Series: Made in the Image of God: The Theological Implications of Human Genomics (4 entries)
This series by Denis Alexander reflects on advancements in genomics as well as their theological implications. He focuses on the relatedness of hominin genomes, arguing that this does not interfere with the image of God in humans. The image of God depends more on the capacity for relationship and covenant, not on a list of particular physical qualities. He then discusses why the recent studies of genomics provide “no grounds for genetic determinism.”
Series: Decoding ENCODE (8 entries)
The BioLogos Foundation explains to the findings of the Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project and responds to the claims that its discoveries challenge the theory of evolution, especially regarding so-called "junk DNA".
Series: Understanding Evolution: Is There “Junk” in Your Genome? (5 entries)
One of the challenges for discussing evolution within evangelical Christian circles is that there is widespread confusion about how evolution actually works. In this installment on “junk DNA”, we explore how genomics can be employed to test for non-functional sequences by comparing sequences between related organisms.
The (Lack Of) Conflict Between Science and Religion in College Students
Media-hungry atheist, creationist and religious fundamentalist provocateurs have dominated the science and religion narrative for the past decade. A recently published large-scale survey of college students, however, finds that the call to arms has fallen on deaf ears.
Ask an Evolutionary Creationist: A Q&A with Dennis Venema
Even if Darwin had never lived and no one else had come up with the idea of common ancestry, modern genomics would have forced us to that conclusion even if there was no other evidence available.
America’s Culture Wars: A Different Perspective
In this video Conversation, Rev. N.T. Wright responds to the controversy in evangelicalism about evolution. Is this a “culture war” issue?
Series: Behe, Lenski and the “Edge” of Evolution (5 entries)
In this series, we reexamine the claim made by Intelligent Design proponent Michael Behe to have found a limit to “Darwinian” evolution in light of recent results from the laboratory of Richard Lenski.
Series: Understanding Evolution: the Evolutionary Origins of Irreducible Complexity (6 entries)
One of the challenges for discussing evolution within evangelical Christian circles is that there is widespread confusion about how evolution actually works. In this installment, we examine evidence that proteins in irreducibly complex (IC) systems can form and refine new interactions through gradual mechanisms.
Series: Evolution and the Origin of Biological Information (7 entries)
Dennis Venema begins this series by summarizing a key Intelligent Design belief: that if we see specified information, we infer design because we are unaware of a mechanism that can bring about specified information in the absence of intelligence. In each subsequent part of the series, Venema shows why this argument is wrong. Venema presents evidence to show that natural mechanisms can, in fact, explain the origin of new information. He reminds his readers, however, that this does not in any manner exclude God from the process.
Series: Behe’s B Cell Bravado (3 entries)
This three part series by Kathryn Applegate argues strongly against Michael Behe’s claim that the immune system is irreducibly complex. She begins with a brief review of antibody generation in B-cells. Then, she addresses Behe’s invalid assumptions about this process. Looking at the function of bacterial transposons, she then provides a reasonable explanation for the gradual evolution of the system and calls Behe to engage the scientific literature.
A Biologist's Perspective
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.
Series: Adam, Eve, and Human Population Genetics (10 entries)
From the Archives: Miracles and Science, Part 5
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.
Are We Genetically Predisposed to Believe in God?
This entry was originally posted on February 13, 2010. While the question of evolutionary predisposition toward religious belief may be challenging, Christians need not see it as threatening. In fact, this is actually a Pauline notion that is explored in Romans 1, where Paul claims that it is in mankind’s nature to “know God”.
I was raised in a household of atheists. My parents were card-carrying members of the American Communist Party, and therefore the atheism in my household was quite close to the militant anti-theism of the so-called “new atheists”.
Evolution, the Enlightenment, and Worldviews
In this video conversation, N.T. Wright discusses how the Enlightenment worldview -- which clearly separates God from the world -- has impacted our view of Scripture, and why cleaning the "spectacles" through which we view the world can help us see both Scripture and the world more clearly.
Does Evolution Compromise Human Morality?
Once we have a scientific hypothesis for how something exists, it is tempting to make the philosophical inference that this is also why it exists.
Can Science Ever Know Enough?
To say something is poetic is not to declare it ultimately untrue, futile and meaningless—it is to say it is more profound and meaningful and true than many other modes of expression.
Series: Divine Action in the World (5 entries)
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.