Yet Another Discoveroid Revival at Biola

Great news, dear reader. The Discovery Institute is having another creationist revival meeting, and like several others we’ve written about before, this one will be at Biola University. That’s the California bible college founded in 1908 as the Bible Institute Of Los Angeles. We’ve previously posted about the interlocking relationships between the Discovery Institute and Biola. And as we reported earlier, for the celebration of their centennial year, Biola honored Philip E. Johnson: Godfather of Intelligent Design.

This is the Discoveroid post that makes the big announcement: “Bad Design” or “Natural Evil”? Upcoming Event at Biola University, January 26-27. It has no author’s byline. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

In addition to questions of science, debates over Darwinian theory raise a number of thorny philosophical, ethical, and theological issues. An upcoming meeting of the Christian Scientific Society at Biola University in Southern California will explore one of them, the existence of “natural evils,” sometimes characterized by evolutionists as “bad design.”

Bad design? Are they talking about the stuff that caused us to write Buffoon Award Winner — The Intelligent Designer? Let’s find out. The Discoveroids say:

Speakers will include Discovery Institute Fellows Michael Keas and Cornelius Hunter. More information is here.

Wowie — that’s an all-star lineup! All right, let’s follow their link, where we’re told:

Many evolutionists point to “bad design” in nature, or predators, etc., as evidence of evolution by undirected processes. Many Christians also accept that these things are “bad,” and argue that they are a result of the Curse when humanity fell into sin. For others, natural evil is a major theological problem.

And for some of us, theology is irrelevant in such situations. Things like preditors are features of reality — to be studied, understood, and overcome. Then they give us the program for the revival:

• Friday night, January 26, 8:00 PM, A Friendly Debate: “Resolved: Carnivorous animals are the result of the sin of mankind.”

• Saturday afternoon, January 27, 1:00 PM, “Non-Empirical Influences on Evolutionary Theory and the Principle of Plenitude”

• 2:00 PM, “The Human Genome: ENCODED by Design”

• 3:00 PM “The Tragic History of Mutations as the source of Genetic Variety”

• 4:00 PM “Evil or Potential for Greater Discovery?”

Some of those topics aren’t self-explanatory, but if you visit their link they attempt to describe what they’re talking about. Okay, back to the original Discoveroid post. This is the rest of it:

The dates are Friday and Saturday, January 26-27, and there is a meeting registration fee of $35 for full and associate members of the Christian Scientific Society, or $50 for non-members. Admission for students is free. You can register here [link omitted]. If you are in the area, please join us for a weekend of thought-provoking discussion.

Well, dear reader, do you have a couple of days to kill? If you’re looking for some of that good ol’ fashioned, down-home, foot-stompin’, hand-clappin’, psalm-singin’, floor-rollin’, rafter-shakin’, old-time creationism, this may be what you’re looking for.

Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

24 responses to “Yet Another Discoveroid Revival at Biola

  1. Michael Fugate

    “The Christian Scientific Society | The Truth, Wherever It Leads”


  2. Gerbil Convention at Biola
    I’ll be at a Robert Burns Night gathering that weekend and can’t make it. I understand however, from the announcement, that there will be a goodly number of “wee tim’rous beasties”, intellectually speaking, in attendance at Biola that evening.

  3. Ceteris Paribus

    “Resolved: Carnivorous animals are the result of the sin of mankind.”

    Well then these Intelligent Designers need to tell us just how they managed to keep the streets and alley ways of Eden cleaned up. With no carnivorous critters to keep things tidy, it could get pretty stinky on a hot summer day.

  4. Is there any recognition of ecology in the Bible?

  5. “Resolved: Carnivorous animals are the result of the sin of mankind.”

    This is a subject for debate? Are these people serious?

  6. Michael Fugate

    In looking up Keas, I ran across this reference to a Stephen Meyer “educational” series for Focus on the Family.

    TrueU #1: Does God Exist? Building the Scientific Case [Scientific?!]
    Dr. Stephen Meyer plays a “philosophical survival game,” pitting four worldviews against one another in the quest to decide which one gives the best answers [oh like that’s going to be fair]. Dr. Meyer examines the evidence and provides the tools needed for students to defend their faith and make it their own. This is the perfect resource for students preparing to enter college and a culture that may be hostile to their faith. [if your believe your faith includes creationism, then it is in trouble even if you don’t go to college]

    1: What Is Faith?
    2: Big Bang: Before the World Existed
    3: Big Bang: The Beginning of Time
    4: Big Bang: A Finely Tuned Universe
    5: DNA by Design: Surprises in the Cell
    6: DNA by Design: What Are the Chances?
    7: DNA by Design: Mind behind the Matter
    8: So It Was God after All
    9: The Moral Evidence: Right and Wrong
    10: The Moral Evidence: Failure of Relativism
    Bonus Extra: The Toughest Test in College [staying a creationist in the face of all the evidence for evolution]

    You will be equipped to defend your faith and become a world changer in an increasingly hostile culture. [hostile to ignorance, sure]

  7. Barbara Forrest

    Not exactly an all-star lineup at this thing. It’s a bunch of second-stringers.

  8. “Resolved: Carnivorous animals are the result of the sin of mankind.”

    It’s a debate… where the conclusion is stated in the title….. yup, that’s “Creation Science”!

  9. I donno, Barbara. It’s difficult to rank creationists.

  10. Why restrict that to animals? What about carnivorous plants and flesh eating bacteria?

  11. Michael Fugate

    There is also the problem that creationists don’t believe plants to be alive –
    otherwise there would have been no herbivory either. Not sure about fungi. Prokaryotes too.

  12. The whole truth

    Hmm, what do you suppose thumpers (including discotooters) do when they eat animals and their parts (meat, milk, cheese, gelatin, cream, eggs, insects, etc.)? Do they ask their imaginary sky daddy for forgiveness for being carnivores? Do they whine and cry because they are sinners, while eagerly downing a cheeseburger? Do they laugh it off and blame their carnivory on the biblical characters eve and adam? Do they not allow their children to eat animal parts and tell their children that they will burn in hell forever if they ever do eat animal parts? Do they blame a talking snake for their sinful carnivory? I wonder if any of the discotooters has eaten or would eat snake meat.

  13. I don’t need to suppose what the creobots think if they down a cheeseburger. They’re thinking Acts10:9-16, where God not only permits but instructs Peter to eat meat – any meat. This of course marks God’s second change of mind on the subject. He gave the same permission, without a direct instruction, to Noah, way back at Genesis 9:3, then changed His mind and enacted the Levitical restrictions, and then changed it back again.

    So carnivory is both part of God’s curse on the world to punish original sin, and it is God’s instruction. This would pose major theological problems, except that believers can instantly retreat under the theologian’s one-size-fits-all cloak, “God moves in mysterious ways” while non-believers either boggle at the stupidity of it or couldn’t care less.

  14. The Seventh Day Adventists tend to be vegetarian.
    SDA seem to be the origin of Young Earth Creationism.
    Before the mid 20th century SDA and YEC were not in favor among “conservative” Christians.

  15. “Many Christians also accept ….”
    So much for IDiocy being scientific and hence neutral on the identity of the Grand Old Designer (blessed be Him/Her/It – or have they finally figured out the gender of the G.O.D.? In that case just blessed be Him). Now I wonder: where does that leave Klinkleclapper?

    Visiting the home page of CSS pays off.

    “We are in no way affiliated with xxxxx. That group …… rejects scientific common sense as well”

  16. @mnb0
    Current English, in cases of indeterminate gender, uses “They”, rather than “He/She/It”. In this case, that also includes indeterminate number.

  17. Fortunately as a non-native English speaker I am excused not to abide to the rules of current English (or non-current English). There is even an expression for this attitude:

  18. Just to clarify things in my own mind, this is the sophisticated, intellectual wing of ID science, right? Right??!!

  19. Curmie coos:

    I donno, Barbara. It’s difficult to rank creationists.

    Easy. All creationists are rank.

  20. To keep it concise with the ever-growing number of genders and pronouns, some people now abbreviate she/he/it to s/h/it.

  21. “A Friendly Debate: Resolved: Carnivorous animals are the result of the sin of mankind.”

    Have they got this back to front? So the DI fellowship is taking the pro stance, this is Ken Ham creationism.

    So the IDiots twenty year celebration of The Wedge is going back to removing any pretence of science.

  22. “9 Nov 2017 – Discovery Institute awarded Mike a 2017-2018 fellowship to complete his book Unbelievable: Myths about the History and Future of Science, Religion and Extraterrestrial Intelligence. This book explores seven false stories about how Christianity has supposedly opposed science, narratives that have made …”

    So the DI will have another of their vanity published books to shill.

  23. Mark Germano

    My suggestion for next year’s agenda is “Debate: Resolved: 4,000 angels can dance on the head of a pin.”

  24. About the carnivorous diet: Jesus’ sacrifice was not supposed to erase the sin? Why they are still carnivores after it? Free will, perhaps. Further animals can’t recognize Jesus as their savior so their innocence is a(nother) drawback.