Tag: evolutionary creation

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
November 19, 2025

Tagged
, Altenberg 16, complexity barrier, Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary creation, Intelligent Design, Jacob Vasquez, Materialism, modern synthesis, multiple coordinated mutations, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, origin of life, Royal Society of London, selective advantage, theistic evolution, third way, Truthful Hope}

Casey Luskin: Theistic Evolution and the Limits of Neo-Darwinism

_{Casey Luskin
November 19, 2025

Uncategorized

3}

Did God use evolution to create life? On this ID The Future, we’re sharing the second half of a recent conversation with Dr. Casey Luskin that originally aired on the Truthful Hope podcast. Casey is critiquing theistic evolution, the view that God used evolutionary mechanisms to create life. In today's episode, he continues by next addressing the inadequacy of natural selection and random mutation to generate biological complexity. Luskin also points out that even non-ID scientists have expressed skepticism about the explanatory power of neo-Darwinism. All this makes it very hard to justify the position of theistic evolutionists, who claim God uses evolution to create life. In reality, the more we learn about the complexity and design of life, the less adequate neo-Darwinism is as an explanation. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
November 17, 2025

Tagged
, abiogenesis, Casey Luskin, Charles Darwin, chemical evolution, Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary creation, Intelligent Design, Jacob Vasquez, Materialism, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, origin of life, self-replicating molecules, theistic evolution, Truthful Hope}

Did God Use Evolution to Produce Life? Why Theistic Evolution Fails

_{Casey Luskin
November 17, 2025

Uncategorized

2}

Some people attempt to reconcile belief in God with the standard evolutionary account of life's origins by combining the two. Theistic evolution is the view that God used evolutionary mechanisms to create life. But does this view stand up to scrutiny? Today, Dr. Casey Luskin critiques this perspective in the first half of a conversation that originally aired on the Truthful Hope podcast. The conversation kicks off with some clarity over terms, including what is meant by “evolution.” The theistic evolution perspective, also sometimes called evolutionary creation, accepts the standard scientific evolutionary account—the same view held by atheists—and simply adds the theological claim, "but this is how God did it". Critically, these proponents reject the idea that design can be empirically or scientifically detected in nature. As Luskin highlights, the central scientific problem with theistic evolution is that it inherits all the numerous scientific problems associated with the standard evolutionary account. This first half of the conversation rounds out with examples of those problems, specifically from the issue of the origin of life. This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
John G. West

Date
February 3, 2025

Tagged
, abortion, cancel culture, Charles Darwin, Christians in science, Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary creation, Francis Collins, human genome project, Intelligent Design, Materialism, National Institutes of Health, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, scientific Materialism, sexuality, Stockholm Syndrome Christianity, theistic evolution}

When Christians in Science Embrace Scientific Materialism

_{John G. West
February 3, 2025

Uncategorized

28}

What if American culture isn’t collapsing because of crusading secularists? What if it’s failing because leading Christians identify more with secular elites than with their fellow believers? Those are the provocative questions posed by Dr. John West's new book Stockholm Syndrome Christianity, which exposes how influential Christian leaders are siding with their anti-Christian cultural captors on everything from biblical authority and science to sex, race, and religious liberty. On this ID The Future, host Andrew McDiarmid begins a two-part conversation with Dr. West unpacking examples of how Stockholm Syndrome Christianity is harming the scientific enterprise and what can be done to repair the damage. In Part 1, West explains how Francis Collins, one of the most celebrated evangelical Christian scientists in America, has fallen prey to Stockholm Syndrome Christianity. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
March 6, 2024

Tagged
, bacterial flagellum, Charles Darwin, compatibility of evolution and design, Darwinism, designed evolution, Evolution, evolutionary creation, fitness landscape, flagellar motor, front-loaded design, Intelligent Design, Materialism, Michael Behe, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, Rope Kojonen, theistic evolution, theologian, Theology}

The Incompatibility of Evolution and Design

_{Casey Luskin
March 6, 2024

Uncategorized

2}

On this ID The Future, philosopher Stephen Dilley speaks with scientist and attorney Casey Luskin about theologian Dr. Rope Kojonen's recent proposal on the compatibility of evolution and intelligent design. In previous episodes of this series, Dr. Luskin interviewed colleagues Brian Miller, Emily Reeves, and Stephen Dilley about their contributions to a recent paper critiquing Kojonen's model. Now, Luskin concludes the series with some additional insights of his own. This is the final episode in a series. For more, visit idthefuture.com. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Brian Miller

Date
February 28, 2024

Tagged
, amino acid sequence space, Brian Miller, Charles Darwin, Darwinism, Evolution, evolutionary creation, Intelligent Design, Materialism, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, percolation theory, physics, protein evolution, protein isolation, protein rarity, protein sequence space, Proteins, Rope Kojonen, theistic evolution, Theology}

Brian Miller on the Limits of Protein Evolution

_{Brian Miller
February 28, 2024

Uncategorized

2}

Was the universe designed to evolve through natural processes? In a recent book, theologian Dr. Rope Kojonen has argued that evolutionary mechanisms work in harmony with intelligent design to produce the diversity of life we see on earth. But can these fundamentally different processes really work together? On this ID The Future, host Casey Luskin speaks with physicist Dr. Brian Miller to explore why Kojonen's theory fails on scientific grounds. This interview is part of a series responding to Kojonen's proposal. Catch other episodes in the series at idthefuture.com or through your favorite podcasting app. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Stephen Dilley

Date
February 26, 2024

Tagged
, adaptation, Charles Darwin, common ancestry, convergence, Convergent evolution, Darwin, Darwinism, Design Intuition, Evolution, evolutionary creation, front-loaded design, Intelligent Design, Materialism, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, Philosophy, Rope Kojonen, theistic evolution, Theology, universal common ancestry, universal common descent}

The Scientific Problems with Kojonen’s Theistic Evolution Model

_{Stephen Dilley
February 26, 2024

Uncategorized

2}

Can evolution and intelligent design work together in harmony? Or is that wishful thinking? On this ID The Future, host Casey Luskin concludes his conversation with philosopher Dr. Stephen Dilley about a recent proposal to marry mainstream evolutionary theory with a case for intelligent design. Dr. Dilley outlines the scientific problems with Kojonen's proposal and explains why it contradicts our natural intuition to detect design. This is Part 2 of a two-part conversation. Be sure to catch Part 1, and look for more interviews with others on this topic soon. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Stephen Dilley

Date
February 21, 2024

Tagged
, amino acid sequence space, Casey Luskin, Darwinism, design hypothesis, Evolution, evolutionary creation, fine tuning, fine tuning of initial conditions, fine-tuning, front-loaded design, Intelligent Design, Materialism, Natural Selection, Neo-Darwinism, origin of life, Philosophy, random mutation, Rope Kojonen, Stephen Dilley, theistic evolution, Theology}

Design-Assisted Evolution: A Response to Rope Kojonen

_{Stephen Dilley
February 21, 2024

Uncategorized

3}

Can evolution and design be wedded in a happy marriage? On this ID The Future, host Casey Luskin kicks off a series of interviews responding to theologian Dr. Rope Kojonen's proposal that front-loaded design and a full-blooded evolutionary process worked together in harmony to produce the diversity of life we find on earth. Here, Luskin interviews Dr. Stephen Dilley, lead author of a comprehensive critique of Kojonen's model co-authored with Luskin, Brian Miller, and Emily Reeves published in the journal Religions. This is Part 1 of a two-part conversation. Look for Part 2 next! Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
June 28, 2021

Tagged
, agnosticism, Alister McGrath, Atheism, BioLogos, Bruce Gordon, Christopher L. Reese, complex specified information, constrained integration view of science and religion, dialogue view of science and religion, evolutionary creation, evolutionary psychology, Faith and Science, Francis Collins, historical sciences, independence view of science and religion, Intelligent Design, Isaac Newton, methodological naturalism, Michael Ruse, Naturalism, NOMA, Non-overlapping magisteria, Paul Copan, postmodernism, Robert Boyle, science and religion, Scientific Method, scientific revolution, Stephen J. Gould, theistic evolution, Three Views on Christianity and Science, universal morality of human beings}

Casey Luskin Reviews Three Views on Christianity and Science

_{Casey Luskin
June 28, 2021

Uncategorized

2}

On today’s ID the Future, host Tom Gilson and guest Casey Luskin discuss a new book Luskin recently reviewed at Evolution News, Three Views on Christianity and Science. Luskin, associate director of Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, summarizes the three views covered in the book: the independence view presented by Michael Ruse, the dialogue view presented by Alister McGrath, and the constrained integration view presented by Bruce Gordon. Luskin critiques the first two and argues that the dialogue view, in practice, quickly devolves into a monologue where religion is supposed to sit down and shut up the moment there is a point of difference between religion and consensus science. He says this is doubly problematic because (a) scientists Read More ›