Creation is the Temple Where God Rests
The third post in the companion blog series to our spring book club based on "The Lost World of Genesis One" by John Walton.
This two-part series is adapted from a sermon originally delivered at Jacksonville Chapel on January 18, 2015. The sermon series of which these posts are derived was, in turn, adapted from a similar series by pastor John Ortberg.
A continuation of our series featuring our new and revised "Common Questions" pages
Many voices in the origins debate have strong opinions about whether their views on science and the Bible are "concordist", yet there is little agreement about what the word actually means.
A short guide to where BioLogos fits in the origins debate.
President Haarsma reflects on our big interview with Bill Nye, and explains how it relates to our mission.
In both form and content, then, Genesis 1 reveals that its basic purposes are religious and theological, not scientific or historical.
By getting rid of the miracle stories in the Bible, Bultmann and his followers hoped to make the Christian story more palatable to modern man. Although I recognize the emotional weight of this sentiment, I am not convinced that it is an intellectually coherent approach, mainly for reasons of self-consistency.
When non-believers in France or in Spain read what young-earth creationists are writing about evolution, geology, or astrophysics, they frequently conclude that the Bible is at best an interesting fairy tale.
The one thing on which the entire Genesis debate hinges is whether we acknowledge the role played by hermeneutics.
The story of the Genesis Rock reminds us of how biblical and scientific accounts, despite their different purviews and purposes, remain inexorably linked in our understanding of origins.
Written by BioLogos Fellow of Biology Dennis Venema, this series of posts is intended as a basic introduction to the science of evolution for non-specialists.
Theology needs science, but science needs theology; there can be no two-state solution.
In this video originally featured in March of 2012, Dr. David Finch, a biologist at New York University, discusses his thoughts on both Creationism and the effects of "new atheists" like Richard Dawkins.
Here are some of the best responses from around the web to David's Barash's controversial editorial about God and Evolution in the New York Times.
“We should be slow to accuse another of discarding the authority of Scripture, and therefore denouncing them, just because they interpret Scripture differently than we do.”
At BioLogos, we believe that a serious and faithful reading of Scripture doesn’t call for a recent origin to the earth, and we are persuaded that God has shown us through the natural world he created that his creative work began much earlier.