John Walton Responds to Vern Poythress’s Review of “The Lost World of Genesis One”
By Falk, Darrel | March 11, 2010 | Category: BioLogos Features
Meyer spends considerable time disputing what he calls “Ayala’s claim” that Alu sequences are distributed randomly. I’ve reread Ayala’s post several times trying to find what makes Meyer think Ayala claimed this. Put simply, he doesn’t say it nor does he imply it. He does say that on average there are about 40 copies of Alu sequences between every two genes, but this is simply a fact.
Comments (13)
By Meyer, Stephen C. | March 11, 2010 | Category: Guest Features
The closest that Ayala comes in his review to recognizing the central affirmative argument in the book is his rather clumsy attempt to refute the idea of intelligent design by insisting that existence of “nonsensical” or junk sequences in the human genome demonstrates that it did not arise by intelligent design. As he claims explicitly, “according to Meyer, ID provides a more satisfactory explanation of the human genome than evolution does.”
Comments (5)
By Falk, Darrel | March 10, 2010 | Category: BioLogos Features
Meyer and Ayala have very different views about what science has to say about the origin of genetic information. Meyer believes the scientific data clearly demonstrate that genetic information has arisen through the intervention of an intelligent agent. Ayala sees it differently. The Intelligent Design movement, as Ayala sees it, is deeply flawed at both the theological and scientific level.
Comments (49)
March 10, 2010 | Category: Video Blogs
In this video conversation, Old Testament scholar Peter Enns discusses the Apostle Paul and his understanding of Adam as the progenitor of the human race. While in Paul’s mind, there may be an “organic” connection, Enns points out that for most Christians, this has no bearing on the “literalness” of Jesus.
Comments (67)
By Enns, Pete | March 9, 2010 | Category: BioLogos Features
In my experience, a lot of Christians have come to some peace with all of this. They may handle it in different ways, and some may not have arrived at a conclusion, but they at least recognize that something has to be done. They sense that a simple literal reading of the Adam story won’t work without creating a lot of cognitive dissonance, and so they are open to ideas. But, sooner or later, another issue comes up that is hard to get around and for some simply ends the discussion entirely: Paul.
Comments (85)
