, sustains it in being, but he can’t do anything else—that is as far as he could go. It is hands off theology, and Bultmann, even in this context, even talks about interfering. I mean if God did something in the world that would be interfering, which, when you think about it, is a sort of strange thing to say—I mean if God created the world, he is the omnipotent, omniscient, holy, good creator of the world—when you accuse someone of interfering, you are saying they are doing something they should not be doing, right?</p>

<p>So Bultmann thinks if God did something in the world that would be interfering, and he should be ashamed of himself. Ok, now why is this a problem? Their suggestion is that somehow it is contrary to science. It is contrary to science the suggestion that God acts specially in the world. I didn’t read that bit, but Gilkey says, "The causal nexus in space and time which the enlightenment science and philosophy introduced into the western mind is also assumed by modern theologians and scholars. Since they participate in the modern world of science, both intellectually and existentially, they can scarcely do anything else.”</p>

<p class="intro">From a presentation sponsored by Biola University’s <a href="http://cct.biola.edu/" target="_blank">Center for Christian Thought</a>, and delivered February 12, 2012 at EV Free Church, Fullerton, CA.  Used by permission.</p>]]></content:encoded>
        <pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 12 04:00:33 -0700</pubDate>
        <dc:creator>Alvin Plantinga</dc:creator>
        <!--<dc:date>Sep 04, 2012 04:00</dc:date>-->
      </item>
            <item>
        <title>From the Dust: Evolutionary Creation</title>
        <link>http://biologos.org/blog/a&#45;leap&#45;of&#45;truth?utm_source=RSS_Feed&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication</link>
        <guid>http://biologos.org/blog/a&#45;leap&#45;of&#45;truth?utm_source=RSS_Feed&amp;utm_medium=RSS&amp;utm_campaign=RSS_Syndication</guid>
        <description>With From the Dust, it was our goal to help Christians see the complexity of the issues raised by modern science, as well as help them to courageously engage with the theological conversations happening within the sphere of Christian culture today.</description>
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[<!--<p align="center"><iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/24746512?title=0&amp;byline=0&amp;portrait=0" width="533" height="300" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>-->

<p>My name is Ryan Pettey, and I am a documentary filmmaker who has been amazingly blessed to work on a feature-length documentary over the last year and a half called <em>From the Dust</em>.</p>

<p>With <em>From the Dust</em>, we wanted to put something proactive on the table that could help motivate an elevated conversation about the “war” between science and faith. It was our goal to help Christians see (and accept) the complexity of the issues raised by modern science, as well as help them to courageously engage with the theological conversations happening within the sphere of Christian culture today. We wanted the film to address the topic hermeneutically, historically, and socially in order to gain a better perspective on the issues, and, hopefully, address some of the fears (justified or otherwise) concerning what science is telling us about our physical origins.</p>
 
<p>Personally, this project has been a spiritual shot in the arm and has whole-heartedly reignited my walk with God. I have been truly humbled by my opportunity to speak with so many incredible theologians, scientists, biblical scholars, and authors. As a result of this project, the book of Genesis has become more alive and more dynamic than I had ever allowed it to be. It is my hope that this film will both challenge and inspire people of faith, no matter where they are on their journey, to revere the complexity of God both through his word and his creation.</p>

<p>Through the BioLogos Forum, I will be posting a few short, topic driven clips from the film in the coming weeks as conversation starters.</p>

<p>This first clip titled “Evolutionary Creationism” poses these particularly important questions to the Evangelical Christian community:</p>

<ol><li><p>John Polkinghorne says, “The doctrine of creation is not about how things began, it’s about why things exist.” What does this mean?</p></li>
<li><p>Is it reasonable that God’s method of creation would be an unfolding process such as evolution? In other words, does an evolutionary process uphold God’s character as revealed in the scriptures? If so, how?</p></li></ol>

<p>Thanks for watching!</p>

<p>Ryan Pettey<br />
Director<br />
<em>From the Dust</em></p>

<p class="intro">Editor's Note: The full documentary is now available on DVD and Blu-ray.  You can order the film <a href="http://www.highwaymedia.org/Product4.aspx?ProductId=1985&CategoryId=171">here</a>, and learn more about the project <a href="http://fromthedustmovie.org/">here</a>.</p>

<h3>“Evolutionary Creation” Transcript</h3>

<p><strong>Dr. John Polkinghorne</strong>: “The doctrine of creation isn’t about how things began, it’s about why things exist, what holds the world in being. The Christian belief is that it is the will of God that holds the world in being.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Jeff Schloss</strong>: “No matter how you think the creation began and the process of the emergence of life occurred, if you are a Christian, you believe that God is mightily hands on.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Alister McGrath</strong>: “And when I stopped being an atheist and became a Christian instead, actually I found that that conversion really brought a new intellectual and spiritual depth to my scientific research. I studied the philosophy of science and began to realize that proof in science was much more complex than I had realized, and above all, I began to realize that the scientific narrative actually pointed to a deeper narrative, which is that of God himself.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Jeff Schloss</strong>: “The scriptures make it very plain that while God does marvels, miraculous marvels, he embeds these marvels in a historical process.”</p>

<p><strong>Reverend Dr. Lincoln Harvey</strong>: “I have heard theologians talk about the account in Genesis in a way in which, however you read the days, whether you read them literally, or allegorically, or however you read them, they do suggest something of God taking time.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Jeff Schloss</strong>: “Well, why does God use history to achieve his purposes? Why not just have created everything right to begin with? And then, if it were made wrong at a point in time by Adam and Eve falling, why not just have Christ die right there in the Garden and have salvation? Why wait thousands of years for the revelation of Christ? And we don’t get to have the answer to that.”</p>

<p><strong>Reverend Dr. John Polkinghorne</strong>: “That shows us that God is patient and subtle, that God is prepared to create through process, unfolding process, rather than through just divine magic decree.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Jeff Schloss</strong>: “If you believe that every kind of living organism was supernaturally created by God, then, in one sense, every organism is unique, and the cheetah is the fastest organism, and the redwood tree is the largest organism, and they are all specially and supernaturally and distinctly created by God; they are all unique. If you believe in common descent and believe in evolutionary theory, then there is a sense in which no organisms are unique to the extent that they can be explained by the common mechanism of mutation and selection. When we look at human beings, human beings do things that, as of yet, are actually not adequately explainable by the common mechanism of genetic mutation and natural selection.”</p>

<p><strong>Reverend Dr. Michael Lloyd</strong>: “What Mother Teresa did on the streets of Calcutta is not evolutionary useful. It is taking limited resources and giving them to people who are dying. That is not, from a survival point of view, useful. And yet, most of us think, that it’s a rather good thing.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Jeff Schloss</strong>: “This is not a God-of-the-Gaps argument attempting to prove that there is a miracle or supernatural causes at work—that actually might be the case. But it might also be the case that there are natural causes at work, designed by God, not operating in other organisms, unique to human beings. Right now, evolutionary theory actually gives content to and illuminates the reality of human uniqueness. E.O. Wilson says that this capacity that humans have for unusual degrees of cooperative sacrifice is the culminating mystery of all biology.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Richard Colling</strong>: “So when we talk about evolution, it is really not a matter of death and destruction imposed upon humanity and all forms of life. Evolution, from a geneticist standpoint, is really a game about probability and potential and hope and possibilities—the same thing that the New Testament says that Christians should be all about.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Kerry Fulcher</strong>: “In Colossians, it tells us that in him all things hold together. I think God’s creation is continuing to unfold. As it continues to unfold and as we have new species that are being generated, that is not in absence of God’s creative power. Creation is not this one time deal in the past, but God is intricately involved now.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Jeff Schloss</strong>: “There is a fabulous and profound thematic continuity to the history of life: for example, the transition from primitive prokaryotic cells to eukaryotic cells, the transition from single cells to multi-cells, the transition from asexual, basically clonally individually reproducing organisms, to sexually reproducing organisms that have to do it together, the transition from individual to social organisms. Well, there is really no other way to put this, it is progressive. It is exactly what we would expect if a God, who we already believe on the basis of the sacred history of redemption described in scripture, is also involved in incrementally achieving his purposes over the entire course of history.”</p>

<p><strong>Reverend Dr. John Polkinghorne</strong>: “And when you come to think about it…if the nature of God is love, as Christians believe, then I think that is the way you would expect the God of love to create, not through just brute power, but by the unfolding of fruitful potentiality.”</p>

<p><strong>Dr. Darrel Falk</strong>: “If people think because of scientific evidence, ‘my Christian faith doesn’t stake up anymore’—that day needs to end. All of the richness in life that I know is because of my relationship with God, and so I don’t want people to miss out on that. I don’t want people abandoning the faith because they find out that evolution is really real. It is God’s truth. So here we have this segment, this all-important segment of God’s people, who are out of touch with God’s reality. I mean, it is God’s universe! This natural world is God’s creation—and so the people, who especially need to be in touch with God’s reality, are off in a corner.”</p>]]></content:encoded>
        <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 11 05:00:31 -0700</pubDate>
        <dc:creator>Ryan Pettey</dc:creator>
        <!--<dc:date>Jun 29, 2011 05:00</dc:date>-->
      </item>
      

      

    
  </channel>
</rss>